Help with new NANO One XT set up

[MikeT]

 

 

Just started with the 66" XT a few weeks ago. Coming from a 67" 9800SL. I've started with the Nano XT stock settings for the fin but the front binding is 1/8" forward of stock. I use a rear toe strap. I placed the binding that way because I'll need to drill out the bindings holes a little to allow it go to back into the stock position but I figured it was no harm in starting in that spot. I'm left foot forward.

Skiing at 28. My first impression with the ski is a good on side turn but a slow delayed off side. I've always skied with an 8 degree wing forever. so after few sets I went to the 8 degree postion and it cured the offside turn. I'm only 6 sets into the season and the ski but I think I feel a better angle crossing the wake with this ski.

My questions to the experts is this. There is a reason the ski specs say set the fin at 9-9.5 degrees. I assume I'd get more from the ski at those settings but have experienced the same delay in the past with the offside turn unless I'm at 8 degrees. Any ideas how I could set the ski up with a 9 degree wing and get good turns on both sides? Any ideas on my problem. I'm Men5 and when I'm up to speed I have run to mid 39 in the mid 2000's. Now I max out at between 3-5 38.

Please help?

 

 

 

[GOODESkier]

I would get binding placement dialed in first. Are you able to drill/devise a way to allow for smaller adjustments?

 

After that I will be open minded about wing angle on this ski. I had the wing set at 10 for the last little bit, but had it at 12 or a hair more before that. I ran a 38 early in the season and then switched the wing to 10 degrees. Today I went back to a little more than 12 again and had some pretty good results. Almost ran two 38's! Was a mental bobble. I was in good shape at 4 each time and did the "I got it" in my head and goofed each time.

 

I would say, just play with the wing setting a degree at a time and see what you feel and how far down the course you get with ease. But, I would get balanced on the ski with bindings first.

[MikeT]

Thank you. I certainly can move the bolts on the power plate and I will do that to get the binding neutral and have more options for placement. I'm using the KD T-Factor binding. I've heard that skiers on the Nano One were moving their bindings first as well. The ski feels real good right now but I'm still on 28. Will soon start with some 32"s

[GOODESkier]

Buddy of mine just got the XT as well, he was a little too far back on the ski. We have moved him ahead, shallowed the fin a hair, and added some wing angle. He normally runs a couple 32's a year. Today he was looking really good. Thinking once he settles down and builds some more confidence, that 32's will be automatic for him.

 

I think we have his bindings pretty close. GREAT thing about velcro, it is so easy to adjust front to back in very small increments!

[brettmainer]

66" was delivered today and I took my first ride on it. My bindings gave me a choice of 1/8" forward or 1/8" behind factory recommended 29". I took 4 passes at 29.125 and the ski didn't work. I took 4 passes at 28.875 and the ski was much better. I remembered that my last Goode (a 9500 picked up at the 2003 Nationals) was the same with respect to binding placement.

The fin was delivered to me slightly shorter, to the rear and deeper than the numbers recommended on the Goode website but I skied today as delivered. The ski felt OK but not great. If it doesn't feel better tomorrow, I will move the fin to website settings unless someone gives me better advice.

[VONMAN]

66" XT right foot forward, 195 lbs, 34.2 mph. Yesterday was the first day I felt in control of the ski. 15,22, 28 and a peek at 32 off. Here's the setup. Front boot 29.25 fin 2.462 7.004 tips .705 slot 8 degrees. Like Horton said just stay stacked and try not to release the Beast and it does all the work. At 63 years old I don't like to work hard. Ernie Schlager

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[brettmainer]

Vonman, have you tried the bindings at the Factory recommended 29"? The ski worked much better for me at or slightly rear of 29". It also worked a bit better with the wing moved to 10 degrees. I am 6-2 180 right foot forward.

[MikeT]

I moved my binding to 29" from 28.875 and to 9* and it made a big difference on my off side turn. However I seem to be buckling slightly or getting some hesitation on both sides. I can see that happening on the offside turn for me, but never had that issue with on side. So not sure which to go to cure that problem. The ski is basically turning well now but I feel hesitation on both sides as the ski is about to complete the turn. According to Goode Specs "increasing fin depth" lifts the tip on both sides. Anyone have any luck with that move. Option 2 is to raise the tip of the fin. I've had that work on my offside before. Moving the fin forward helps the offside tip but I've never used that to cure a little buckling. Looking for suggestions!

[brettmainer]

Be sure that the hesitation and buckling are not caused by you pulling the handle in too early or pushing on the ski before you start moving the fin. If I stay patient in the turn, it turns perfectly. If I get impatient and push the ski or grab for the handle, things get worse. I've yet to run a super smooth 35 on the ski, but I love how the ski stays with me at 38 and allows me to run the pass with mistakes that would have put me in the water on my A2. I am hoping that with more practice and patience on the ski I can keep things smoother at all of the line lengths. I have in the past made the mistake of adjusting the fin to compensate for pilot error and am trying not to repeat the mistake when the ski as is works so well at my hardest pass.

[skialex]

@VONMAN‌ by the numbers you gave it seems that you run a very long and shallow fin, On my 66"XT I use sorter and deeper fin and boot at 29.

It probably feels that you have to much tip.

[MikeT]

@brettmainer I look at my video and I'm pretty satisfied that I'm staying with the handle and staying back all the way to the turn on both sides. I'm trying very hard to be patient and stay countered but on the onside a slight buckle occurs at the end of the turn and I recover quickly. The offside is worse. Part of it is me pulling in to early there but I don't feel like the ski is following through as good as it could. My fin is set at stock but I'm going to get the exact numbers and put them down. My first move that I was contemplating would be to raise the front a bit and keep the length by increasing the depth.

 

[Than_Bogan]

@SkiJay (and anyone else of course): Would love your advice on this. I watched @MikeT from the boat last night and I couldn't see anything causing it. Frankly it looked like he was doing it on purpose at the last moment, but obviously THAT's not the case!

 

I've skied with @MikeT for a long time, and he's almost entirely responsible for getting me from -15 to -38. This problem is something I haven't seen him do in the past, and since I also cannot spot a proximate cause, I began to wonder about ski setup.

 

Would video help? I'm pretty sure he has at least a few passes at -28 taken recently.

[gginco]

I'm 5'-11", 190 lbs, LFF and ride a 66 XT. I also feel the ski hits the brakes coming out of the buoy. A relaxed, tall and countered body position is the cure and makes this ski a dream stick but at the same time skiing is not fun at all if we have to swim every time we aren't 100% perfect. I don't believe this ski only works if you're Regina or the Big Dawgs so what's the answer to accommodate the occasional scrap? I think this ski demands a certain velocity into and through the turn to perform properly. Unfortunately, one tick below that ideal velocity is deadly. What adjustments can make this ski faster in general?

[brettmainer]

With respect to gginco's comment, I have had the opposite experience in that the ski is more forgiving of mistakes at the ball, not less, than other skis I have ridden. I do find that I tend to get narrow on the ski and have to concentrate on holding maximum angle and speed from the buoy to the wake so as not to be narrow at the next buoy. The funny thing is that while I feel narrow coming into the buoy, the ski seems to keep going out more than other skis, so I don't hit the buoy even when I feel like I might. This ski is either drifting out or it is coming in; it doesn't seem to want to stay parallel with the boat if I am early and waiting. This is why the 35s are not as smooth as I would like (I generally ski 35 very early) but why 38s are better (for me) on this ski, as I am not good enough to be "too early" at 38.

 

With respect to Mike T's ski set up, I would say the proposed moves would be the correct ones for the perceived problem. Are you sure that the fin is at factory settings? The reason I ask is that Goode measures fin length differently. The engineer in me hates this, as 6.768 inches should be 6.768 inches if measured by a scientific laser accurate to the millionth. Instead, Goode measures the length with the body of the caliper tight to the fin rather than using the tips of the caliper, which should be the actual length. Not having messed with Goode fins for 10 years, I had forgotten this and was wondering how the factory could have sent me a ski set up so far from the factory settings. Dirt straightened me out and reminded me of what I had forgotten about 6.768 inches not really being 6.768 inches.

 

Before moving the fin, I would also take the wing from 9 degrees to 10 degrees and take a few passes and see what difference you feel. Conventional wisdom would say that more wing angle would cause even more hesitation at the finish of the turn, but I actually felt the opposite.

[SkiJay]

@MikeT‌ I've been watching this thread but have been confused by the description of the problem, so @Than_Bogan‌'s recommendation for video would definitely be a big help. When I hear "buckling," I think the tip is biting too hard at or after the ball, but "hesitation" suggests the tip is resisting being engaged with the water during about the same phase. On the surface, the description seems contradictory.

 

But if I had to guess without video, I'd say the ski is building tip pressure too easily and your efforts to avoid tip-grab are making you tentative entering the turn. Trying to avoid tip-grab can lead to a tip-high pre-turn, which means you are both a bit too far back on the ski and it is carrying a little extra speed into the ball. When it's time to turn, the ski hesitates because of the speed and lack of tip engagement. This causes an urgent move onto the front of the ski, jamming the tip into the water causing it to grab and buckle your form--hesitation then grab and buckle. Are these two events happening in this order?

 

The perplexing thing about an overly sensitive tip is that sometimes it grabs, so you back off working the front of the ski, then it won't engage. So you go back to working the tip etc. To really confuse the issue, sometimes you nail the sweet spot which only raises doubts in your mind that the problem is your inconsistent skiing and not your setup. The resulting lack of confidence makes us ski defensively which is what the previous paragraph is all about. Does any of this sound familiar?

 

If so, there are a few things that will increase the ski's resistance to tip engagement so you can use your natural technique with confidence. Please post accurate measurements of fin length, fin depth, distance from tail (indicate tips, slot v1, or slot v2), wing angle, and front binding placement. If you have video, that's a huge help as it shows if the problem is at the front (tip-bite) or the back (over-smear) of the ski.

 

BTW, It's interesting that when you reduced wing angle to 8°, things improved. Less wing would reduce tip pressure and help the situation described above. But it's worth figuring out if there is something else out of wack because Goode's stock settings are usually pretty good.

[MikeT]

@skijay The description is really buckling at the end of the turn. So here are the numbers with tips. DFT is not an exacting measurement and I'm getting between .705-.710, Length is 6.768, Depth is 2.492. Binding is 29" and the wing is 9*.

To your last paragraph. I started with the binding at 28.825 and 9 degrees. The offside was not turning well at all so I put the wing at 8* with that binding position and it improved the offside.

[gginco]

 

@SkiJay I think what you said is spot on. As I get better at shorter lines I'm getting wider on the buoy. As a result I'm trying to backside buoys by driving the tip into the turn. The XT doesn't like it so I'm looking for an adjustment to let me get away with more tip pressure but that is the wrong thinking. The XT wants edge angle and not tip pressure to perform at its best. The youtube link above that I came across today is perfect for this topic. Really short shortline skiers seem to love the XT but that's probably because shortline skiing naturally achieves this side angle position whereas longer (-32 and longer) can result in course width that confuses the skier into using tip pressure rather than a cast out to turn. Coming from the A series HO to the XT this is very noticeable to me. The A series seemed to allow more tip action which doesn't really force proper technique but does keep you alive.

[SkiJay]

@gginco‌ Matt Rini is da man, and I love his description of how to properly turn a ski! Thanks for this pertinent and timely video post.

 

When I first got my XT, I was a little over zealous with the front of it too and tried all kinds of fin changes to desensitize the tip, but all they did was make the tip ride even higher than normal, messing up the pre-turn and exit. Once I realized that yet again, I was the problem, I focused on setting a constant tip pressure in the pre-turn and just rolling it into the turn at the ball. We became much better friends after that, and the setup eventually evolved right back to stock.

 

Since your settings are very nearly exactly stock already @MikeT, you might be in this same boat. Whatever you skied on last probably had a more forgiving (or demanding) tip design. And since you were running into 39, you obviously new how to use it. Normally, I'd be all over adjusting the setup to match your existing style, especially since it's a style that you've done very well with. But I'm far from the only one who has ended up right back at stock after trying other setups on the XT.

 

Having said this, the answer to your question regarding adding depth to raise the tip on both sides is yes, sort of. If you add FD and leave FL alone, you are increasing fin area which will reduce tail smear, and over-smear can drop more tip into the water. Without video, however, it's impossible to know if your ski is over-smearing, and if it is, why.

 

But if you are set on trying this, I'd recommend taking a little length out of the fin at the same time. Just increasing depth also rotates the belly of the fin forward which slightly increases tip engagement. Maybe try adding .006" of FD and reducing FL by .004". See if this will let you run 9° of wing too. This ski likes lots of wing, probably because it helps the skier get over the ski during the pre-turn which avoids having to jam the tip into the water at the ball.

[ForrestGump]

Aren't the XT fin settings with tips 6.840-6.845 Long and 2.495-2.502 deep? That's how most people I've seen run it.

[SkiJay]

Great catch @ShaneH! @MikeT's numbers are so close to factory, I jumped to the conclusion he was using a Slot calibper. That's what I get for posting at 2:30 in the morning!

 

This is great news @MikeT. None of what I wrote above applies to your case. Once again, working without video is a waste of time. I'll bet your XT is riding really tip high in the pre-turn and that you have trouble keeping it down at the end of the turn too . . . after you finally get it to bite!

 

Anyway, try 6.845 (tips), 2.50, .694 (head flat), 9°

.087" more fin length and over .010" lest DFT will definitely be a noticeable improvement!

 

Thanks Shane.

[MikeT]

@skijay Thank you for all the good tips. Back on the water tomorrow. If I understand everything I should try a 10 degree wing first.

Next. Not sure if the buckling problem is more or less tip. So I'll try "increase FD+.005, less FL to keep fin area balance" or skijays numbers or "decrease front of fin to just affect the off side" and see what happens. The later adjustment use to help on the Connelly's . I'm nearly 20 years on Goode skis and I always have reverted back to stock fin numbers as well Last ski was 67" 9800SL

 

[SkiJay]

@MikeT The numbers listed on Goode's website are measured using a V2 Slot caliper. You've posted that you used these numbers with a standard caliper to set up your fin, and this has given you an absurdly short fin and too much distance from tail.

 

A fin this short will cause the ski to ride excessively tip high in the pre-turn and is no doubt the cause of the hesitation at the ball. Then you'd have to urgently force tip into the water at the ball which nearly always leads to tip-grab anyway, but to make matters worse, the fin is also too far forward making the already smear-happy tail of the XT even looser, exaggerating the tip-grab, and causing the buckle you are experiencing.

 

I'd highly recommend that you go straight to the following numbers using a standard caliper. Using standard calipers with these numbers will put you virtually right on Goode's listed Slot caliper numbers:

 

FL = 6.845" (measured using standard caliper tips)

FD = 2.498"

DFT = .694" (measured using the caliper head flat on the ski)

Wg = 9° to 10°

Front binding = 29"

 

The improvement should be substantial! Let us know how it goes.

[MikeT]

@skijay ok will do, but! What's interesting then is why would the numbers be "so close" to their specs. Put another way. If I'm getting the same numbers as the Goode specs with the (sort of wrong) standard caliper does that mean the original set up is slightly off. The FD and FL is not as far off as DFT. Thanks again for the help. I hope to make some progress this week.

[SkiJay]

Good question @MikeT I'm going to guess that someone other than the factory must have had their hands on that ski and they put the factory numbers on it using a standard caliper. Possibly, someone demoed the ski, messed up the fin setup, didn't like the ski (no surprise here), and returned it good as new. Pure speculation of course.

 

Every Goode that I've measured right out of the box with a slot caliper is pretty close to factory specs. Goode has standardized on using the slot caliper because it makes measuring DFT more repeatable for some users. But "industry standard" (not that it's official) is still to use tips for FL and the head for DFT, and the numbers between these two methods are substantially different.

 

The main reason they are different is that measuring FL with a slot caliper is done with the jaws, not the tips, and a version 2 slot caliper (which is different than the first version) has no notch at the base of the jaws. Nearly all other calipers, including version one slot calipers have a notch cut into the base of the caliper and the depth of these notches vary greatly making jaw measurements useless for number sharing.

 

Also, when using the jaws to measure, the caliper bridges the ski's concave bottom, so the measurement is taken further away from the base of the ski than when it is taken with the caliper's tips. This is why the FL tips measurement suggested earlier is so much longer than the factory spec Slot caliper measurement--it's the exact same setup, just two different ways of measuring it.

[MikeT]

@skijay Ok. I measured my FL using the tips of my slot caliper (1st generation) following the technique written about by Chris Rossi in an article and I'm getting 6.900 FL on my fin. Again the measurement with my 1st generation caliper using the jaws is indeed 6.768 the stock number that Goode specs say to use with a digital slot caliper. So my fin FL settings were off. I talked to Goode today and they said they do not have conversion numbers to give me for those of us who have the old style caliper. According to different threads, they confirm that 1st generation dial calipers "need" to subtract .060 from the jaws measurement of the 2nd generation slot caliper to be accurate. My caliper measurement with jaws should then be 6.708 which is -.060 from stock specs. I appear to have a fin that is .052-.060 to long. Secondly, what is the reason to drop the DFT to .694 from .705 as well?

[MikeT]

Reset the FL measurement to 6.845 with the tips of the caliper. Measuring with the jaws of the 1st generation caliper it came to 6.710. The FL was off .058-.060 from the factory

 

[Chef23]

@MikeT I read in another thread to add .081 to standard Goode settings for length to convert from their jaws setting of the slot caliper to tips of really any caliper and to subtract .0004 from their slot caliper measurement to using the flats for the DFT. I think it was @scotchipman that posted those conversions.

[MrJones]

Those tip conversion numbers can be off. I thought the .080 number was about right. When at Cedar Ridge I checked my tips number vs. a slot caliper and found a .060 difference. Took .010 out of length with the slot (flat) and found that correlated to .012 tips change. Don't trust the conversion. (Just ordered slot calipers BTW. I think tips are the way to go, but if trying to talk numbers with Goode skiers it's just a pain)

[ktm300]

@MikeT David Miller posted here about the binding position and said that the rear must be up to around 17.25. I had my fin back to .695 because at stock DFT my onside turned 110* with a rear boot at 17.00. I also had to tip toe around the offside to avoid wheelies. Sporadically, and without warning, I would get lean locked. Moving DFT back solved those problems for the most part. Because of the hole spacing, I am now at 17 3/8 (from 17.00) with dead stock fin settings. Transformed the ski. I read every thread on here to learn what was working. Moving the rear boot up and resetting to dead stock fin has been the best move yet. With size 10 feet, this is mighty close together ( I want to try 17.25 and will make a plate to get there). Another point he made is that the front should not be ahead of the 28.75 number or the ski will loose speed and just be hard work. Found this to be true too and am at 28 11/16. As to the caliper game, I feel your pain.

 

Thanks Dave Miller!

[ktm300]

@MikeT After posting the above, I realized you are on a 66" not a 65.25 so, numbers irrelevant; concepts valid.

[gginco]

What precise spot on a powershell boot is everybody using to measure distance.

 

 

[gginco]

so @scotchipman , you are saying add .081 to the website posted number if you want to use the tips of standard off the shelf calipers? In other words, are the web posted numbers assuming 2nd gen Goode grounded down calipers?

[gginco]

@scotchipman‌ Thanks! I'm curious why there would be a difference in how much to add on as it relates to the ski model and size. Besides maybe ski bottom profile caliper jaws or tips shouldn't care about the ski model or size should it?

[gginco]

@SkiJay‌ or @scotchipman‌ What spot do you or did you use on your powershell boot (assuming you've used them) to measure binding distance?

[jayski]

@gginco measure the distance between the front and back powershell from ankle hinge bolt to bolt, average the two measurements...Measure the distance form the REAR OF BACK BOOT to tail, add the average distance you figured out between the boots and you can get front binding distance...

[MikeT]

@KTM Time to get the right caliper. I wish the manufacturer would help by taking into account the different measuring devices are out there and publish the numbers for the two different methods. Thanks to everyone for supplying the conversion numbers. Glad to have the ski at the correct starting point.

My ski is a 66" and the front binding, D3 T-Factor is 29"DFT for now. Any consensus on what seems to be the ideal DFT for the 66". I read the post from David Miller and how he stressed the importance of getting the correct DFT for the rear boot. I use a RTP and I may not be getting my foot in the correct spot every time. Some of the best skiers use a RTP. Any tips or suggestions to assure that you are getting the proper foot position for the rear foot with a RTP

[SkiJay]

Unless you are comparing skis out of the same mold, there really isn't a consistent conversion factor between measurements taken with slot calipers and standard calipers. Differences in the amount of concave in the base at the tail of various skis varies significantly, and when measuring with the jaws of any kind of caliper, including slot calipers, the jaws bridge across the concave moving the measurement away from the base in varying amounts. This is why measuring FL with the tips touching the base of the ski is the most widespread method used when sharing numbers.

 

The same goes for comparing slot measured DFT to head measured DFT. The varying concaves effect where the slot caliper gets it's measurement. Converting slot measurements to standard caliper measurements works so long as both skis are out of the same mold, but the conversion factor will be different for every size of ski, even of the same brand and model.

 

@gginco‌ My understanding is that the standard spot for measuring a PowerShell is right behind the heal between the two humps (as close as you can get to your actual heal). For Stradas and RS-1s, it's the distance from the tail of the ski to the lower line of stitching low on the heal. Here again, factory specs and shared numbers may get you into the ball park, but there is no standard size or shape for feet and ankles, and we don't all balance over the exact same point on the ski to within 1/8th of an inch. You have to move your bindings around a little bit to discover your own personal sweet spot.

[MikeT]

@skijay Skied today with the re-adjusted fin at as close to stock settings and now the ski feels like it should and much more like normal. Much lighter and smoother feeling in the turn now on both sides. No buckling on both sides anymore. Turns out my fin came to me .050 to long. Just took one set tonight and stayed at 28. Binding is at 29". Skied with Than Bogan and he was observing that the onside looked good, but the ski seemed to riding high coming out of the offside turn. It felt squiggly to me coming out of the turn maybe because of not enough ski in the water.

Some on this site say go first to experimenting with different wing angles so next time out I'll go 10 from 9 degrees.

[SkiJay]

Thanks for sharing how things went @MikeT. Good to hear you're now in the ballpark. Good call on changing to a 10° wing. That will make it easier to stay over the front of the ski and keep the tip down out of the off-side buoys.

[Than_Bogan]

Much thanks to everyone! This was a huge improvement. Mike is flowing in and out of his on-side (135) brilliantly now. The tip rise on the other side is pronounced and definitely needs to be fixed, but it's clear he's taken a giant step in the right direction.

 

10 degrees may fix everything. If not, my next guess is front boot forward a little?

[ForrestGump]

Most really good ski designers and coaches say go forward 1/8" on bindings with rear toe strap. Since stock on a 66 is 29, I'd move the bindings forward to 29 1/8 and give it a go again.

 

[VONMAN]

Skijay, thanks for the fin numbers they were spot on for what I needed. Ended up at 10 degrees wing and tried 29" on the front boot but found 28 7/8" were the magic spot for me. What was weird for me was going back/shorter with my front boot. On all the Goode's I've owned in the past I've allways gone forward. So thanks for help. I now feel the power of the XT.

Ernie Schlager

[MikeT]

Thanks for the wing position tip. Tried 10 degrees this week. I've always had my skis set at 8 degrees, so 10 is allot for me but the ski felt just fine and it seemed to turn with a lower attitude through the turn I will say. The high tip on my offside is partially caused by poor position just prior to the turn and occurs at the end so for now I'm blaming that one on myself. You clearly can see in the video that I'm in pretty good position right into the turn, but I'm not quite countered enough and tend to come over the top in apex causing a slight delay. With the old settings my ski would stop, now even with not so good positioning I'm getting a better follow through. I won't touch anything and ski some more with 10 degrees and try to correct the pre turn to produce a better turn position. Next adjustment I will try the binding at 29.375" from 29".

[rickf]

Great thread my fellow shredders. Maybe somebody can help me out. My 65.25 Nano OneXT feels like something isn't right (sluggish in work zone and across wake, but turns very nicely), and at this point I just want it to be stock. The wing came factory set at 8 (now at 10), which makes me think other settings may be off too. I don't have a slot caliper, but here's how she arrived: 6.849 (tips), 2.496, .724 (head flat on tail of ski), and my front of two boots is at 28.75.

 

Sounds like my first move is to try .694?

[The_MS]

@rickf Start at 9 on the wing and play around with the DFT. Length and depth looks good. If you hold the ski upside down and press your thumb on the caliper head, you should be around .712.

[rickf]

@MS Thanks for the reply and feedback! My 65.25 XT is now at 6.849 (tips), 2.496, .712, wing at 9. I tell ya, the ski shape at the tail makes DFT really hard to measure, but the upside down ski trick you shared reallly helped get more consistent readings.

 

Moving the fin back a little seemed to help, as did moving my bindings forward a notch since the exact front boot measurement (28.75) put me between holes on my HO bindings. However, I still haven't gained anything course-wise with this ski, and the XT seems to just take more effort over my old 2010 67" HO S1. I weigh ~170, ski Right foot forward, get into 35, and my only other thought is that I might need to be on a 66" XT.

 

Thoughts anyone?

[SkiJay]

I think what you are feeling doesn't have much to do with the setup @rickf. The Nano One XT is a turning machine, but the trade-off that makes that possible is that it demands more effort out of the skier than you are used to with your old HO S1. Once you get used to working harder on it from ball to wakes, you'll find it also generates great angle and space before the ball.