Baller oneski Posted March 17, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2014 I'm considering hopping on a Nano One (from a 9800) for the start of the ski season. Most everyone I know who skies on the Nano One loves it, but I'm curious what difference, if any, between the Nano One and last years XT version. According to the Goode website it appears the only difference is the XT has a sharper bevel. Curious to hear fellow Ballers opinions on the difference between the two skies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller GOODESkier Posted March 17, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2014 While I really liked the Nano One, I found the XT to be even better. If you are moving up, you should go with the XT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller SkiJay Posted March 17, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2014 I have both @oneski. The Nano One has a little more rocker than the XT, making the Nano One a super easy ski to turn but a little more work than the XT. The Nano One's ability to survive a late long pull by delivering a stupidly fast, late, tight turn without losing its composure, makes it one of if not the most forgiving of all current skis. The XT, though very similar, is maybe not quite as turn-happy, but it also requires a little less work to accelerate. They're both fine skis. How much saving do you need at the ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller greghayes Posted March 17, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2014 +1 @skijay. I moved from an N1 to the XT over the winter and have enjoyed the reduced effort in the pulls that more than make up for the less snappy turn. It encourages the right habits. IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GregDavis Posted March 17, 2014 Members Share Posted March 17, 2014 I went from Nano One to XT. Nano one, has more rocker, thus, turns very good. However, the second you take your hand off the handle, ( on the Nano One), it wants to come in, make you narrow, and start turning. Nano One requires a bit more energy cross course. XT, faster cross course, XT seems to carry out better, XT less sensitive to taking hand off handle early. Loved both Nano One and XT. The Nano One might work better for some people, and the XT better for others. I wouldn't say one is better than the other, they are more skier specific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller ktm300 Posted March 17, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2014 @GOODEskier Have you discovered any limitations in turning the 66.75XT? What is the compromise you feel in riding the bigger ski; if any? Are you riding a stock flex or softer? I am the same weight as you though just 6'0". Did you ride the bigger N1 too? If the bigger ski still turns great, that is what I want. Like @GregDavis said, with my 65.25 N1, if I take my hand off the handle, we're turning; very little carry out off the second wake going into my onside. While some of the turns are incredible, I'd rather not have to make 'em. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller_ DW Posted March 17, 2014 Baller_ Share Posted March 17, 2014 Any comparisons between these options and the 9700? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller GOODESkier Posted March 17, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2014 @ktm300 I have a 66" XT and a 66.75" XT Currently skiing on the 66.75" XT. It is all together a different ski than the Nano One 66.75". I don't know what to say other than I think it has given me the best of both worlds, a fast/stable ski cross course and a good turning ski as well. I don't feel it shutting down in the turns on me like the smaller ski tended to do sometimes. I only have about 8 sets on it back in mid-January after not skiing for over 2 months. On the 5th set I was right back skiing 2@38, so I feel there is room to grow on this ski again (cold water to boot!). I ordered it with flex and rocker numbers that were recommended to me by a friend already skiing the ski. i think they are pretty close to what you get from the factory anyways. I am currently 185 lbs. and 6'3". My buddy is lighter and tad shorter as well. It really seems to work well. Give it a demo at least and make a decision from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GregDavis Posted March 17, 2014 Members Share Posted March 17, 2014 DW Baller 11:13AM Flag Any comparisons between these options and the 9700? NANO ONE, AND XT big improvement from 9700 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller jcamp Posted March 17, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2014 I skied the XT for the first time Saturday and got a new all-time PB on the first set. Coming off the Nano 1 I felt the differences with the XT were less cross-course effort, more speed and a quicker transition from the apex to the first wake, especially on my on side. I tend to rush the turn by dropping by my inside shoulder. The XT came under me better and finished the turn more completely before I was off to the next buoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller GOODESkier Posted March 17, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2014 @jcamp wondering what size you are on and your weight/height? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller jcamp Posted March 17, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2014 66", same as my Nano 1. I'm 5'11" 183 lbs. Considered the 66.75 but wanted to compare same size XT to Nano 1 first. After PB'ing on first set I decided I'd keep the 66. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller jackski Posted March 18, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 18, 2014 OK what about a comparison to the Nano mid ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller GOODESkier Posted March 18, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 18, 2014 I was on a Mid-Ride Twist before the Nano One....... I think the Nano One I had was too small for me, but the Nano One was a lot more work cross course. I loved the Mid. The XT seems to be my compromise between the One and the Mid......... If you haven't tried an XT, you should........ and different sizes if you can....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller_ DW Posted March 18, 2014 Baller_ Share Posted March 18, 2014 @GregDavis: thanks, can you add any specifics on the improvements? Is this from your experience in upgrading from a 9700 to a Nano One then XT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller ForrestGump Posted March 18, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 18, 2014 @DW That's like asking if a 2015 Corvette is improved from a 97 Corvette. In 97, the Corvette was the top of it's class. But in 2015, that 97 barely registers against the lowest car in the 2015 Vette's class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller RAWSki Posted March 20, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 20, 2014 Thanks for all the comments guys this was helpful.....I think OB and GoodeSkier just cost me $2K! George hope to catch up with you at the ProAm this spring....my GF pointed out that the ATL Tournament can be capped off with Jimmy Buffet at Chastain Park on Monday. Nice planning man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller PatM Posted March 20, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 20, 2014 I found the work needed to ski on the N1 made me develop bad habits (over pulling, pulling to long) and was not consistent for me. Went from a 9900 traditional to the N1. Returned it after having it for the 30 day trial. Have not tried the XT but understand that the changes addressed the issues I was having with the ski. To me if you have to tweak the fin and wing to make it work its not for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members musclefixer Posted March 23, 2014 Members Share Posted March 23, 2014 hey , can anyone help with Xt settings. 34/28-32' skier 160lbs on a 65.25, fin is stock. Ive tried numerous binding placement started at 28 7/8 moved 28.5, now at 29. While this really helps my off side, my on side is stuck. I tend to want to hook my onside turn and close off my shoulder quickly during the reach back for the handle. The skis tends to want to not come around( while it is better at 28.8, I fall back onto the tail and then get too much speed) I thought this ski would be a whole lot easier to ski on. Wing now at 7', trying to lose the drag on the on sideturn. Off side is good at 29'', but the further back I go, the worse the off side gets. suggestions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller oneski Posted March 23, 2014 Author Baller Share Posted March 23, 2014 Well, I just added a Nano One to the stable. Thanks for all the helpful advice......Looking forward to dialing in the new ski. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller SkiJay Posted March 23, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 23, 2014 @musclefixer The 65.25" XT factory numbers are excellent and the ski is so sensitive to wing changes that Goode recommends staying within ½° of 9.5°. Probably you are used to a ski that offered more tail support. The XT has a narrow tail and bindings way back compared to most skis, so your normal stance may be too far back for the XT. If you go factory spec and ski more over the front of your XT than you are accustomed to, I'll bet you discover the magic. @OB makes a good point about Goode's fin numbers. They are for a 2nd generation Slot caliper only. Using the jaws of a standard caliper will not match. Stock FL is 6.853 using the caliper tips, and DFT is 0.694 using the caliper head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members musclefixer Posted March 23, 2014 Members Share Posted March 23, 2014 I haven't touched the fin. besides the wing. I did account for slot caliper settings by adding .58 to the jaws and it does seem to be factory set to the specs, DFT .696-.701( depending how you measure). I'll give it a try again today and see what develops. Just seems i'm running my front heel way longer then most, Thanks @OB, @SkiJay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller SkiJay Posted March 23, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 23, 2014 Three points of clarification: First, the .694" DFT measured with a Mitutoyo caliper using the head is exactly the same distance from tail as the .705" listed on Goode's website as measured by the 2nd gen Slot Caliper's jaws. Two different numbers for the same distance using two different tools. Second, I think the ±½° listed with the 9.5° the stock wing setting is just an indication of acceptable measuring tolerance around the stock number. I don't think Goode is suggesting that the ski won't work well with wing settings outside that narrow tolerance. Indeed they say the ski is very wing sensitive so try different settings. For you @musclefixer, I'd recommend more wing than stock before less wing if you need to be more over the front of the ski at the ball. Finally, I think the same measuring tolerance idea goes for binding placement too. Goode is saying that stock is 28⅞° ±⅛" for the 95.25" ski, not that the ski will not work outside this range. In fact, binding types, mounting styles, measuring techniques, skier foot size, and skier stance all conspire to make binding measurements the most likely to require some experimentation. So play with where you have the bindings by all means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Chef23 Posted March 23, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 23, 2014 Any bigger skiers skiing on the N1 XT? I am about 215 during ski season (although I would like to be lighter) and am skiing on a 66" Mid right now and ski mid 35 off. I am interested in trying the XT but not sure if the 66.75 will be enough ski. At times I find the Mid a little short although it has plenty of surface area if that makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfennell Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 My 66 xt is easier to get up on and more stable then my 67" Strada was at 200 lbs if that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Kelvin Posted March 24, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 24, 2014 @Chef23 I'm on a 66 N1 at 210+ and it feels fine. No feelings of being too short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Chef23 Posted March 24, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 24, 2014 @Kelvin thanks. I may try one this summer if I can get the green light from the CFO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller MrJones Posted March 25, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 25, 2014 OB, Did you ever try the N1 with less wing? Like 7-8 deg? What did it feel like. I rode Erb's for one set last year, but I don't remember if I did my normal 8 deg or put it at 9 just b/c it was closer to factory rec's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller MrJones Posted March 25, 2014 Baller Share Posted March 25, 2014 What was the difference in feel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horton
.webp.a30f66e5f4553a0ea06e4fe12520951c.webp)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now