Why do fins have holes?

[liquid d]

I think part of the reason is that it's very hard to control just one variable....your body adjusts to the one variable by bending the knees more or pushing the tail, pushing hips forward a bit more, etc.

random thought...what if the holes in the fin/or bottom of ski closed after the turn!? massive acceleration and makeup distance!?

[Horton]

@AdamCord‌ what ski from 1995 do you think were good?

[AdamCord]

@Horton I just took a quick look through a Water Ski Mag on google books from 1995. Of all the skis advertised I've ridden 2 in the last 5 years and was able to ski close to my average on them, the KD 7000 and the Goode 9100. And those were old, tired, beat down skis. If they had been brand new with modern materials...

[Horton]

Same 2 I would pick plus CDX maybe

[AdamCord]

Ah yeah CDX was a great ski too

[Horton]

@AdamCord‌ in your opinion the HP the first modern slalom ski? Competitor? SuperStar? Stiletto? Apex? RedLine?

[JAS]

@AdamCord‌ I was under the impression that the 9100 had KD 7000 genetics?

[Horton]

@JAS false ( & impossible without a time machine - I think) and let's all do me a favor and not talk genetics

[eleeski]

@Horton‌ , Obrien Mach 1 or EP Comp 1. Maybe the Maherajah. Shapes haven't changed a lot from then. Materials have! Stiffness, stability and weight are vastly improved - but that has happened incrementally. Those ski shapes worked back then and still work now.

 

The new skis have been fine tuned and ARE worth a few extra buoys (or passes). Get a new ski (or build one yourself). If you have too much time on your hands, experiment with funky fins or holes in strange places. But that will be a subtle incremental improvement...

 

Eric

[thager]

@ eleeski Strange places? No!!

[dchristman]

@eleeski I don't think I would say the shape hasn't changed a lot from those skis - they're all tunnel concave. Are there any modern, high performance skis that are tunnel concave?

 

I bought an old O'brien Mach 1 last winter and tried skiing on it when the ice melted. It's wasn't the easy riding ski I remembered from the 70's, I couldn't make a turn on it without falling over. The only difference between this one and the one I rode back then was the fin... the one I got doesn't have holes. Hmmmm. It's now relegated to display. If anyone has an original O'brien fin for the Mach 1 with the big holes, I'd be happy to try it out again and report back.

[eleeski]

@dchristman‌ I've built both edge to edge and tunnel concave skis. Different for sure but rocker has a similar effect on the performance. Fine tuning. Either way, the skis today do look like the old Obrien much more than the Taperflexes or Western Woods that I dumped once I tried the Obrien (with its reasonably modern fin - I think mine had holes).

 

Hmm, I always liked the tunnel concave. An experiment for the next ski?

 

Eric

[thager]

@dchristman‌ If it's the red blue silver original fiberglass Mach 1 I had to drill my own holes about 1972 or so.

[ozski]

My 97 KD CR7 went through -41 last year @36 ZO 200 and it looked good doing it!

[6balls]

KD 7000 rocked...as did the ski's from KD that immediately followed. My 36 mph PB is on a CR7.

[ALPJr]

In a conversation with an HO person a couple years back, I was told that my Phantom from 2000/2001 is basically the CDX mold made with carbon and pvc. It still works well for me.

[Horton]

@ALPJr‌ you are correct that the Phantom is a CDX shape but please try something new next year.

[bigtex2011]

@horton and AdamCord. for sure you two have a ton of knowledge when it comes to skis. I would respectfully disagree tho. I rode d3's for years and a few goodes. The Cr7 and the 7000 were ok and but probably don't hold a candle to fusion or quest or whatever flagship ski D3 has. The 9100 was groundbreaking with it's carbon technology. The Nano series way better. Higher on water. The nano twist series. How about RTM. I'm a Radar guy now. Hands down the best ski I've had.

 

For sure there have been good skis for me. The Nomad Rc was good. I started running 38 some then. That was '07 i think. I think there have been subtle changes that dramatically change how skis react. Jamie B, Rossi, Dave Goode, the BLP/ and KLP combo have done more than just lighten skis

 

I love to tinker with skis and fins and have even ruined a few with attempting to add rocker or narrow a ski.

 

I'm so impressed and thankful Adam shares his ski tech prowess with us all. Maybe you can ride the old skis so well because you are a badass. Nate, Will, and Trent probably could too. For a fatass, I can scrap thru 38 around 1/2 the time in practice and usually once a year in tourneys. There is no way I could go back. just me.. Same to Horton with his ski test. Amazing how well you ski without skiing on same ski for more than a few months. I hope he changes skis right before nationals cause I'm going this year and my hip and ankle feel pretty decent. :)

 

Skis have come along ways in 20 years. So have bindings for that matter. my 2 cents.

 

@ozski try to get on that CR7 and report back.

[Horton]

@bigtex2011‌

I cannot speak for @AdamCord but I do think skis do generally get better on a 3 or 4 year cycle. I am not saying that every new ski is a step forward but on average, skis today are better than 3- 4 years ago and even better than 8 or 12 years ago.

 

Materials have made a HUGE difference but not the only difference.

 

What I am saying in my above post is that basic shape has not radically changed since the Taperflex Apex (or some other ski from that time frame – 1975/1980?). All the changes in shape since then have been subtle. There was a bit of a revolution when wings came out and skis had to get stiffer & faster. Then there was another revolution when Goode started using all carbon. I do not know who used machined PVC cores first – Goode? That was the last really big innovation.

 

If you painted 20 skis from the last 30 years => all black and hid distinguishing features like tip and tail shape – you would have a hard time identifying the make and year from a visual only inspection.

 

Analogy => if you take the fenders ( and any wing on the back) off of a Porsche 911 it takes an expert eye to tell the difference between the silhouette of a 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005 or 2015 models. Under the skin the differences are massive. ( I have always wanted an early 70s 911 or 912 with the little chrome fenders)

 

In 2015 there are a few skis I can hardly wait to try. The current bar is high so getting better is harder every year. Some products will fail and some will raise the bar.

 

[footloose42]

If I remember correctly @OB once drilled an extra hole in his fin. I wonder if he can give insight into any changes it made

[SkiJay]

This picture I took of Chet Raley's fin a few years ago is my all-time favorite fin pic. Traction at the tail improves up to about four holes, then the tail of the ski starts to smear more without tending to surface from five holes on up. Notice how far back Chet had to run this fin to compensate for its reduced surface area.

 

 

[ToddL]

homemade slot fin...

[Ham_Wallace]

I have had holes since 1966. It let's minnow's swim through.