Boody

I have had two Goodes, the latest a Nano. Love both of them.

My wife has had two Goodes (9900 and Mid), loves both too.

No really buying into getting "right" one, but its possible, maybe I got lucky.

I'm also not convinced the Nano is $1000 better than a Fire, nor the 9960 is $500 better than the Fire. I would start with a Fire and move up if you don't like it.

I have had two Goodes, the latest a Nano. Love both of them.

My wife has had two Goodes (9900 and Mid), loves both too.

No really buying into getting "right" one, but its possible, maybe I got lucky.

I'm also not convinced the Nano is $1000 better than a Fire, nor the 9960 is $500 better than the Fire. I would start with a Fire and move up if you don't like it.

Great pic Klundell! Screensaver....

Warman is an amazing site, great facitility and fun people. They have a website, www.warmanlake.com. They have live web cams, current water and air temp too. Oh, and they have a hot tub.

The wife and I drive up there once or twice a year for their tournaments. As far as tournaments, there are several lakes in the Vancouver area that host tournaments. And you can drive down the freeway to Southern Oregon at our lake, 4 hours away, but warmer. Or Sabrina Lake, 2 hours south.

Yea, whats with the 66???

As far as my settings. Boots - 29", 6.820, 2.449 and .720.

From Dave Miller which I think is right on the money:

"Bindings range from 28.75 to 29.25. Fin from 6.820 to 6.840 2.445 to 2.50 .70 to .735"

Richard, yes, keep posting some youtube videos this winter. Helps motivate me to get out there!

I switched my boots from the and old pair of FMs to the new Goode powershells and noticed a significant difference in quickness of edge changes. The ski was more nimble, but I didn't necessarily pick up bouys.

I do think heavier skis perform better in choppy conditions, but I would rather have a light ski.

I would describe the Goodes as much quicker accross the course, easier edge change and have a much larger sweet spot. My 9900 did not turn quicker, smaller, etc than my A1. The A1 turned better. But with the 9900, if I got out of position, I would not get penalized as bad. On the A1, D3 or FI, if I got too forward or too back, I'm done. With the Goode, it won't work as well but I will continue skiing and have a opportunity to make it up.

The more I get on the front on the Goode, the better it turns. Where many other skis will break my body position or stop if I got on the front too much. The Goodes just keep going and keep the speed. Again, large sweet spot.

I don't think they do anything that is crazy, they just work.

Going to the Nano from the 9900, there was a dramatic increase in speed, to the point it was penalizing me. But the ski turned better than my 9900. So the Nano was faster and turned better. With the mini ventral, the ski slowed down to a 9900 speed, but turned even better.

And finally, I can give countless examples of skiers who have signficant issues with form yet gobble up bouys like nobody's business on the Goode. Maybe thats why we have so many Goode haters.....I agree its irritating.

Performance and that is it! With the amount of work I put into this sport, I want the best equipment, even if it costs a little more. With the money / effort we put into tournaments, gas, travel expenses and time, the cost of the ski is a drop in the bucket (even a Nano).

I don't get the Goode haters, its kinda weird. Goode does help promote the sport by sponsoring many significant events and was even recognized for it in the latest Waterski Mag.

Hey guys, thanks!! But I couldn't wait and bought a brand new set from Goode, OUCH, spendy. I was hoping to pick some used ones up.

But, I swapped out my front powershell for a reflex and like the fit/performance better. I left the powershell on the back, its a nice combo.

Here is my one concern with this system, that SG emulator will be slower to respond than ZO, much slower, no matter what the setting.

I drive both SG and ZO every weekend, and it seems that SG is slow to react to changes, which I think is more mechanical that a software issue. For example, if the skier stops skiing at 5 ball, I will get a .88. The overall feel of ZO is instantaneous, where SG can take much longer to compensate and have those out of whack segments, where the boat "yo-yos" thru the course, or runs away after 3 ball.

I hope I am wrong because I really want this ZO emulator to work. But I have always thought its just too slow.

Here is my one concern with this system, that SG emulator will be slower to respond than ZO, much slower, no matter what the setting.

I drive both SG and ZO every weekend, and it seems that SG is slow to react to changes, which I think is more mechanical that a software issue. For example, if the skier stops skiing at 5 ball, I will get a .88. The overall feel of ZO is instantaneous, where SG can take much longer to compensate and have those out of whack segments, where the boat "yo-yos" thru the course, or runs away after 3 ball.

I hope I am wrong because I really want this ZO emulator to work. But I have always thought its just too slow.