Gloersen

Understood. Might have to be creative with fabricating inserts along the sides in addition to the superfeet sole so that she's comfortable. If her feet aren't comfortably snug she may not enjoy skiing as much but refrain from saying so (to please Dad); delicate balance. Maybe find a source to demo a pair of Vapors.

Radar Lyric may be a better fit, function, and value. Call their shop to know what they have in inventory & sizing help.

This pusillanimous pirate's prerogative is to not ski N of 30.3322° during winter... ...stay the course over there.

@Roger - email Marion M or Chris [info at edgewaterski dot com] they should now have liners. the Intuition Aqua liner works quite well too.

@Roger - email Marion M or Chris <<>> they should now have liners. the G Intuition liner works well too.

@ThanBogan – I think your comments about the rpm spread are logically accurate. @Horton – heard something similar about the sound of higher revs having negative impact on the final selection. @DW - the gate speed closer to baseline, once acclimated, feels better imo. There also is NO notable catch-up throttle (e.g., like when PPSG parameters were not ideal). Basically squeeze the trigger and reap the results. @BruceButterfield – trying to get a former Accuski developer to try trick mode slalom, he’s hesitant, maybe when it gets warmer. One must wonder how many engineers at Enovation Controls exist that are capable of modifying/improving the ZO choices and offer a firmware upgrade, let alone any that are in-tune with slalom skiing. Also not sure how motivated EC is unless the firmware upgrade generated a little profit. @CParrish43 – ditto @adamhcaldwell – that rpm kick after the 1st spray really makes skiing feel more fun and freer of the boat coming back under the line. Hope all of you can make a firmware upgrade with trick mode slalom options happen soon!

@Deanoski - just some funky photo shadow effect off of the mid-line molding seam. It's pretty compliant material and seems like it will hold up well; time/use will tell. It's actually just a little residual ridge from the mold that could be filed down, but no need. Made me look though, twice.

Basically a similar set-up to other hardshell systems using the Silvretta release: @solski – typically a RTP or RB that allows the foot to escape easily is used. Many find the Reflex R-style ideal. Wiley, HO Animal, etc.; a number of RBs can be used if not too tight from which to release before the FB does. The Radar "Prime" is a great fitting full RB with a semi-open toe that is easy to release from and doesn't interfere with the release bar. @Golfguy –with #10 shells running a 12” spread (Reflex R-style), can easily go 11.5” if needed (can feel rear great toe touching release bar hinge through the liner). To have less spread an RTP would be needed. Had to trim the R-style shell to permit the Silvretta release mechanism enough play to get the Edge FB in place; the FB shell is clipped in place before the feet are placed. There is no interference with the release mechanism when testing its function. The shell’s eyelets (from skate application) come in handy for zip-tying pieces of rubber overlay in place. Hardshells tend to have too much space around the toes so a piece of rubber wrap can be cut to fit inside the shell to fill the void. Also buckles on hardshells can cut through the foam on the liner’s tongue so a 2nd piece of rubber can easily be placed to shield the liner tongue from the center buckle. The selection of the shell and material used is a good one; it’s nicely compliant along the sides, top of the foot, and ankle. Unlike other hardshell systems in which the forefoot raises up off the plate to the end of the toes, because of the formed plastic cup underneath the sole, pressure on the forefoot is directly transferred to the ski beneath (no more heat gun to flatten the shell's sole!). The plastic cup is 2 pieces, each screwed to the plate (not riveted), so any easy job to replace should they crack (not saying they will). The combination of the firmly affixed sole to the plate/ski and the relatively compliant shell is really good. Noticeably better is the predictability of tip engagement in the turn (especially onside for me) and a smoother, yet powerful “edge” during acceleration. Obviously I’m kinda excited about this set-up; too bad it’s so freakin cold out!

I'd stick with the 654. Rpms are low enough with plenty of torque. The 5.3 DI tops out at 47.5 mph Can't recite the rpm range for various speeds. It is substantially less rpm then the 4-1868 on 5.7 SN 200's. Not sure how that 3-blade would perform. But the 654 has no issues for short set-ups at 58k/heavy skiers; the SN 200/5.3L-DI/654 is a solid match;

@bigskieridaho - 4 years ago converted an '03 Signature Series Excal 330 in about 12 hours, should have been less. Basically as ozski described: 1. convert your engine to drive by wire (throttle body) 2. convert your engine to E-control (ECM) 3. install Zero Off (display, cable, antenna) Pricing at that time was: 1.) $2400 (ECM, throttle body) based on PCM's 2012 pricing. 2.) $1565 Zero Off (for the Display, harness, 2 GPS antenna) + 40 for the CANBus and power harness Total: ~$4120 Probably is ~ 6k with single antenna system, etc., now like @skierjp mentioned. If you don't have a boat to convert yet, you're probably right, keep an eye out for a later model ZO SN 196 with a 6L (although may be hard to find) unless you're getting a super good price on the '03.

ditto @SM @disland -imo- The Edge shell’s upper cuff articulates with the lower shell’s v-cut shaped heel. As the ankle flexes, increasing tension wraps around the ankle providing ample force to disengage the release in an OTF without stressing the Achilles tendon. The Achilles strap on the white cuff shell is all or nothing. It is needed on that shell to effect sufficient upward force to disengage the release; without it the skier may not release as predictably. Anecdotally, when I switched from the tongue brake black cuff Reflex to the white cuff I did not platform test the release; it probably was too tight. If the release is set too high (tight) the Achilles may incur abrupt load after the strap is taught. Upon striking 6B my Achilles tendon ruptured. Although the brake strap engaged, the release stayed put. This created an abrupt upward tension on the Achilles (as though trying to force the heel out of the shell) and thus the snap. Most Achilles ruptures occur from an abrupt load rather than an over stretch and usually in an otherwise asymptomatic tendon. The nice aspect of hardshells using the Silvretta release mechanism is the ability to platform replicate the release. It’s strongly advisable to be very familiar with the release set-up and test it on the dock/platform to be comfortable that it will release when needed without undue force (or load on the Achilles) as well as not too easily to avoid pre-release. This Edge shell and plate is likely to be received very favorably. Looking forward to @Horton review.

Cool!

3 sets on the Edge system - so far, so good. Notably improved "connection" through the forefoot was using Reflex PS

@dbutcher - hard to say, it's all just curiosity at this point. Like scoke said, the A-B-C settings in trick mode slalom yield a different timing in throttle application. For me A is better, B is decent, C not so much (trick mode). I have no idea how the 1-2-3 settings play out. Until ZO releases an update file (presumption) with published parameters; who knows?

@Horton - maybe correct - "the total speed swing is not very different or maybe less. With Trick mode the ZO gives you more revs when you are on the line. The result is the boat is slowed less by the skier and is able back off sooner. The change in revs is more for less time and the change in speed should be less. " @scoke - we did the same in Jax today, just -28/34.2 In slalom mode A3 speed range =~33.5 to 34.9, the rpm swing was 3719 to 3910 In trick mode (A3) speed range = ~33.8 to 34.8, the rpm swing was 3752 to 4030 Just a cursory look at it, but to me it seems the speed range is slightly tighter in trick mode and the rpm swing was greater at 278 revs (vs 191 delta revs in slalom mode). This aligns with what @Horton presented. This is not what I was expecting, but it's beginning to make sense to me why trick mode feels somewhat easier (acceleration at hook-up feels less abrupt, but mainly a feeling of being more free of the boat off the 2nd spray). It's not necessarily better results, but maybe it could be with more adaptation. More sampling is required.

@NateSmith43 - Holy Mackerel! When you run 43 at least you won't have as many dang drivers to remember! :)

@tap - looks like peak load occurs at ~ -20 degrees for both of you? However open skier gets to -20 earlier. Both RFF or was open skier LFF with a quicker 1B turn? Both B2 setting or was open skier "C" something? Of course there are all sorts of plausible reasons for the differences; the trick being how to decode the observed data of the better skier into one's own... Cool data!

@MS types truth

1/3/5 a weakness under this LF. At our club of those skiers running <14m; 16=RFF, 3=LFF

@SkiJay - Thank you! Semantics can be huge in some of these threads; reading them sometimes sounds like a fingernail scraping on the chalkboard. The "X"-"Y"-"Z" axes (the only plural word for 3 different noun forms) should be described such that any binding rotation(s) can be defined along the appropriate axis. Roll = "X", Pitch = "Y", Yaw = "Z", so in this thread; ...a "Z" rotation is being discussed ("canting", "canter, "cant" applies to an "X" rotation). ...not that I have an axis to grind... :)

@bishop8950 - concur with your assessment. Only 28s/34 yesterday A1/B1/C1 (B1 prefered) in trick mode 2 sets, the last few passes in slalom mode. But, very notable differences just as you described. The first thing noticed being a more progressive gate pull and much more space in front of 1 ball, could be a slow 1B time though. A few deep pulls out of the onside and the throttle was right there. I doubt that type of throttle response could be based on GPS determined speed data only and retract any prior conjecture that accelerometry data is not used. It most likely is in play and am very curious as to what the "g" range is set as clipping values in trick mode. My conclusion is that it felt so much different (in some ways better and overall perhaps easier on the body) that there is no point in practicing in this mode if tournament skiing is planned. But it would be good if skiing pioneers progress something from this trick mode application into a viable slalom mode option(s). I would then most definitely practice in trick mode slalom... e.g., the new "Y" slalom settings.

Raptor - with spoiler

@Horton - well, "velocimetry" is a lot easier to understand than "accelerometry" imho. we should run some passes in both modes with video of the dashboard showing the buoy to buoy RPM spread during the pass. The RPM spread is typically linear to the velocity spread. too bad the water is so dang cold now; hard to get motivated with video equipment.

what @Horton said. ruptured mine in a Reflex, BUT, it was after changing shells and NOT doing a platform release test. after trying other systems; still in Reflex and platform test the release 2x/month or after any change to the shell or it's structure. be perceptive with chosen equipment; good luck on your calf-rehab!

The audio in that clip sure sounds (unequivocally) like a greater RPM spread running slalom in trick mode vs slalom mode. It’s reasonable to assume that the boat’s delta Velocity is notably greater from gate to gate during that slalom pass in trick mode. Remember when PP came on the scene, the powers that be advocated a more constant boat velocity during the pass. Then along comes ZO using GPS velocity to determine baseline speeds but added (on top of velocimetry alone) super sensitive accelerometer data acquisition (1-2-3 settings) to modulate throttle activation (A-B-C settings); the relative steady velocity of the boat became even greater. IMO this has been to the detriment of stronger (not so “light on the line”), heavier, big-turn type skiers, etc. If the ABT’s are in tolerance, and if trick ski mode slalom is mainly velocimeter data based speed control, and certain skier technique can harness a greater swing effect; who cares if the boat path's oscillatory speed over ground has a greater delta from gate to gate? An option that provides a skier a purely (or closely) velocimeter based only (no g’s clipping values) throttle correction would be cool! Not holding my breath, but hopefully Parsons, Bush, et.al. can come up with another option to ZO that many skiers would appreciate.