Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

______________
12" White Stickers
______________
BallOfSpray $5 Donation
______________
BallOfSpray $10 Donation

Carbon fins

bherderbherder Posts: 56 Baller
edited May 2011 in Skis Fins Bindings
John,
Yes, I searched. So I have 3 of your carbon fins. I have skied on one of them for the last few years on a F1, and D3 RC. I couldn't find any documentation on what the numbers on the fins mean. If I remember back in the day, some were meant for 34 and some for 36 (I'm a 36'er through and through, until I turn 35). Can you explain what the numbers mean?

Also, what was the conclusion of the carbon fin? Not different enough from the standard fin? Is anyone currently using one?

Comments

  • jackskijackski Posts: 265 Baller
    I've been using one of John's fins for the last 4 years, It helped me get from 35 to 38 on a 9700
    Just got the Nano a couple of days ago. Couldn't use the stock settings on the std fin. and I think that I'll bolt on the carbon fin tommorow. Mine was a 88
    Jack
  • Ed_JohnsonEd_Johnson Posts: 2,262
    jackski,

    Let us know how you like the Nano. Mine arrives Thurs. according to Fed Ex.
    Special Thanks to Performance Ski and Surf and the Denali Adam's !!!
  • Ed_ObermeierEd_Obermeier Posts: 1,345 Crazy Baller
    I have an 88+ that has been barely used, if anyone is interested make me an offer.

    Ed
    Ed Obermeier - owner, EZ-Slalom Course Systems
    www.ez-slalom.com
    luckyosun
  • jackskijackski Posts: 265 Baller
    edited May 2011
    EJ
    I can only really compare to my previous 9700. I've only skied 3 sets on it and don't have my fin settings where I want them yet. The water is only 52 and the air bounces around the same, so it's far from ideal conditions.
    Regardless I know this is a huge step forward from a 9700. In comparision it has a solid feel, it holds edge better and gains angle with less effort while not over rotating. It accelerates faster but more progressively so it feels more under control. The edge change is more equal both sides and it seems easier to keep the ski under you at that point. A few settings away from Nirvana? Keep in mind I'm on a 64.25 so my view may not translate to the longer skies.
    Jack
  • Ed_JohnsonEd_Johnson Posts: 2,262
    jski,

    Thanks for the info, enjoy and keep us informed.

    Do you plan to try the Ventrals?
    Special Thanks to Performance Ski and Surf and the Denali Adam's !!!
  • HortonHorton Posts: 30,396 Administrator
    The 88 is a mid-soft flex
    106 is was the standard
    116 was extra stiff but did not work as good as the 106
    105 was soft and love by a few.

    Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

    Barts★ Connelly ★ DBSkis ★ Denali ★ Goode ★ Follow ★ Hobe Lake ★ MasterCraft ★ Masterline ★ 

    McClintock's ★ Performance Ski and Surf ★ Reflex ★ Radar ★ Rodics OffCourseStokes

  • BoodyBoody Posts: 613 Baller
    I had a 116 when I skied 36 mph and I thought it worked really well. It felt like it allowed the ski to finish with more angle by sliding around.
  • HortonHorton Posts: 30,396 Administrator
    116 was good for some skiers. 106 was the gold standard for 34 mph.

    The 116 was an attempt to get back it an first gen design that I was never able to replicate (89i)

    Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

    Barts★ Connelly ★ DBSkis ★ Denali ★ Goode ★ Follow ★ Hobe Lake ★ MasterCraft ★ Masterline ★ 

    McClintock's ★ Performance Ski and Surf ★ Reflex ★ Radar ★ Rodics OffCourseStokes

  • jackskijackski Posts: 265 Baller
    Ed, I'll try ventrals when the water warms up a little. Probably late June here.

    Thanks for the reminder about the numbers John.
    Jack
  • StefanStefan Posts: 127 Baller
    edited December 2020
    @Horton I found this old thread after reading the new thread about a CarbonFin for sale. Since I have four of your fins in my old tool box, but not the manuals/descriptions any more I have a question. The 106+ I have is not mentioned above, what is the difference vs the106 ?
  • bajabaja Posts: 250 Baller
    It is 9 years old and it sucks.
    ForrestGumpKKelly
  • HortonHorton Posts: 30,396 Administrator
    @Stefan I'm not exactly sure I understand your question. I don't remember if I called those fins 106+ or just 106. Either way it's the same thing.

    @baja ?

    Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

    Barts★ Connelly ★ DBSkis ★ Denali ★ Goode ★ Follow ★ Hobe Lake ★ MasterCraft ★ Masterline ★ 

    McClintock's ★ Performance Ski and Surf ★ Reflex ★ Radar ★ Rodics OffCourseStokes

  • StefanStefan Posts: 127 Baller
    @Horton I thought 106+ as it says on mine maybe was a slightly different version
    The_MS
  • HortonHorton Posts: 30,396 Administrator
    edited December 2020
    @Stefan it's been enough years that I don't exactly remember but maybe I did call it 106+. the numerical 106 is literally a description of the carbon layup. 10 layers vertical & 6 layers horizontal.

    Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

    Barts★ Connelly ★ DBSkis ★ Denali ★ Goode ★ Follow ★ Hobe Lake ★ MasterCraft ★ Masterline ★ 

    McClintock's ★ Performance Ski and Surf ★ Reflex ★ Radar ★ Rodics OffCourseStokes

    StefanMattPDW
  • liquid dliquid d Posts: 1,320 Mega Baller
    The + is just like on zero off...it just hammers the shit out you at the gate.
    The_MSdavid_skibigtex2011
Sign In or Register to comment.