PurdueSkier

Indiana does seem to be Nautique country, but not for me. I actually own an older Malibu but grew up with MCs. There arent a lot of gold options for boats, so I would adopt yellow; really as long as it isnt red and white I would be good.

How does the wake on a 209 compare to the 197? Not sure I am in the market yet, but when I am I need a good shortline boat with room for the family. Leaning towards 197 or LXI, but have never skied behind a 209.

What about a sub-buoy just far enough below the water you can ski over it without hitting it. Then using a hook, rope, or clip (to allow for complete rotational movement) connect a small vertical marker. The marker could be foam, noodle material, anything rigid enough to stand up but not hard enough to hurt someone. The idea would be to hit with your ankle and not notice it. Similar to snow ski gates, they are made to be hit (just much softer). The sub-buoy would do all the work of keeping it in the correct location. They could stick up higher than standard buoys and could make judging easier.

@chuck thank you. It was a typo on my part. I meant A2.

Thanks for all the comments. I will try moving the back binding back and see what happens. @EdJohnson - I am obviously not sold on the 34 mph marketing. I feel like it is more of a style difference than a speed difference. If the S2 was really a 34 mph ski, then the A2 is really only a 36 mph ski. If that is true how did Badal just set a pending WR at 34 mph on an S2? Also, many of the top pros do R&D testing at 36 mph for skis that are used at both 34 and 36. Just my thoughts. The S2 works well for me at 36, other than wanting a better onside turn.

I have been skiing on an S2 at 36 mph all year and skiing very well. My offside feels really good and really stable. I feel like I am in good position going into and coming out of most of my offside turns. It caries speed very well through the turn. The problem is when I start to scramble on my harder passes 28 and 32 off, I feel like my onside is a little slow. When I get behind and feel like I need or want a big onside turn to help makeup time, and I can't make the ski do it. I tend to get a little too far back on the ski and not stacked well. I am working on that, but is there a fin adjustment that would help with a faster (sharper) onside turn without impacting my offside too much? Right now I am at stock fin and stock binding setup.

I am riding a 67.5 at 36mph and love. Very stable. I had a new practice pb of 2 at 35 off a couple weeks ago. It fits my style well. I have skied it at 34 and 36 with no issues at either speed. I am 6'-5" 200lbs. I am at stock settings all around.

@Horton - Thanks for posting these numbers.

I go to a pool supply store. They have nice 5 gallon jugs that the chemicals come in. You usually have to put a $5 deposit down on the jugs when you buy the chlorine. So they get returned empty. You can usually talk them into letting you have a couple for the $5 deposit. You can clean it and fill it with water or sand (depending on how much weight you need). They are sealed, have a nice handle and you can return them and get your money back at the end of the season. Works great. Fill it with sand and then water, and one jug can weigh up to 100 lbs.

Thanks for the comments. I figured they had thought of that before, but I hadnt had a chance to test it out yet.

On the topic of Strada boots, does the water drain out of them? I just got a pair of 2011 and have only been able to have 1 set on them so far. I noticed that the liners and factoryy footbeds have holes in the bottom, but a new footbed (what many recommend) may seal those up. Also, it doesnt look like there is any place for water to drain from the shell. It looks like they would fill up with water and then not drain out. That would add extra weight and change the feel of the boot. Has anybody looked into this?

@chef23 I havent skied on it yet. I am planning to today or tomorrow. I will let you know what I think. Unfortunately I had to buy it before I could try it. It was too good a deal to pass up. Can't wait to get on the water.

I bought a 67.5 S2 and called HO before I did to check on the "wide" issue. The person I talked to told me the 67.5 wasnt any different than the other sizes. They just listed "wide" to explain that the S2 has more surface area than other ski shapes, the largest ski size is 67.5", and why it has the weight range/recommendation it does. I didnt think this was the clearest answer, but it was all I could get. I bought the ski anyways.

I dont fully understand the difference either, but I do know that I got injured in a tournament a few years ago and USA Waterski insurance was great. They were much easier to deal with then my primary health insurance, at the time, and covered every dime that my health insurance didnt.

I am not sure about boats, buy my father-inlaw has auto steering on his farm equipment. He put markers on the ground at the edges of his tires, turned it on, it drove down the field, he turned around, turned it back on, and it came back between the markers. Probably not off by more than a couple inches. His was an after market add on that bolted onto his steering wheel. Looks like it could be adapted to anything with a steering wheel. He "mapped" all of his fields using the integrated GPS, no reason you couldnt "map" a ski course, just like with GPS cruise controls. The technology is alread available.

I don't mean to hijack the thread, but this is what I was thinking of. I found this on schnitzskis webpage: I still havent seen a picture of it. THE HISTORY OF THE DYNAFOIL The Dynafoil was next in wing evolution. For quite a few years the Dynafoil was a hit in the early 1980s. Early on in the wing development stage, every time I skied I would inevitably crawl back in the boat and make a wing adjustment. On windy days I ran more angle. On calm days, less. I daydreamed about a wing that I could adjust while in the water. These dreams evolved into a wing/fin system where the wing was connected to a shaft which ran up through the fin and then on through the top of the ski where a knob could be turned thereby pulling the front of the fin up, decreasing the angle and deceleration or pushing it down increasing the wing angle and deceleration. A marketer by the name of Carl Schuberth saw the Dynafoil potential and bankrolled the project

@ AB, did they used to have something like that before. I read on another topic about a dial that would allow you to adjust your fin between passes. I believe there is a rule that prohibits making changes to the way your ski rides, during your set. I always thought something like that would be great. Does anyone know anything about the old system, or better yet pics?

Crashman, I don't know anything about the boat or seller, but saw this in Knoxville TN. http://knoxville.craigslist.org/boa/2782102031.html It has the carbed motor and not EFI, but a great looking boat from the pictures and low hours. Great hull. I regularly ski behind a 94 (same hull). I have never seen an older MC with those colors. Looks sharp. Well below your budget.

I said everyone has the right to use the lake. I didnt mean the part of the lake that I was using, or the ski course, of the right to be an idiot on the water. I just meant somewhere else on the lake. Trust me, I have flagged down my share of boaters.

Laws are different in each state, assuming you are on a public lake. In Indiana, if you are on a private lake, there are no laws. If you are on a public lake, you have to have a spotter, no skiing before sunrise or after sunset, and we have to get a Department of Natural Resources permit each year to allow us to put the course out. This may be different depending on the lake, but ours is a public reservoir and we have to have a permit. All that said, it is really just the traffic on the lake that holds us back. Not much you can do about that, everyone has the right to use the lake.

Its a physics thing. The direction the boat is pulling the skier is always along the rope, from the skier directly to the boat. With a longer rope, when the skier is at the ball the boat is much further down course and is pulling the skier more down the course. As you ski, you are always moving down course, so this pull is in the same direction you are traveling, or at least partly in the same direction. You can easily ski much wider than the balls. With a short line length (say 39' off), when the skier is at the ball the boat is almost directly perpendicular to the skier and the course direction. So, the boat is pulling the skier directly back towards the middle of the course. This is 180 degrees from the direction you need to be going as you ski wide around the balls and 90 degrees off the down course direction. This makes it much much much more difficult to ski wide enough to get around the balls. In addition to this, with a long rope you can ski 10' wider than the balls and still hold onto the rope with 2 hands. With a very short rope, even with the skier directly perpendicular to the boat, the handle won't reach the ball. You have to release from the boat and make up that distance with your body lean. Hope this helps.

I would just like to point out that "winning" a tournament or the overall tournament format do not have to be directly tied to the standard Class C tournament format that we are all used to. I have participated several times in a team/handicapped scoring tournament. Four skiers from each team compete in the first round of each event. Each person is paired up bracket style to another person/team. Whoever beats their USA waterski average score by the most (or is the closest to their average if under it) advances to the next round. It is head to head until their there is only 1 winner. Often beginner skiers do well because it is easier to be consistant or beat a 1 or 2 ball average than say 2 or 3 at 38 off. Scores from each round our entered into USA Waterski scoring like a normal Class C tournament. Just each round has fewer and fewer skiers. For fun, there is a points based team scoring system. It is one of the most fun and exciting events I have been to. It is a two day tournament with limited entry, because as you can imagine it takes awhile.

Wish Not to hijack the thread, but if the 67" Co X was perfect, why the push for the S2? I am still trying to figure out if the money is worth it for the S2, just curious what swayed you. I havent ridden either yet, but want to.

Boat speed, line length, how aggresive you pull out, and ski set up all impact when you need to pull out. I use a 2 handed gate. At 36 MPH and 15 - 28 off, I pull out just before the boat hits the 55s. The key is that you must get wide enough (for me I line up with 2,4,6), and then you must have the right amount of glide/deacceleration. For me, if I have too much speed (pulled out too late), I have a really fast turn in with too much speed through the gates and into 1. If I have too little speed (I pulled out too early), I will get pulled in behind the boat which will make me narrow through the gates and to 1 ball.

Boat speed, line length, how aggresive you pull out, and ski set up all impact when you need to pull out. I use a 2 handed gate. At 36 MPH and 15 - 28 off, I pull out just before the boat hits the 55s. The key is that you must get wide enough (for me I line up with 2,4,6), and then you must have the right amount of glide/deacceleration. For me, if I have too much speed (pulled out too late), I have a really fast turn in with too much speed through the gates and into 1. If I have too little speed (I pulled out too early), I will get pulled in behind the boat which will make me narrow through the gates and to 1 ball.