Jump to content

WhisperFin unboxing


Horton
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators

Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

California Ski Ranch ☆ Connelly ☆ Denali ☆ Eden Lake ☆ Goode ☆ HO Syndicate MasterCraft ☆ Masterline ☆ 

Pentalogo ☆ Performance Ski and Surf ☆ Reflex ☆ Radar ☆ Rodics OffCourse ☆ S Lines ☆ Stokes 

About Horton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I have devices on the leading edge of the airplane wing...they make a huge difference in laminar flow at high angles of attack. Dropped the take off and landing speed, way more control in the flare, and basically the wing is now un-stall-able.

I love the idea of applying this to fin tech. You go Jay! Awesome book I hope the fin works out awesome, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@6balls

Exactly! We used to use zigzag tape as turbulators on our competition sailplane wings, and the glide ratio would improve remarkably. It seems counterintuitive that creating turbulence can actually reduce drag, but that's how the turbulator slots on this fin work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@scotchipman

I don't know where to start with that question. How about with a picture.

In a nut shell, for turning, a small fin is better (that's a whole topic), and for acceleration, a big fin is better (another full discussion). With these turbulation slots, this fin achieves both goals, turning and accelerating better than the standard fin.

 

Bronze-BOS.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

An interesting article from 1987 where grooves, or "riblets" were applied to the Stars and Stripes hull to help it win the America's Cup. The purpose was to reduce drag by smoothing the turbulence of the water as it passes the hull.

 

3M Riblets

 

I had been wondering if this is also the concept behind the Goode gold fin that has grooves machined into the surface in the direction of flow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
@SkiJay I see in the ordering information that you have listed each of the major ski brands individually, with all but Radar at a thickness of .095 inches, and Radar at .080 inches. Is there actually a different fin for each of the brands, or is it just thickness, in other words are the Connelly and D3 fins identical?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I‘m also interested in what’s @kc bringing up above, about different fins for different ski manufacturers.

A D3 fin for example won't fit a 2018 Connely GT with the Viper 2.0 fin box. The mounting holes are placed slightly different and the set screws are not in the exact same location. Even the 2017 GT fin is different from the 2018 model. For a $300 piece I sure wouldn’t want to have it to file down or drill additional holes to get it to fit my fin box.

I would be interested in a fin for a 2018 KD Platinum, but you can’t select the option “KD” on your website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
Not to speak for Jay but generally, it's not a big deal to swap fins between brands.

Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

California Ski Ranch ☆ Connelly ☆ Denali ☆ Eden Lake ☆ Goode ☆ HO Syndicate MasterCraft ☆ Masterline ☆ 

Pentalogo ☆ Performance Ski and Surf ☆ Reflex ☆ Radar ☆ Rodics OffCourse ☆ S Lines ☆ Stokes 

About Horton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@kc, @DavidN & @ToddF

There are two thicknesses, .080" and .095". I broke it down by brand for my own records. The fin profiles are identical in every regard.

 

The profile along the top of the fin is designed to work in all of the current common fin blocks, including the new Connelly Viper design. Additionally, the prototype fins were all .080" and they worked fine in every ski listed. So if you want one fin to work in all skis, choose the .080" thickness.

 

FWIW, Bruce Dodd set a Men's 6 national record last month using a .080" fin in a Goode which normally uses the thickest fin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
@skijay in your testing did you spend much time on comparing the two thicknesses of fins on identical skis with identical settings?

Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

California Ski Ranch ☆ Connelly ☆ Denali ☆ Eden Lake ☆ Goode ☆ HO Syndicate MasterCraft ☆ Masterline ☆ 

Pentalogo ☆ Performance Ski and Surf ☆ Reflex ☆ Radar ☆ Rodics OffCourse ☆ S Lines ☆ Stokes 

About Horton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Wish & @Brewski

There was a LOT of research into fish, whales, exotic sailboat keels, rudders, etc., plus aerodynamic studies since air and water are both fluids. But I had to draw the line at renting hydrodynamic test tank time before these fins ended up costing more than skis. In the end, applying what I'd learned to ski fins took a mountain of experimental fins, the help of a wide range of skiers on a variety of ski brands and a torn hamstring on the prime crash-test dummy. It has not been a cheap or frivolous project, and the size and shape of every hole in this fin is the way it is for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Horton Not yet on this fin, though I've done that in the past with standard fins. The real reason I'm offering two thicknesses has more to do with longevity than performance. With the exception of Goode, only the top tabs of the fin mount into the fin block, and the bottom edge of most fin blocks forms a sharp edge. If the ski's fin slot is much wider than the fin, the fin can flex side to side along the red line illustrated below until it cracks. It takes a long long time, but it happens. We don't want that.

 

69puxyvqbgpa.png

 

p92xa394t00h.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may or may not be surprised that I have all of these dimensions from all of the skis listed on my website. And because I've done this homework, I can say with confidence that the only ski that has a fin slot too wide for the .080" Radar version is the Connelly. Though the .095" is recommended, the .080" thin version should be fine in all of the other skis listed too if you prefer the feel of a thinner fin, or may use your fin in a Radar in the future. tbvd7vgax9m2.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
@SkiJay I actually have quite a bit to say on the subject of thickness but I'm going to dig up an old thread and make those comments there so I don't derail this thread. I will say that my entire career in the waterskiing industry started because of the thickness durability issue you stated above.

Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

California Ski Ranch ☆ Connelly ☆ Denali ☆ Eden Lake ☆ Goode ☆ HO Syndicate MasterCraft ☆ Masterline ☆ 

Pentalogo ☆ Performance Ski and Surf ☆ Reflex ☆ Radar ☆ Rodics OffCourse ☆ S Lines ☆ Stokes 

About Horton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
this is not a class in rudimentary aircraft design. Please try to get back on topic

Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

California Ski Ranch ☆ Connelly ☆ Denali ☆ Eden Lake ☆ Goode ☆ HO Syndicate MasterCraft ☆ Masterline ☆ 

Pentalogo ☆ Performance Ski and Surf ☆ Reflex ☆ Radar ☆ Rodics OffCourse ☆ S Lines ☆ Stokes 

About Horton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
@SkiJay Thank you so much for the thousands of hours you have dedicated over the years to unravelling the voodoo magic of fins and deciphering and documenting the science behind them. So of course it is no surprise that you have the accurate fitment measurements to most common skis, fins and fin boxes... and CAD drawings... and now you are designing a better mousetrap for the benefit of a sport that is smaller than curling... and sharing your knowledge and technology. Thank you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Wow! That looks amazing.

Can I use the standard wing that came with my Radar Senate, or will the fin come with a new type-specific wing? It is plainly obvious that there is another hole right behind and above where the wing appears to live. I usually don't ski until about April up here in Washington (Seattle), so I have a LOT of time to wonder what the 2019 ski season will bring with these new fin technologies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@SkiJay I gotta say your explanation on the website kills me. I paraphrase: “one Sunday morning I’m enjoying my first cup of coffee thinking of how to be able to ski better...holy crap! Has anyone ever noticed the weird bumps on the pectoral fin of a humpback whale?...”

 

Love it!

 

Serious question, though, will this be more impactful for all levels of skiing or really only be a measurable difference for high-end ballers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DangerBoy

This fin is symmetrical, so no right/left foot versions. I'm going to post a really good way of achieving asymmetrical smear later on this winter.

 

If you normally use a wing, you definitely need a wing on this fin—it's fast. Two of the holes at the back are for the wing. Here's a pic with the wing on;

9f6oc5jh293w.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@6balls & @jercrane

This fin is very slightly less sensitive to adjustments than a standard fin, and a caliper can definitely be used. And yes, I'll have starting numbers for various skis based on testing and results gleaned from my video ski-tuning service. Note that this fin only needs a cheap 6" caliper from Walmart, and DFT has never been so easy to measure.

 

Of course most Ballers already have a caliper. I'm just making the claim that casual skiers won't NEED a caliper because I've got a simple system for setting it up that requires no special tools beyond a tape measure (bindings), one of the free Allen wrenches most people got from IKEA, and the free paper wing gauges downloadable from Free Wing Gauges Here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@braindamage

This fin helps skiers of all levels, though for different reasons. Most beginners are unable to turn any sharper than a school bus because they don't engage enough tip and the fin is WAY to big for their needs. Good skiers, say up to -32, benefit from easier turning, tighter turns and more speed (i.e. skiing earlier and wider). Shortline skiers benefit from all that too, but more importantly, the way this fin hooks up more progressively exiting turns reduces the likelihood of those tip pressure-relieving wheelies that often delay the cut at ≤-35. Reducing those shortline wheelies was the original goal, the rest was gravy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SkiJay I understand the thousands of hours you have to put into design. I totally appreciate the time and effort. I did the same thing many times designing waterski and speed skating equipment. The money I threw in the trash can was phenomenal but R & D is what makes it all happen. In my mind though I just have to eat most of those costs to have a marketable product. My price is little higher than most of the competition even though my products are much more expensive to produce and there is a world of difference when it comes to performance, quality, reliability, and longevity. So again I can appreciate everything you are doing. I just can not justify 300 for a fin for my usage. I am sure there are a few that would go there to try to get another ball or two, but it would seam to make more sense if they were 100-150 or even up to 200 and many many more people bought them to create users, proof, and consistent cash flow. I am not sure my reasoning works with fins but it was crucial for me to get my products on as many feet on the ice as possible in order for them to get to the Olympics winning medals to create the proof. Sorry if this seams like a rant. It is not, just me thinking out loud.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@Brewski I agree that the fin is expensive.

However, Goode skis are 300 dollars more than most skis and they sell a lot of skis. If the performance is there, people will pay.

I don’t need a whisper fin but it’s so much fun trying new stuff. I bought one!

PS. I don’t ski on Goode anymore either so definitely not a plug for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@Brewski something different though, it is alot harder for you to put your boots on someone to "sell them" on it. If your product became enough more money that people were reluctant to invest you have an even harder time selling them on it. And your boots probably lasted too long to be able to recoup costs by selling the first one at a discount and then getting back to full cost on the next set doesn't work if the first set lasts 5 years.

You couldn't say fly to south korea and fit their team all with custom skate boots and then tell them to call you if they wanted to buy them.

 

I think with this and the denali fin, if you sell one to someone who skis with the group and that guy likes it, his buddy can install it and give it a whirl and then you have another sale.

 

He can keep his 300 and give one guy at big clubs/events one to try out and that guy can market the sales. And if they all like it when Whisper2.0 comes out in 2020 I bet someone buys it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Brewski

Essentially you are suggesting that innovators shouldn't waste their time with water skiing. You're probably right because to a great extent, they don't. While I do have thousands of hours and thousands of dollars in this project, I'm sensitive to your point. So I did a quick search that revealed a set of good quality figure skate blades (or speed skate blades) cost over $500 with the best blades approaching $1,000. They've invented nothing, taken zero risk and have a bigger market. Thanks for pointing out that I should probably raise my price ;)

 

1ir5p7yrz8sw.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SkiJay I have nothing to do with blades. Most are somewhat of a copy of someones ancient engineering. Again I am not being disrespectful at all. I admire the heck out of where you have gone with the fin biz. I was just thinking on how to market your product to make more money.FYI I did make a few fin designs back in the day and threw tons of money into the trash making fiberglass, carbon, kevlar, dyneema, spectra and a billion combinations of those materials and even 6-4 titanium fins. Come to find out that the best ones were titanium but wet tested almost the same as the aluminum fins costing 1/100th of the price in materials with minimal machining time compared to the titanium. So I totally understand where you are coming from. I was looking at a marketing perspective where if you asked a little less per fin you would make more money by producing more product. Though, I guess if there are not enough skiers to buy the product to begin with then you are correct and should raise the price.?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...