Jump to content

Goode Wide Ride


JAYK
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Baller

So I got to ski on a Goode wide ride last week and was curious as if any one else has tried one and their thoughts and fellings on it. There hasn't been next to nothing on any of the forums of people trying them and results.

Nobody wants to take the chance?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I notice you are involved in two threads, this and the 35 off thread.  Were you on the Goode when you ran the 35?  Just curious.  By the way, congrats on your accomplishment.  That is a huge step ahead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Jay - I believe the main objection most have with the wide ride is "no demo period".  It would be foolish of me to invest $1500 based solely on how well Nick Parsons or any other skier performs on the product.  It is a completely different ski in terms of shape and size.  I believe it would take a significant amount of time to become accustomed to the differences.  Those I've spoken w/ that have tried it are split 50/50.  I can't take that type of gamble at this point knowing that my current ski (RCX) is working better than anything else I've ridden.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just got the 64" Wide Ride delivered today.  Can't wait to try it out over the weekend.  Demo period, two weeks.  Will let folks know how it rides. FYI, lately been running 35s 75% +.  Half way thru 38. Been on an RCX, 67" for the last 7 weeks.  I love the rcx.  The Goode will have to be very impressive to change.  I came off a 9800 before switching to the RCX.

Lance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brent,

Jon and I are both looking forward to trying the ski today! Let me say it sure is short and fat. I dont think much of the tip will be visible while skiing it.

Both of us are right foot forward.  It has the power plate, so at least no worries about stripped holes.  Dave did not give me credit for my broken 9800, but did give me a discount and free postage on this ski for demo.

 jdarwin- Will let you know. Like I said, I really love the rcx, but can't pass up the chance to demo this new ski. 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skied the wide ride yesterday.  I skied three sets.  I like the ski. It is a well balanced and stable.  The ski came with settings 6.662, .767, 2.494. Wing at 7.   After the first set, I moved the fin back to .749, increased depth to 2.51 and kept length at 6.66.  The next time I try it I think I will take out some tip. 

I would likely buy it, but love the way the RCX skies, so... can't justify the $$ over what I am riding now. 

Lance 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
BINGO!!  That's exactly what I've heard from others - "great ski / could run some buoys on it / not worth twice the price".  Thanks, Lance.  You confirmed what I thought all along - I'll stick w/ the RCX for now and see if economic pressures begin to have downward pressure on prices.  It has already forced a "demo" period.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

 Scot isn't the real price $1680.00 corret me if I'm wrong but don't you have to buy Goodes power plate to mount your binding to the ski.Power plate is $190.00 our does the plate come with the ski?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brent,

Jon's impression was similar to mine.  He ran some 38s, I ran some 35s. We both really liked it at 32 off.  It is a good ski. It does have great potential.  For those who have skied the 30mph wide ride class, it has a similar feel.  It is fast across the wakes. It turns nice.

I am not wanting to start a flame, and I am very appreciative of Goode for granting me the demo.  I am just saying, as I said before, I am already in love with the RCX, which I bought used at half price.  I don't like the WR enough to buy it right now, when my used rcx is skiing very well for me.

Lance 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would wait for the 1000 wide ride. Its the 2010 edition made with the latest carbon. It lighter and better then any other goode ski ever made.

You can go 1/2 way between the 9900 and RCX by getting on the Sauce. 900 or less if you get used/demo ski and it will out perform both of those logs.

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

>>When is Goode going to start putting inserts in a ski for people who use bindings with screws ? <<

Goode want's to sell you their Powerplate which will take pretty much any binding.

 

>>"Any chance you could post the review somewhere else? A lot of skiers will not go to his website anymore... "

 Why not ? <<

I don't think the reasons are for this site. Search on the "Water Ski Forum" site for his posts on Zero Off for one example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Here is a new dead horse I am gonna beat.  Don't buy baade skis (goode).  Don't give dave a dime.  My 9700 I bought at the end of june has a crack under the tip of the ski (all the way across).  I am very upset b/c it was sold upon inspection.  Cracked after three and a half months of skiing ( half the sets of a normal season due to a new job and baby I may add).  I don't care if the 9900 helped me run 43 off, I am tired of dave's inferior products, I will talk to goode tomorrow about some sort of restitution.  Anyother industry and he would be run out of business.  Stop putting gas in his plane.

 

I am out.

 

dawg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

 Hey Lance, I'd like to discuss the following statement with you (and anyone else who'd care to chime in), "For those who have skied the 30mph wide ride class, it has a similar feel."

Have you or anyone else here tried any of the "30 mph wide rides" at 34 mph and if so how would you compare the Goode to any of those (i.e. Syncro, Triumph, F1X, Radar Theory etc)?  I know there was a post earlier in the season about a Big Dog skier using a Syncro for 34 mph shortline sucessfully, just starting to wonder if any of these skis have the same potential as short line 34 mph skis or if there is something significantly different about the Goode that makes it better suited to 34 where the others may be better off at 30?  Obviously for at least some folks the Syncro will work, now I'm starting to wonder about the other skis in that group.  Opinions?

I still have an '04 KD Evolution Carbon that I've taken into 28 off 34 mph (bought it originally for INT Wide Ride), tried it at 34 a couple of times just to see what it would do.  The Evo is simply a slightly wider CR7 so it's definitely a capable ski; haven't skied it in a couple of years now.  One issue with the wide rides at 30, you can tend to get some pop at the wake at 30; on my Evo I didn't notice the pop as much at 34.  Lance - did you guys notice any pop at the wake with the Goode due to the width of the ski?  I never took the Evo shorter than 28 but now I'm wondering...  I currently have a Radar Theory I'm using for 30 mphWide Ride, I'm wondering about it at 34 now also.  Horton, you taken yours faster than 30?

Some fodder for the next ski test - how do the "30 mph" wide rides do at 34 mph?  Also tell Jon hello for me when you see him.

Ed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

 "why in the world would you buy a 9700 in june of this year"

i dont think anyone is doubting the performance of dave's skis scot. it dont matter what model it is. but its hard to argue against the fact that goode has possibly the worst durability and customer service of any ski mfgers. dawg is entitled to his oppinion and his negative experiences with their product means he wont buy another. so what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I spent $1500.00 on anything (ANYTHING) and it broke after only a short bit of use, I would be seriously pissed off. If I then contacted the manufacturer and got the BS and run-around that virtually every dissatisfied Goode customer reports, I would be looking to shove the remains of that ski right up Dave Goode's exhaust pipe - and I don't say that in a metaphorical sense. I won't ever buy a Goode ski because I don't want to be put in the position.

I think a reasonable life expectancy for a high-end composite ski should be - at a minimum - 3 or 4 years. Hell, I've still got perfectly sound top-end skis dating back as far as the early 90's! 3 months - 6 months doesn't cut it by anyone's standards. Goode customers who rush to their support [on these forums] always point out that all brands of skis will break now and again. I've never broken a ski, but those who have almost always report reasonable customer service response from every company except Goode. O'Brien, HO, Radar, Connelly and any company Denny Kidder has ever owned are all known to be quick and reasonable in dealing with broken skis.

Only Goode has the terrible reputation that is so widely know in the industry, and until they decide to change how they treat their customers they deserve to be "thrown under the bus" on public forums, IMO. Consumer pressure in the marketplace is the only thing that will encourage them to change their questionable practices - otherwise Dave will just keep cashing those checks and ignoring the righteously indignant.

 

TW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Ed, I've skied the same Sixam 2 point for the past two years at INT US championships. Switched between the end of the state season and championships in 2007. Picked up a couple of CLASSES (lots more passes) moved from 1st to Adv to Adv Open @ 55kph, fun to super in wide ride using the same ski. The sixam 2 point 69 mics at 7.262 which meets the rule for INT wide ride. The 67 is 7.12* which is too narrow. I'm told the 69SS comes out of the same mold so it would be agood candidate. I am adding a bit more wing, 9* at 30 mph. Horton talked me into pulling the wing for 55kph when I skied with him at a AWSA at Ski West just before INT. Managed to podium in WideRide, 4th in adv Open. Looking forward to next year. Seems like the Eric and the super short WR guys need a lot of wing to slow down and a bit of a softer, longer pull. I skied with Eric who won wide ride open on the way back home. He stays on the handle to the very end then arcs out. seems to maintain a constant speed in contrast to the big hits some of the boys take.It's just too chilly down at Winlock to do much more than play around. You Ca skiers need to start early season traning up here in June when the water is back to 55.

That is all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott,

Is that koolaid flowing right out of his lake into yours? He dosnt need to work on customer service, just his policys. Change your policys so that your service people can actually give service and not bad news.

On a differant note, I plan on getting out to SLC this winter a few times and it would be great to hook up and shred some powder with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ed,

The Goode had a little pop at the wakes, but not an issue.  I think the ski has 30mph potential, and has the dimensions to qualify it.  As far as other wide ride 30 mph skis, it is funny you mention it.  Jon has the idea that this may be a possiblity.  I do know from on accidential attempt on my burner, that 28 off is a challange at 34.  Perhaps the Venture, 35" would work.  It may be worth trying.  The difference with the Goode is that it has the wide forebody, but narrow tail.  The HO wide skis such as the burner has a pretty wide tail, which is a little scary at 34. 

 Lance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
On the wide ride issue I ran into 28 off at 34 mph on an HO Charger.  I never made 28 off but I had no problems with 15 or 22 off.  This was after returning to skiing after 15 years off.  I would guess a better skier could run that ski deeper than I could but it was capable of handling the speed but wasn't the most nimble in the turns as the speed got higher.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Two comments to you guys.

 

SCoke,

I am not on a goode now, but I do have to point out that it has been the "USA Water Ski National Championships sponsored by Goode Skis" for number of years now. With the decrease in support from the rest of the industry we need what ever we can get. (Opinion based on non-scientific tent size and goody bag decreases since my first Nats in '91) BTW, I believe this is directly due to removing the US Open from Nats...but thats another thread.

 

Joe,

That dead horse deal is priceless!!!

sj 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Lance,

I'm thinking that is why the Syncro works at 34, it does have a narrower tail than a lot of wide rides.  My current Radar Theory does too - wider than a normal slalom but not much wider.  I may give it a rip tomorrow (Saturday) at 34, going out for a little open water session with a couple of my buds.

Horton, you tried your Theory at 34 ??

Ed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators


Ed,



No I never did try the Theory at 34. I would bet it would not really be the right solution for much of any shortline 34 mph skiing. At 30 the Theory is freak’n kick ass. As for the Synchro, I know a few skiers have skied some super deep shortline on it but I do not think it is a good solution for 99% of the skiing world.




I would purpose that each ski has a usage range.  Some skis kick ass in a very narrow range. At my weight the Connelly F1x rocks from about 28 to 32 mph. At 30 or 32 mph this ski loves the shorter lines. At 34 shorting the rope is questionable and the ski just feels oversized.  



On the other hand I have put skiers who can just run 32 mph on a Radar RS-1 with good results (this was a gamble that worked out). The Connelly F1 and the HO Monza seem to me like skis that have a narrower range of optimal users but I suspect that the newer Prophecy and  A1 have much broader ranges.  And so on . . . . .

 Goode ★ KD Skis ★ MasterCraft ★ PerfSki ★ Radar ★ Reflex ★ S Lines ★ Stokes

Drop a dime in the can

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goode customer service with my 9800 breaking.  The follow up and customer service I received from Dave Goode has been great.  He offered me the WR to demo, free postage, quick shipping,  a discount and an extended demo period.  Since my 9800 was two years old, and damaged from a handle pop; I think he has been more than fair.  The WR of course comes with the power plate, which is way better than screwing into the ski, as I did wtih the 9800.  The finish on the WR is excellent, and much improved over the 9800. Whether I keep the Goode or not, I must say that Dave Goode has been very responsive to me and my needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

 

Jay,

Were you riding the 64" or the 66"? Do you know which amp ski it was? What's your height/weight?

 Also are you at 36 or 34?

 

skidawg told me to buy one so i am looking at the chart trying to figure out which one to order.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Scoke,

I am 6'1" 185lb, ski at 36, but heavily trying to be convinced to ski 34. I skied on a 66" 166 amp 36 mph RFF model. I am LFF, couldn't be picky, free demo. I skied it at 34 and 36, one of the things that I liked was the fact that it carried speed very well trough the turn, no stalling at the finish. When I skied it at 34 this was a huge difference compared to every other ski I tried this year, which was too many according to my wife.

Without great detail of any sort, I REALLY liked the ski. My new WR just arrived down south, so in two weeks I will get to ride it again. Before I ordered it I emailed Dave Goode and he suggested the 66" 146 amp model for me, besides the fact of weight/height I also inquired about skiing in colder water all the time, the warmest our lakes gets is mid 70's and that doesn't last long, so temp in my mind is a factor also.

I got a few different ponits of view, one "big dawg" skier told me to be on a 64, another pro said 66, buddies always have lots of opinions, but who better to listen too than the man himself, I'll find out in a couple weeks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller


If I was skiing 34mph, it would be different but I have 3 more seasons at 36, with that said:


 


Most of the information I have read, talked to riders, points to the 64†as the ski to ride.



My height and weight (over 6’3 and hair under 6’4, skiing between 195 & 200lbs) combo on the chart puts me on the 66†166 which just seems like too much ski for me. The only guys riding the 66†it seems are Parsons and Degaspari. I have always ridden softer skis as turning is usually my problem not speed across the wakes. OH yes and most of the water I ski in is avg. temp at 85 and usually ski the majority of 90-100 degrees.



I am not a strong edge changer (worked my ass off at the second half of the year trying to change that).



The other “the man/CS†is telling me a 64†would be what I would need.  I am looking into if he has a 66†for me to ride as well as a 64 for trial. Probably purchase one of them…


 


Maybe I should create a new topic and create a poll. Let you guys vote the size./vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...