pcmcon729

@Horton This is super cool info. Lots of amazing skiers of the past.

I've been researching. Following.

Snow ski construction couldn't be any more different from a slalom waterski. @Horton is spot on about the limited info flex testing will provide. REBOUND (dymanic) of the ski is far more important. This is far more difficult to measure. I have had a well used 2 year old ski, "flex tested" at the factory, to be returned with the note that it matched the specs when new, only to ski on a brand new duplicate of the ski, and a completely different experience. Speed and rebound!

Thanks to @Bdecker, I've had the opportunity to test a 67" Vapor. I have been overdue for a new ski for a while. On a good day I can run 35, but those days seem to be fewer this year. After observing Brian's improved position and less effort required on this ski, combined with the measurable improvment of bigger scores, I was compelled to try it. The first set was with the short and deep fin settings along with 29.75" DFT. It felt easy to ski on, but struggled with my onside speed in the preturn at -32. Day 2, Brian set it up with the long and shallow, and 30" DFT. It immediatly felt comfortable and easy. I skied 2 sets, staying mostly at -28 and -32. Less effort=easier on the body, ability to get back into the pass after making a mistake, abundant local skiers on it to collaborate with @Bdecker @Ali makes this ski a winner for me. For the first time in 25 years, I won't be starting the season out on a black and orange ski.

@jjackkrash Thanks!

Couldn't find a ski size chart anywhere on Radar site.

My, "back to basics" plan is to ski at home with my wife Jen driving. No noise, no egos, no competition. I usually start by running 6-8 easy passes at -28 to find my rythym. We chat on the ends of the course about anything but skiing. Ramp up slowly from there with confidence. Out injured for a week or two. This will be the plan for this Fri I hope.

@PatM Thanks for the kind words. @Horton , I agree with @MDB1056, there is no valid reason for not wanting SP, in my mind, other than the added expense for a sport that is already crazy money. Also, I don't fear PathGuidance, as I believe that like Perfect Pass and ZO, there will be a margin of, "Give" +/- a few inches designed into it to simulate a good driver. At least, that should be integrated as a priority.

I don't own a SurePath system, and I likely will not purchace one. I think that it will be obsolete within a few years once PathGuidance takes it's place 😉 . The technology already exists. I do have the opportunity to use it at tournaments, and I love it. I think it makes a positive contribution to the sport. I'm a 30 year driver of tournaments, and it pointed out to me that my approach into the 55's could be improved. I welcomed that feedback and started focusing specifically on that detail to become a better driver. My point, nobody should be intimidated by it if you want to do your part to become the best driver you can be. To add to the conversation, I have seen and heard of novice skiers (-15/22) put way to much emphysis on on boatpaths +/- 8-10cm as a possible reason for missing a pass. If you're missing a path at that line length with 15 extra feet of rope, there are 20 other things for you to be focusing on to run the pass.

Any video available?

@Stevie Boy 6 liter or 6.2?

@usaski1 The engines in ski boats are essensially marinized GM pickup truck engines. The use for waterkiing is faily easy use, as they are build for working. As a basis of comparison, my 2016 truck has 4800 hrs/165,000 miles. I have put well over 1000 hrs on 3 of my boats with zero internal engine issues. One of the ski schools in FL had a CC 200 with 4500 hrs on the engine, rebuild it, and ran it for another 2000 hrs before upgrading to a newer boat. Bottom line, change the oil as recommended by the manufacturer, and run the hell out of it!

Truly amazing athletes! Great footage from TWBC.

@Jody_Seal bahahah Truth!

I am in the same situation with Chubb/Global. I also reached out to Ski-Safe for a quote. They quoted an amount that's significantly more than I was paying (not unlike everything else in this economy at the moment), but my biggest concern is, they didn't seem to have an understanding of what I need. I told them I needed to insure a 2012 MC Pro Star 197 20' that is used for some recreational boating and ski training in a slalom course for myself and 2 other skiers, and on occasion it's used for myself and ski partners at a ski club. It it never used for USAWS official practice or tournaments, private use only. I explained to them that I needed for USAWS named as insured to use it at the ski club, as required by the membership. I also shared with them that it's fully winterized and stored in a heated garage in the winter, and stored on a covered boat lift in the summer. They asked repeatedly if it's use is for a ski club. They also inquired about a drivers background check for my ski partners. Lastly, FYI, they don't like boat lifts, and deductable for lift failures are raised to $3000. I simply want an insurance company that has a basic understanding of a ski boat that it used for it's exact intended design. Thoughts?