Gloersen

appreciate the way Rossi articulates; the Power Triangle always a useful repeat reference

@Than_Bogan – Also have a 10.5 foot and use a “10” size R-style rear shell with an “XL” liner (thicker - Reflex stock R-style liner). The FB “Supershell (heat-gun flattened forefoot as well) is an “8” size and comfortable with the thinner stock Reflex liner. Regarding the rear R-style I end up cutting a bit of the toe off and heat gun-flattened the fore foot so it rides all flat against the plate as well as allow getting my foot span at 11.75”. Mounting it as “stock” always felt to have too much lateral rocking motion. So I use my own stainless T-nuts (2 fore, 2 aft) to keep the shell firmly affixed to the plate. Also, the stock larger hex shaped T-nuts (not stainless) supplied by Reflex (at least those in the recent past) have corroded and then become loose through the lateral rocking motion (being they're placed in the center-line) and subject to stripping. This can be particularly annoying when occurring at an away tournament site. You may be able to get away with a “8” R-style rear shell if you cut the toe off, flatten, and wear a “L” liner, can’t say not having tried. However the “10” with the “XL” thick R-style liner is a good fit for my narrow 10.5 foot. Finally I prefer the black R-style liner as it does not absorb water. The original “silver” liner for the R-style fit was comfortable but soaked up water like a sponge and didn’t feel as good around the foot after a few passes.

try this next, then heat-gun flatten the forefoot, whittle and hack the rest until suitable. You'll achieve what you seek with an RTP but have consistency as well with foot position. RRB

Regenexx Expensive, out of pocket cost, vendor based "research", not FDA approved. Maybe worth investigating. First line of Rx, truthfully, is to work your BMI<<40.

@Laz - If you can get your wife to drive/pull you; let her choose the boat. That's all that will matter.

Just speculating but the toe cap likely extends aft and under the toe of the shell (not seen in pic) to create more "connection" with the plate. This may enhance tip pressure as well as "edge control". It's an easier fix than reshaping the shells which are not initially designed for slalom ski use.

Yes, L for both, however, used thin Kevlar liners with ML-Cs and they were snug. The L BOAs (no liners) were snug initially but break-in after a few sets. Have not needed liners (would need XL if so), but crank them down tight across the palm. I.e., if your L ML C's are snug without liners, might be best to get XL BOAs.

@parkerc2112 - indubitably.

@Than_Bogan - have to disagree with you just a tad. It shows a cool beating heart gif, ECG rhythm strips, the 4th of which with such ST segment elevation might be indicative of an impending MI, the 5th strip perhaps V-fib. Not to mention the speedometer exceeding 200+ mph. Who knows, maybe this new binding system is a heart-attack on the water waiting to happen; any adrenaline rush is good. :)

@BraceMaker - concur. IMO the current Supershell (v1.0) is too responsive as it is regarding edge control.

Teaser kinda enticing

just put the fin back in with fin block clamp adequately loose. Tap it up against the depth/length set screws, then tap forward a bit so it's free from the DFT set screw. Then use a screw driver shaft through the rear fin hole and retract the fin until you hear/feel it "click" back against the rear DFT screw. Then re-tap (with screw driver handle) the fin blade back against the length/depth set screws. Hold fin firmly in place and clamp it down from rear to front. It'll be fine, don't let it get in your head. If not and it skis like crap, then do the caliper thing.

...while at the end of the lake after the opening pass following a favorable fin adjustment, yet contemplating another and whether it could be made even better; the thread title's wise words were spoken by @JackQ. If a tuning change leads to improvement, might be best to stick with it for awhile; perfection is the enemy of good. 2nd set was even better with a skier adjustment.

if what is pictured remains intact it will be fine to ski with it.

keep doing more off the water and the line will keep getting shorter on the water first tournament look @38 off at 58, expect to see @39.5 at 62

@mmosley - concur; dampened the unwanted effect of relying too much on the back foot to turn.

ditched the RTP after 2 weeks; wasn't going to lead to more buoys in my case. Back to R-style cut down similar to @mmosley899 but notched in the back; much more compliant sidewall and no heel restriction if it has to lift. Main benefit for me is that the back foot stays in the same position through the pass.

@tap - super cool, thanks for the elaboration and f -formula. is there a triple Dexter award?

FACTORY SETTINGS Length - 6.860 Depth - 2.495 DFT - .770 pretty sure it's 29.25" FB on the 67" @lpskier ?

hmmm... often times the DFT set screw needs to be "retracted" a bit back first when making big changes to depth, especially shallower, otherwise it will impede easy adjustments. Set depth/length then fine tune DFT, then re-confirm length/depth, yada... It's an art; not for the faint of heart.

I'm not sure what you mean by "they require a lot more torque to move". The 2 set screws (length/depth) will be snug when the clamp is set tight upon the fin as they should be. However when adjusting the fin and the 3 clamp allen bolts are "loose" the 2 set screws should be "free": and easy to turn to make adjustments. Square One distribution manufactures both Radar and the T series skis; more T -series to come :) It appears they have selected the Mapple style fin block for all their skis; it's a better fin block imho

May be a good idea to understand what "Kd gains" and "Clipping Values" imply. C2

probably a good idea to understand what "Kd gains" and "Clipping Value" implies. C2

concur with @MrJones - compare both, if you do switch to conventional, stick with it long enough to assess for improvement. Pretty sure Lucky (LFF) skis (skied) with a reverse grip (left palm up). (LFF) skis with left palm up (reverse grip), which is reason enough to consider trying or sticking (in your case @Glydon) with a "reverse grip". It certainly has no negative impact on his offside (toeside) reach or toeside cut. One of my ski partners (LFF) switched to conventional grip for weeks (right palm up) and it had a negative impact on his heelside (1/3/5) reach. He switched back to a reverse grip and instantly back to better. IMO the reverse grip may aid in keeping the left palm up (humerus externally rotated) in the 1/3/5 reach and helps keeps the shoulders level through the apex and into the hook-up. That said, one of the best and most experienced coaches out there, and one heck of a skier, recommends the conventional grip for good reason. This is not always an intuitive sport; you have to be willing to mix it up, experiment a bit, and choose what works best for you, but be amenable to input from quality skiers and coaches. Make a choice, stick with it, ski without thinking about it too much.

@TAP needs to chime in on this