Radar Senate vs. Radar Senate C

[Skihack]

Guys,

I know the Senate C is lighter and rebounds quicker due to the carbon layoff but is the Senate C a thinner ski vs. the regular Senate? I have not put my hands on either. No ski shops close to me. It appears that the Senate C has a thicker sidewall in pics.

Thanks!

[Jim Neely]

Both skis come from the same mold so the size is identical. According to Ryan Hughes at Radar there is no difference in the flex, either. The difference is in the weight and response, as you mentioned. I have the regular Senate.

 

 

[Horton]

I am pretty sure the C is stiffer. I have ridden both. The stock Senate not a bad ski but I would not try to run shortline with it. With the Carbon version I can smoke 35off / 55k.

[ScarletArrow]

I'm thinking of demoing a Senate...for a 165lb 15off skier, should I go with 65 or 67?

[Horton]

Boat speed?

[RichardDoane]

I had a 67 Senate C, 180#, 6'.  It's a great ski, easy starts, a little wider for forgiveness when you really step on the front, and still plenty fast.  I handed it down to Officer Friendly, he's only 5'10" 165# and he's doing well on it.   Always @ 34 mph.   One of our ski group just graduate to Men7, and with the decrease in speed to 52K, he opted for a 65 Senate C.  I'd guess he's 5'8" 150#. 

[ScarletArrow]

32...hopefully will finally conquer 34

[Chris Rossi]

I'm glad to see that skiers are starting to pick up on the Senate and Senate C.  These skis are awesome.  I feel as though we will start to see some of the top 34mph skiers ripping it on the Senate C.  I am 6'2" and 180lbs and the first time I rode the 65 Senate, I ran 39off at 34mph.  The 65 Senate has roughly the same surface area as a 66 RS1 so I felt right at home.  The 67 Senate has slightly more surface area than a 68 RS1. 

 Chris

[Horton]

I am not sure anyone has answered Scarlet's question. I think the 65 is the right size but if possible demo

[ForrestGump]

My new Senate C w/ Annex Graphix showed up yesterday.  WhooHoo. Hope to get out this weekend to try it beside my RS1. After tearing a ham in 05 and tearing a rhomboid in my back last year, I wanted something that was a bit easier on me.  I love the RS1, but the 67 RS1 is noticably harder to get out of the water(which is where I feel both injuries the most) than the 68 RS1.

[ForrestGump]

Super Dave!  After skiing on the Senate C, I'm probably going to get rid of the RS1.  It fits my skill level right now better than the RS1. Plus it sure takes a lot of the strain of getting out of the water off that torn muscle.  Give me a shout this week at 281.686.4272.

 Shane

[D Wolters]

Thanks Shane!

[ForrestGump]

Got about 10 sets on the Senate C so far. Damn this is a nice ski. It really rolls up hard on edge at the finish up the turn with the tip way down. On every ski I've skied on I've had to run the bindings forward. Not on this one. The RS1 feels like it carries a bit more speed through the finish of the turn but the SC really puts me in a nice position.

[lkb]

I need some advice. This is my 7th yr skiing. 34 mph.  I have run 35 off. I don't have it anywhere near down pat but I have run it several times. At the beginning of last year I was skiing good on a Warp and felt like I might make some progress toward knocking down a 35 pretty often. As the year went on things got worse instead of better. I think it was hard for me to make the switch to ZO. Anyway now I think it's time to ditch the Warp. I want something that is easy to ski on and forgiving and not real sensitive to fin moves. I'm thinking Senate C. Any thoughts/ comments? Is it pretty fast through the wakes?

[RichardDoane]

My Senate C was a excellent Ski overall, reliable feel in the turns, easy to get up on, and you could get on the front without burying the tip.  And still pretty fast.  I ran alot of 35's on it.  One of our group is skiing on it still, and doing well.  Depending on your size, they go 65, 67, 69" so they cover alot of different skier types.  If you want to get your 35 more consistent, practice running 32's over and over and over and over.  When you can run 10 in a row, you'll know you've got it.

[ForrestGump]

lkb, The SC is a very forgiving and easy ski. It doesn't punish you. It's got the stability of the D3 skis, but the speed of the RS1(almost). If you're late and you stomp on the front end, it turns hard but doesn't stall. It doesn't carry your momentum past the apex like the RS1 does, but it carries it a lot better than a Goode. It's very much a new school type of ski, IMO. If you stay countered behind the boat, have good counter rotation at the ball and keep your head up, you'll love it. That said, what makes you think you want to ditch the Warp? Is it not forgiving enough? Not stable? Just curious.

[lkb]

Don't get me wrong, I have always known the Warp is an amazing ski. I don't think there is a ski out there that can match it in acceleration. It's instant. But it has a narrow tail which means you will have problems if you get back and don't stay over the center of it. I think that's what has been going on with me. But, for the last two days I have finally gotten to ski in warm water, finally gotten a good feel on ZO using c3 and I have really worked on staying up over the ski and keeping countered. Voile! Nice results.

I really wish more ski makers would look at  using the coreless construction. Warp is on to something with that. 

I would say it is a stable ski but I don't think it is very forgiving.

All that being said, I still want to try soemthing else just for s**** and giggles. If I can find a Senate C cheap I will try it.

[Guest]

ShaneH,

("My new Senate C w/ Annex Graphix showed up yesterday'). Shane did you special order the Senate C w/ANNEX Graphix or did RADAR make the change? 

 

[ForrestGump]

Radar did it custom for me. :)

[RS]

All this talk about the Senate C has me thinking I need to try one of these too.    I'd like something easier on the body and I'm only skiing the course about once a week right now.  

[ForrestGump]

One of my friends is getting a Z7 next week, so I hope to compare the Z7 to the Senate C in the next few weeks. 

[Ed_Obermeier]

I'd definitely be interested in that comparison.  All this wide ski stuff has got me thinking a Senate C might be a good next step for an aging mid-level skier such as myself once I cash out the MPD (which I'm definitely not ready to do just yet).  The Z7 sounds equally interesting.  Love to put some sets on both of them myself.

No one remembers and you'll all say I'm full of it, however...  Around '99 or '00 during a discussion of INT Wide Ride class skiing, which was a relatively new idea at the time, I posted a diatribe on the old Water Ski Message Board that I thought the day would come when wide ride skis or at least some attributes of wide ride skis would find their way into high end skis.  Of course I was roundly ha-ha'd and made fun of by the posters on the board (maybe MS remembers??).  I'm just saying...

Ed  

[Old MS Accout]

Ed, I remember. When I saw those guys running 38 and deep 39s at the INT nats, I thought about it then. I think a guy got into 41 on a WR. A few years later we see Kyle T running 39 on a Syncro at the BDs. It is the future.     

[RS]

I'm looking forward to trying out the Senate C on Thursday.   

[Edmund]

RS,

I am very interested in hearing your report on the Senate C.  I am on a regular Senate and keep wondering if the upgrade to a "C" would be worth it.

 Edmund

[RS]

I won't be able to compare it directly to the Senate but I can at least give you how it skis and how close I get to my PB (3/-35/34) on regular sticks.   

 

[Horton]

I have ridden the Senate and the C. The Senate is cool. It is great for the open lake but the C is a bad momma 30 - 32 mph ski for running balls. It is not a 35 off 34mph or 36 mph ski but for lower passes it rocks.

[Ed_Obermeier]

No way it works at 34 mph John?  I didn't think it was much less than a slightly wider MPD but wasn't sure of that.  You're aware of the Syncro being run into short line at 34, eh?  Agreed not anyone could probably do that though.  Requires too much input, just too slow, ???

Ed 

[ForrestGump]

The Schnitz slot fin really made the SC come alive for me.  As I got into 32 and 35(albeit at a slow 34) I started experiencing a little too much tail slide on my offside. Schnitz's fin completely cured that. Haven't blown the tail out since putting it on.

[Edmund]

ShaneH,

Based on your Senate C experience, do you think a 65" length is the best for me? [155 lbs, working on 15 off, 32 - 34 mph.] I am riding a 65" regular Senate now and it seems OK, but I am probably at the upper weight limit for it.  I wish they made a 66".

The slot fin sounds like something I should try.  Thanks.

[ForrestGump]

Edmund, The 65SC has the same wetted surface area as a 66 RS1 or MPD.  That said, I'd say you're on the right size.

[RS]

We are getting blown out today.  I'm bummed because I wanted to jump on the C today and prove Horton wrong!

Shane,  I'll keep that in mind about the schnotz fin.   I still have one laying around.   I've tried it on just about every ski I've owned and I it always seemed to be a trade off in benefits.  

 

[Horton]

I have run into 38 on the C. It is a really good ski but it is not a super high end ski. It is just one tick less. That is why it is so good for so many skiers. I say for anything past 32 off at 34 you want a top line ski.