If you could have a ski built for you...

[Horton]

If you could have a ski built for your needs. What would you ask for?

 

More buoys or magic are not good answers.

[skiray]

I had the first year Sixam 1.0 (red/blue). My performance on that ski was the most consistent of any of the ski that I have had. I broke it with a handle strike. Replaced with a first year Eilte. My PB went up, consistency went down. a lot of great days, some not so much. Probably me, but I want a consistent ride that I can ride for 3 - 5 years. That way I don't mind the cost.

 

One designed in the sweet spot of consistency, forgiveness and performance. You asked, what else would you expect?

[6balls]

I'm not as refined as some (though improving) and continue to depend upon power to some extent despite my best efforts. Given that, I need a sweet spot big enough to handle my sometimes variable body position. For this reason I skied D3 for years.

I also have a tendency to overturn, particularly onside (2,4). Tip support is something I have only recently discovered as important as it's one thing to have a forgiving ski and not fall. It's another thing to have a ski run through my tip overload and seldom penalize me as a result. I'm on a Razor now and it's fast, has a big enough sweet spot, and due to tip support on the overturn I'm not penalized (and s'times rewarded). For now it's the ski for me.

I also want machined inserts and a fin block system that is intuitive and easy to adjust.

[skibug]

turns without effort, slows well in the preturn, fast cross course with the ability to build angle, forgiving enough to not punish me for my lack of technique.

[eleeski]

The real issue is what physical characteristics translate into performance traits. Asking for inserts is easy. Asking for more angle or forgivingness is asking for magic. I have no idea what to ask for. I try something to see what it does.

Eric

[RichardDoane]

I wanted a pink ski

[GAJ0004]

I would combine the performance characteristics of my 2000 O'Brien Mapple, with the forgiving characteristics of my 2008 D3 Nomad RCX. I like a ski that rides deep in the water, and cuts through rough water. The forgiving characteristics of my D3 have saved me many falls over the front of the ski, the only downside is if you get out of position the ski just stops/stalls you can't recover after that. The handle gets yanked out of your hands. It has saved me from taking some nasty falls, but I may lose a small amount on buoy count here and there. I suspect the O'Brien Elite is like the Mapple Signature model but faster. As far as graphics go I would go with red, white, and blue like my boat..

 

[Ham_Wallace]

LaPoint Pro. Tunnel. 67". Made from Carbon. Fairly soft forebody. Rigid tail. Mapple Cut back fin. Double wing.

[Ham_Wallace]

Oh yeah, Need the steps in the tunnel.

[A_B]

I want a 68" Mid Ride or a 68" Senate C with PVC core.

 

[KM]

A dual-rockered, dual-locked, resin transfer molded, hollow cored, autoclave cured, asymmetric mid ride made with nano carbon technology.

[Bruce_Butterfield]

Here's my wish list:

1. a ski that will perform the same after 5 years as it does on the first set.

2. the offside turn of a 9100

3. the onside turn of a 2005 model Monza

4. the ability to generate angle and space like the Elite

5. the stability of a D3

 

For the specifics that might make that happen:

1. the next step in manufacturing beyond RTM (not sure what that step is)

2. a really stiff tail (>100lbs)

3. thin tail profile like the Warp

4. the tail “channel” that was on the Monza and Sixam

5. wide forebody – maybe not as wide as a Mid-Ride, but wider than 'normal'

 

Might as well ask for magic

[MattP]

I want a ski that would magically give me more buoys!

[Horton]

@Brent that is sort of my thinking.... based on what you think are your short comings what do you think you need from a ski?

[Horton]

@Brent just a thought exercise. If the ski turned different at 1-3-5 or acted different at edge change into 2-4-6, would that make is easier for you to be centered?

[Wish]

front support of the Mid-ride

width of the Coefficient Xsl (step bottom)

tracking of the Strada

ease of use of the D3 Z7 st

speed the Elite

 

Squeezed into a graphics package that's similar to the Prophecy- old school/new school look.

 

[Chef23]

Unfortunately I don't think the ski is what is holding me back it is my physique. I don't know enough about ski design to come up with what I need in a ski.

[Razorskier1]

I think more than the ski I need about 3 months of daily coaching. That would likely make the ski a non-issue!

[scuppers]

I said this in adifferent post:

I need a ski that is designed to run into 39 off - with my arms out, butt back, stiff legs, and bent over at the waist. Surely the technology exsists.

It would save a lot of aggravation.

[Horton]

My dream ski:

turns slower (carves a longer arc) on off side to compensate for my over aggression and shoulder rotation

does not require a ton of front foot pressure to turn on side

 

[Than_Bogan]

To not quite answer your question: I feel the next "big innovation" in ski design is going to relate to the bottom. The step bottom is (pardon the pun) a good step, and may prove to be a valuable idea.

 

But I suspect that more can be done there. This is not so much because I have a specific idea, but because I think a lot of the rest of the possibilities have been well tread. I don't know that materials are going to get many more buoys than they already have (although I do think that durability can increase). And the basic shapes seem pretty well explored.

 

But there's a (literally) infinite variety of stuff that could be tried on the bottom, and I feel that some combinations will prove to do good things.

[skidawg]

What bruce said, but offside of my elite