GMC

bhs - I just replaced my liners after 4 seasons of Michigan skiing. The boots are that old too; the new ones may look nicer but there's nothing wrong with mine. This year I went from the FMX plate to the screwless plate when I got a 9800 so the only original items left in my setup from the original purchase are the shells and the plates they are mounted to. I have very high levels of confidence in my setup and the only thing I don't like about the system is the mass... But I'm not sure that matters. It does seem kinda funny mounting up that heavy system to a featherlight Goode though. As for maintenance, the only thing I do is occasionally check the pin gap.

I have been using FMs for years but my next set of bindings is likely to be a Reflex front/Wiley rear.

Sold. Finally.

Is the technology better? From the information I've gathered on- andoffline, I think not. It seems to me that the system is based on aninput that can't be sampled rapidly enough (GPS) so they addedband-aids to cover the gaps in speed data - theaccelerometers. Then the algorithm is reactive (thus the gassing - Ithink it's an adaptation of automotive cruise control) and highlyovergained. The A/B/C settings can obviously alter that a bit. I'm a bit skeptical about the virtual timing concept but over thatdistance the satellites should get it right as long as the course isright. Even if it has to call for more gas in the second segment, a laStarGazer! It just might suck from the handle, that's all! In the end I think that if I were to design a speed control systemfor skiing, it would end up being a lot like Perfect Pass classic - analgorithm designed around a ski course, not an adapted automotivealgorithm. GPS would only be used to establish an RPM baseline on theway to the course but upon entering the course, GPS-based feedbackwould shut off and the boat would control around it's RPM baseline.Thus the convenience of ZO and the pull of PP classic. I thinkRPM-based (or maybe even torque-based) speed control is far superior in concept than GPS-basedcontrol.    Disclaimers/other random points: 1. There is no such thing as constant speed unless you're at a cablepark. There is always error in the system, it's just a matter of howthat error is managed and corrected. BTW, what's the best known slalomscore at a cable park? 2. If any data I am using to form my opinion is in fact wrong, I've just wasted a lot of keystrokes and some of your time! 3. If we continue down the ZO path, towboat speed control could becomethe defining factor in ski design and technique. Is that a good thing?Maybe it's always been that way? Seems to me that for ZO you want a skiand technique that gets you all of your angle at the ball becauseyou're not going to make up any time/space behind the boat any more. 4. I have only one tournament set behind ZO and it was terrible... Butit was terrible before I got gassed by the control system. I'm nothaving a good year and I'm definitely not blaming it on the system. Isuck behind good old PP classic this year. 5. I do powertrain controls for a living so while I may be a hack onthe water, I have a pretty good idea of what's going on under thedoghouse. 6. I've been waiting quite a while for the right opportunity to saythat I think ZO is a piece of crap and I think I finally found one.

The smallest RS-1 they make is a 65". I would guess that the 66" is too much ski; I'm 175lb, 5'10", 36 mph and it was definitely the right size for me. My read of the warranty is that it's for the original owner only.

I tried the RS-1, my old 9600, and I'm back on my 9700 until my SL shows up. JD why do you prefer the 96 over the 97?  They are my two favorites but after revisiting the 96, my 97 is a much better turning ski.

Bindings sold. The ski remains, $800.

http://www.ski-it-again.com/php/skiitagain.php?topic=Search&postid=SIA06634

I'm kinda like Scoke in that I've skied Goodes forever but I have tried other stuff. I just keep coming back - they just work really well for me. I've got an RS1 in the garage that I still may try once more before selling it. I liked some things about that ski but I couldn't get it to turn on my offside. Surely it's operator error but coming off a 9700 that has a ridiculously good offside turn, that was strange.  There are some guys at my site running 34 on the SL and they love it. They've both picked up buoys.

I'm thinking about giving the SL a whirl... I almost ordered one Friday. Still under strong consideration, even with a 9900 (?) about to bow in a couple weeks.

The design came out in 2001 but the truly current hull with the transom hook came out on the 2002 Tournament Team boats and went into regular production for 2003.ÂÂÂ

Scoke, what are you skiing on these days?ÂÂÂ

Shane - since you replied to my RS1 thread I'm assuming you went from the 9700 to the Radar? If that's the case it must be working well if the 9700 is for sale? I'm currently on a 9700 with FMs. Curious how the transition will feel.

Thanks guys. I figured I was looking for size 10 bindings but wasn't sure on the ski size. Would probably go with the bigger ski for the reason you mentioned - plus my major problem in the course is falling over at 4 ball - my onside. Tuning symptom charts say "more ski" is a solution.

Given the positive press and a week off next week with nothing to do but ski, I think I'm going to give the RS-1s a shot. If my old FM plate mounts up I may only try the ski but I'm prepared to give the bindings a shot too - despite great confidence in my FM setup. So as a 5'10" 175 lb 36 mph skier with a size 10 foot, what size ski/bindings should I be looking for? The Radar website doesn't have such details so this forum seems to be the best source of knowledge.

KTM - Thanks for the post. You addressed what I consider to be a couple of the primary issues with my skiing, from what I remember. In the end, my rear boot canting was for comfort, not performance and by your/Rossi's logic I could address both of them by closing up the back boot. I think we're going to kick off the season this week so before we even start I'm going to straighten out the back binding. BTW, how's the back? One of my major goals for this year is to keep my sciatic nerve happy.

Brent he's talking about the 07 Masterline Masters Curves not the ones you just ordered. I happened to like them and previous editions but I've heard that the black and red ones for 08 aren't so hot. Anyone using the new red Masters Curves that can confirm or deny?ÂÂÂ

I rotate out as much as my FMs will allow on the rear, straight on the front. BUT I was fighting a mysterious "falling over" problem at 2/4 (my onside) last year and recently outward cant of the rear boot has been mentioned as a root cause of that so I think it's time to start bringing it back in this year. Still waiting for temps though - the water is now liquid...

RE: Horton's post. Glad to hear that someone with credentials better than mine has the same philosophy about looking down the lake, difficulties with keeping shoulders open, etc. Every time I really concentrate on looking down the lake at the completion of the turn, I am in the water shortly thereafter, sometimes barely avoiding a bad OTF. Now if I can just keep my shoulders open longer...ÂÂÂÂ

I think the word you're looking for is "shear". I'm not a materials guy but I wouldn't think that carbon fiber is good in shear, it excels in tension. I don't disagree with Eric's "lighter is better" - other things being equal (except cost of course!) My Goode/Fluid Motion setup isn't light and in comparison it's shocking how light the Goode/Powershell setup is. After helping a friend set one of those up recently, I'd almost consider going back but I have bad memories of Dual-Loc replacement and I kinda like those substantial boots around my feet now.ÂÂÂÂ