Connelly Upgrade Advice

MteaMtea Posts: 3 New Baller
edited June 2018 in Skis Fins Bindings
I’ve been skiing on a Connelly GS-2 for around 18 years and while I really enjoy the ski, my ability may have outgrown it. For the past three years I’ve been skiing almost every day in the summer. I never ski a course, but enjoy going out to rip it up for awhile where I find that when I aggressively carve a turn, the GS starts to slide away on me. I’m thinking an upgraded Connelly might be in order and I’ve been reading about their Concept and their V which is slightly more expensive but it’s hard to interpret what little info is out there. I’m 62 years old (on the younger end of the crew I ski with), am 5’ 9” and weigh 165. I’m a pretty decent skier and haven’t blown a deep water start in probably two years. We generally pull with a 2000 Mastercraft Prostar with the LTR 330 hp engine. Might one of these skis fit the bill better than the other? What’s really the difference? Does anybody use either of them?
JoelHowley
«1

Comments

  • JordanJordan Posts: 1,029 ★★★Triple Panda Award Recipient ★★★
    edited June 2018
    Any new design will be wildly better than your 18 year old ski.
    I don't know if Connelly has updated the Concept since it came out but that ski originally came out in the early '90's.
    The skis that everyone seems to like, who ski like you describe, include the Radar Senate and the HO Omni.
    I'm sure that I am forgetting a few other good choices.
    Others will chime in for sure.
  • AndreAndre Posts: 989 Crazy Baller
    edited June 2018
    What speed do you ski at ?
    Can't really go wrong with the ski suggested by Jordan...
  • MteaMtea Posts: 3 New Baller
    Andre, I usually ski 31, but occassionally bump to 32. Jordan, I’ll do some reading on the Omni and Senate. Thanks for the info.
  • JmoskiJmoski Posts: 260 Baller
    In your case I would avoid the concept. it’s a great entry level high performance ski for those coming from a combo set, and it’s claim to fame is how forgiving it is.

    The concept was my first real ski 20 years ago, and it served its purpose, but it now sits in the garage.

    The Carbon V or the Radar Senate will leave it and your old ski in the dust!

  • theboardingschooltheboardingschool Posts: 89 Water Ski Industry Professional
    Do yourself a favor and get a Radar Senate. The most user friendly ski on the market. Great for open water or skiing in the course. I can promise you that you will not be disappointed.
    MuskokaKy
  • MteaMtea Posts: 3 New Baller
    I am becoming convinced that the Radar Senate is the way to go. What size though? I usually hover between 160 and 165 pounds which is the upper end for the 65” (up to 170 pounds) and the low range for the 67” (160 to 200 pounds). My current ski is a 67” that is maximum 6.75” inches wide. The Radar Senate 65” is 6.91” wide and the 67” is 7.12” wide. What should I be considering here to decide between the 65” or the 67”?
  • theboardingschooltheboardingschool Posts: 89 Water Ski Industry Professional
    @Mtea I am between 165-170, and if I ride a Senate, I ride the 67". Such a great ski!
  • GlydonGlydon Posts: 224 Baller
    @Mtea 67 I went with a 65.5 A2 and wish I had gone 66.5 cause guess what? ... you will gain weight and by the sounds of it you stay with your ski's a while.
    MickeyThompson
  • JoelHowleyJoelHowley Posts: 31 Open or 55K Rated Skier
    edited June 2018
    Radar Senate would be good. My pick would be the Connelly Carbon V. The V has a stepped hull to reduce some drag and functions like a slightly less aggressive high end ski.
    https://www.h2oproshop.com/collections/slalom-skis/products/2018-connelly-carbon-v
    The_Kristawtrskier197Glydon
  • jjackkrashjjackkrash Posts: 478 Solid Baller
    A guest in my boat (10-year old) misstepped when we were unloading and stepped on my new GT while it was bagged with the fin protector on, but it still snapped like a twig right near the end of the fin. I am super bummed (I have maybe 20 sets on the ski), but I guess its time for a new stick. Anyone got a line on a good deal on a 68" GT?
  • vtmechengvtmecheng Posts: 347 Solid Baller
    @jjackkrash, I hope that your guest is offering to replace the ski. That's what I would do as a guest.
  • Chef23Chef23 Posts: 5,658 Mega Baller
    @jjackkrash I know someone stepped on it but try calling Connelly maybe they will do something for you. I have stepped on m6 skimbefore by mistake and I weigh more than a 10 year old and they haven’t broken. Connelly doesn’t owe you anything but it doesn’t hurt to ask.
    Mark Shaffer
  • jjackkrashjjackkrash Posts: 478 Solid Baller
    I suppose a call to Connelly wouldn't hurt. I was a little shocked at how it snapped. It must have been just the right pressure point. I have never seen a ski do that before.

    It really was one of those days. I also trashed the back window on my truck canopy today backing it up to unload some lumber in my yard and caught an overhang. Some days its better to just stay in bed.
  • lpskierlpskier Posts: 2,241 Mega Baller
    If Connelly won’t help you out on a full warranty replacement, ask if they could wholesale a ski to you. I wiped out a Cannondale bike on the roof of my car one time, and Cannondale gave me a brand new frame for about $800. If Connelly can’t do it for you, ask the retailer that sold you the ski. You’ll also save some $$ since you don’t need a fin and clamp.
    John Wilkins- Si non pro sanguine quem ludus ne. #iskiconnelly
  • AndreAndre Posts: 989 Crazy Baller
    @jjackkrash
    Send that kid to @MS for proper punishment!!!
    MSthager
  • vtmechengvtmecheng Posts: 347 Solid Baller
    I should have been clear that if my kid broke your ski I'd offer to replace it. I don't expect a 10 year old to buy you a ski. :)
    jjackkrash
  • The_KristaThe_Krista Posts: 90 Water Ski Industry Professional
    @jjackkrash ... I'm sure @Connelly_Skis_Inc would be happy to help you out in some way. Can you DM me your email?
  • Chef23Chef23 Posts: 5,658 Mega Baller
    @jjackrash I am glad things are going to work out for you. Thanks to Connelly for stepping up where you didn't have to.
    Mark Shaffer
  • jjackkrashjjackkrash Posts: 478 Solid Baller
    The new stick got here Friday night. I forgot how much I dislike trying to get the fin set up. I am using Connelly's Advance Option 1, which is the deeper fin setting. I am also using the middle hole on my single plate/Vapor binding set up like the last ski, as the measurements with a Radar Vapor binding seem useless as there is no good point to measure the front binding from with any certainty. We are camping on the Columbia, so free skiing for a week before I can get back to the course.
  • thagerthager Posts: 4,319 Mega Baller
    Really?
    Stir vigorously then leave!
  • BraceMakerBraceMaker Posts: 2,916 Mega Baller
    @jjackkrash I've taken to marking my ankle bone on the shell, dropping that to the plate then measuring the difference to the back of the boot that way when you set up a ski you can use that number.
  • jjackkrashjjackkrash Posts: 478 Solid Baller
    Connelly says "29.875", i.e., to the thousands of an inch. What part of the Vapor binding does Connelly mean me to measure from to get to a thousandth of an inch on a plate that lets
    adjust by maybe .1 inch? I have read "stitch line," but that was on the old RS-1s.

    It all seems a little hyper technical when I can move my CG by inches with different knee flexes and can fit into different size boots.
  • JordanJordan Posts: 1,029 ★★★Triple Panda Award Recipient ★★★
    FWIW....I doubt that Connelly specifically makes any recommendation for competitors boots on their ski.
    Measuring to the stitch line is still the recommendation on vapor boots by Radar.....to put it another way,
    where else are you going to measure to?
  • BraceMakerBraceMaker Posts: 2,916 Mega Baller
    How close is the center hole to that number when you mounted it? You can always turn that into a slot.
  • jjackkrashjjackkrash Posts: 478 Solid Baller
    @jordon, I guess that's my point. What's the point of measuring to "29.875 inches" unless you know the exact starting and end point of the measurement.

    @BraceMaker, its about 29 & 3/4 inch where it is mounted to where the back of the front heal touches the plate. The "stitches" are almost 1/2" further back. This is frustrating.
  • BraceMakerBraceMaker Posts: 2,916 Mega Baller
    edited July 2018
    @jjackkrash I think it's not a 29.875 +/- .001 Like a machinist might think, instead it's the decimel form of 7/8th inch such as you'd write .25 or .125"

    You don't mean to imply the precision as much as that fractions and such don't format well in digital formats.

    Also how would you measure that? Tough to find a vernier yard stick ;)
  • jjackkrashjjackkrash Posts: 478 Solid Baller
    edited July 2018
    @BraceMaker, thanks. In another other thread just now, a member said to measure Vapor boots to the threads. If so, that means I am more than 1/2" off. On my ski that broke, Darren Wiley (Wileys) set up the binding placement for me, and said the middle hole was the closest to "factory" specs and it seemed right, but now I am questioning the whole meaning of life.
  • BraceMakerBraceMaker Posts: 2,916 Mega Baller
    Don't be too frustrated used to measure to the inside of the horseshoe on wileys and such. That isn't even close to your heel bone.
  • jjackkrashjjackkrash Posts: 478 Solid Baller
    edited July 2018
    @BraceMaker thanks for the calming words. I found a technique that worked for me that did not involve removing the rear boot. I measured the blank ski, squared a tape line with a micrometer against the screw holes on the required measurement, and then squared a tape line on the plate basically the same way under the bottom stitch lines, then I lined up the squared tape lines (which matched perfectly on both sides after install, so I feel pretty good about it). The result was moving the binding forward exactly one hole. I feel pretty good now, but it seems like this process is unnecessarily stressful. :)
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.