jjackkrash

I assumed when I listened 12 o'clock would be looking straight down course parallel with the bouy line. On the gates a move to 2 o'clock would be a move forward but also toward the pylon putting pressure on the inside tip of the ski.

Who knows, it might make you a world champion.

Nautiques get unfairly trashed on here in MC land more than any other boat, hands down. (And they objectively do track the best).

I have heard decent trailers are like $7 to $10k now unless you find screaming deal on a used one that actually fits the boat.

Not sure if it's MacGyver or MacGruber.

One of my ski buddies gets pretty deep into -35/34mph on a Senate Probuild and loves the ski. My boy starts at -28/28 mph on a new Vapor and is working into -28/36 mph right now. The vapor works fine at slower speeds if it's sized right and you stay balanced on top of it. So either ski could work for you. Its preference.

Order Fin Whispering. Its worth it weight in gold. https://finwhispering.com/product-category/books/ For a quick chart (ignore versa-tale stuff) I like the Connelly cheat sheet. https://www.connellyskis.com/pages/dv8-adjustment-guide Spraymakers Gold: https://player.fm/series/spraymakers-w-rossi-and-trent/dialing-in-your-ski-setup

Damn it, I didn't realize this was going on.

So you are running more fin surface area than either stock setting. Is that normal for you or did you get a tip on setup?

Nope. In any courtroom there is one standard at play and a neutral fact finder makes a determination based on instructions about the standard and the evidence. Just like in every car wreck case where negligence is the standard. The jury gets instructed on the standard and then makes a call. Its tough for me to see how the captain of a wake barge is going to be able to prove he took all reasonable steps to minimize the risk of damage caused by the wake when they are intentionally loading the boat with wake-enhancement devises and traveling at speeds designed to maximize the wake. Good luck with that.

The solution is get the vessel number and file suit if a particular boat's wake causes injuries like in this case. It's actually not that complicated or subjective in most states. The general standard has been around in maritime law for decades. It's easier to prove than negligence in a car wreck situation because the boat with the big wake has the burden to conclusively prove that it took all reasonable to avoid harm caused bv the wake and that the wake was not the cause of the harm. I would think it would be pretty hard to prove no causation when these boats are doing everything possible to make the wakes bigger not smaller.

Senate.

There's lots of good reasons not to exceed manufacturers recommended tow limits, but unless there is an express exclusion in your policy for towing over recommended limits, I don't see the basis for a coverage denial unless the towed vehicle was so grossly overweight it amounts to criminal recklessness or intentional misconduct. I've pulled my policy and looked for such an exclusion and there isn't one. But actual policy terms control.

Or they assume naked weight plus an allowance for some gear. Which is what I assumed.

SIZE SURFACE AREA MAX WIDTH SUGGESTED MAX SPEED TERRAIN RECOMMENDED WEIGHT 65" 344.05 SQ“ 6.749” 32-36 MPH / 52-58 KPH COURSE 110–145 lbs / 49–65 kg 66" 354.71 SQ” 6.853” 32-36 MPH / 52-58 KPH COURSE 125–180 lbs / 56–81 kg 67" 365.54 SQ” 6.957” 32-36 MPH / 52-58 KPH COURSE 160–200 lbs / 73–91 kg 68" 376.54 SQ” 7.061” 32-36 MPH / 52-58 KPH COURSE 180-220 lbs / 82-100 kg 69.5" 393.33 SQ” 7.217” 32-36 MPH / 52-58 KPH COURSE 200+ lbs / 90+ kg

My boy had a tough time on the ski last night and I suspect setup (possibly my human error). Last Vapor binding set up for both long and shall and deep and short was 29.25. This year deep and short is 29.25, but long and shallow is 29.5. He said it turned fine but was having a hard time getting swing (and it looked to me like he was abnormally tail heavy). My instinct is to start moving bindings back toward 29.25 or switch to deep and short. Or does he just need to stand differently on this ski? Any thoughts?

A 206 is basically a 196 hull with an extra foot on the back of the hull and a bit more weight. It tracks great but it's got a bigger wake at slower speeds and longer line lengths and doesn't feel as nimble while driving it. If you are cutting rope at 34/36 mph I think you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference blindfolded between the wake on it and a 196 if it is properly set up and you are not running an old heavy tower. Add a tower, add a bunch of wake. If you are skiing -15 off 26 mph and hit the wakes flat and unstacked you want a 196. When I owned a 206 we rotated with a 196 and a response lxi of similar years and none of the skiers who cut line at max speed complained when it was my turn to haul the boat out. I do recall one female long line skier in our group hated skiing behind it. She skied slows speeds and -15 and was flat when she hit the wake. The 206 is a good trick boat as it tracks nice and the wake is a bit bigger at slower speeds. Punchline: In this era boat, I'd personally take a 196, but a 206 isn't a horrible compromise if you want a little more room and don't ski slow/long line speeds a bunch. But skip the tower.

If you put 50 hours a year on it that boat might need a repower in the next 10 years but you may never need a repower in your skiing lifetime. Again, it comes down to your personal usage. My ski buddy has a '92 Mastercraft he bought new and skis on every season; it's on its original engine and still running strong. Also, the 6.0l is the GM HD truck service engine and it's built to last. One of the PNW jump-school guys told me he does not think those engines really even hit peak HP until after 1500 hours when they start to loosen up (really break in). I would not personally think about a repower until it needed it or until gas engines start getting scarce.

That's a good way to get a boat if the price is right, depending on your intended usage and resale horizon. Hours are always going to be a factor if you want to resell it, so that has to be factored into the purchase price.

Radar website. Click on fin settings. https://radarskis.com/products/2024-vapor-pro-build-gun-metal

I have machine squares, got a pick of the technique?

I have a ski doc workstation. The issue for me is eyeballing the calipers so they are straight back when you measure DFT; it's really just a guessing game. Any micro movement off center changes the measurement. Also, the calipers can (and pretty much do) dig into the fin when measuring fin length, which also turns measuring fin length into a guessing game. At least if you believe that getting it within .001 of the "stock" setting is significant.

Treat yourself: Vector Boa.

I set up the boy's 66" today; man I hate setting up new skis. I have a hard time getting the same DFT measurement twice and fin length isn't much more consistent. So stressful. At least the single carbon plate makes boot measurement and set up easier. Stock Long and Shallow settings. Hopefully he gets to try it out Tuesday. Fed ex didn't get here in time to set it up and ski it this weekend. By the way, I was tempted to get the blue, but he generally prefers all black-ish. I gotta say, the gunmetal is real sharp, especially with the carbon plate and matching black boot.

Rodgers ran -41 almost 30 years ago; and there have been skis that have allowed people to run -41 many times since. Presumably some of these model skis are on the used market and even great new skis left over from previous model years get substantially discounted. I don't see having the newest ski as a real "need" to be competitive, only a "want." If you are a patient shopper you can pick up a very nice ski for under a $1000 down to a couple hundred bucks.