View Full Version : Monza Setup
Some of you had asked me how did Wade Cox setup my ski, here are some pictures and information.
First he move my front binder to one hole back, I just to have it on the 3rd and now is in the second (from the tip tp the tail)
then, he moved the back binder to this position...
M-Funf
06-27-2007, 01:07 PM
are you RFF?
and also he changed my fin, I just to have the wing at the max and he open it a little bit
sorry for the poor quality of the pics but I took them with my cell phone
Here are the numbers of my fin:
Lenght: 6.85
Depth: 2.522
Tail: .725
east tx skier
06-27-2007, 01:56 PM
Is that a 67"? 1 hole back and 2 holes back from center is what I've heard as a starting point on HOs since I've been paying attention. I think I'm running forward of that a bit though.
Is that a phantom in the front and an animal on the rear?
André
06-27-2007, 02:02 PM
Don't know about you guys but i would call the front boot "one hole FORWARD" meaning the front boot is actually forward then suppose and the rear boot seems to be "one hole BACK" in my mind.
ICBW...
Never saw someone riding both boots differently ,maybe one hole difference but pq2 set up is a 2 holes difference between the boots...
But then again,i'm no Wade Cox!
Edit:In post # 2 ,is the ski pointing left or right?
It is a 67, and Chris Parrish recomend me to change my rear binder for an Animal, so I still have the Approach in the front, he also told me to have 1 size bigger in the rear binder that way i will be able to move my feet, so my front Approach is M and the Animal is large. The Approach binder has 5 holes, mine just to be in the 3rd (midle) and Wade told me to move back one more. Also I just to have the rear binder very close to the front and he move the rear binder far behind. Heres a picture of how I just to have my set up.
Don't know about you guys but i would call the front boot "one hole FORWARD" meaning the front boot is actually forward then suppose and the rear boot seems to be "one hole BACK" in my mind.
ICBW...
Never saw someone riding both boots differently ,maybe one hole difference but pq2 set up is a 2 holes difference between the boots...
But then again,i'm no Wade Cox!
Edit:In post # 2 ,is the ski pointing left or right?
André, you are right, He move my front binder one hole back.
the ski is pointing right (sorry for the poor pics)
André
06-27-2007, 02:14 PM
André, you are right, He move my front binder one hole back.
the ski is pointing right (sorry for the poor pics)
Get it now!
So everything is one hole back compare to the factory setting.:)
Yes, and two holes back in the rear binder (as I just to have it)
#47of100TeamMC
06-27-2007, 02:34 PM
Any Idea the Measurement from the rear of your front Boot to the tail of the ski? That is how I've gotten a better measurement of placement since like was stated, one hole forward and backward could be different for someone with different boots. animal/approach etc.
I will get that number tonight and post it tomorrow.
east tx skier
06-27-2007, 03:34 PM
Get it now!
So everything is one hole back compare to the factory setting.:)
I had this conversation with someone, but what I was told is one hole back means you start at the center hole, then move the boot back (which is one hole forward) of center.
It's easier just to say 37.25" and 17" from the tail or whatever stock on a 67" monza is.
#47of100TeamMC
06-27-2007, 03:55 PM
I had this conversation with someone, but what I was told is one hole back means you start at the center hole, then move the boot back (which is one hole forward) of center.
It's easier just to say 37.25" and 17" from the tail or whatever stock on a 67" monza is.
That point, plus the different plates each style of boot is on led to the inch measurements as the most accurate and repeatable from person to person.
I believe stock settings for the Monza are:
(-SEE East Tx Skier's Post... the one after this one.)
It should also be noted, that these measurements are from the soft rubber of the boot... NOT the frame-work with screws in it... as in from the blue line to the tail of the ski as in this scenario.
east tx skier
06-27-2007, 04:11 PM
On a 67", I think it's 29.25" for the front and 17" for the back, but let me confirm that.
/edit. Yes, it's 29.25" for the 67". Almost positive rear boot is 17".
http://www.skitek.net/articles/skisettings.php
Jesus_Freak
06-28-2007, 01:45 PM
It is a 67, and Chris Parrish recomend me to change my rear binder for an Animal...
What was the logic here? Was it for your style, particularly, or was it related to approach bindings overall?
I wanted to change my rear binder for an animal before the camp, I was not very confortable with the approach. He just said to change it for a bigger one and I took the chance to try the animal. I really like the animal binder and being able to move the back foot had helped me a lot. I think Im going to change also my front binder for an animal.
east tx skier
06-28-2007, 03:14 PM
I wanted to change my rear binder for an animal before the camp, I was not very confortable with the approach. He just said to change it for a bigger one and I took the chance to try the animal. I really like the animal binder and being able to move the back foot had helped me a lot. I think Im going to change also my front binder for an animal.
So is he officially not using Wileys anymore? Having skied the animals, approach, and wileys, I very much prefer the wileys for a combination of comfort, performance and release. The approach had comfort and performance, but no release. The animals had performance and release, but tended to hurt my feet after a while.
With an approach, I'd be uncomfortable running a soft boot in the rear just for fear that I'd go OTF, the rear boot would release, but the front Approach would not. I had several OTF falls in the Approach boots and did not once come out of them ... which is why I went to Wileys. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind staying in a boot (have stayed in the Wileys twice), but I didn't feel the tension in my legs/ankles like I should have come out.
Chris is using double Animal. You are right East, thats why Im afraid now, and thats one of the reasons why I want to get the front animal boot. I have had very bad falls with the approaches and they never went out.
Some of the PRO´s that were at the camp were using a hard shell in front and a animal in the rear. Most of the guys who had two diferent binders they had a rear animal boot.
east tx skier
06-28-2007, 04:03 PM
Chris is using double Animal. You are right East, thats why Im afraid now, and thats one of the reasons why I want to get the front animal boot. I have had very bad falls with the approaches and they never went out.
That said, the control in the approaches was phenominal. Have you tried/considered Wiley's? I'm running a Pro-Build in the front and the standard highwrap in the back. The PB is just a little less overlay than the trick wrap (it may be a jump boot). My wife was having some sizing issues with hers and they are replacing an overlay for her to make it fit better. Great one-on-one customer service. The front boot is a full toe, which gives good contact over the front arch, helping to keep foot and ski nicely connected (kind of like the arch strap on the approaches).
I havent try Wileys, I just hear everywere that are great. Now Im feeling very well with the approach and th animal. I need more sets to realize if its realy working or not. But thanks for the tip. Newt trip to US i will get some wileys to try them. The problem here is that we dont have any shop where to buy equipment and try it.
Jesus_Freak
07-03-2007, 02:53 PM
Question for everyone: Do you all lift your heel to tuck your knee in better while skiing? My approach rear binding doesnt let my foot move at all, and I am wondering if this is nonideal. Could I put some small cushion under my heel in the boot? Suggestions and comments?
#47of100TeamMC
07-03-2007, 03:45 PM
Question for everyone: Do you all lift your heel to tuck your knee in better while skiing? My approach rear binding doesnt let my foot move at all, and I am wondering if this is nonideal. Could I put some small cushion under my heel in the boot? Suggestions and comments?
Negative Ghost Rider... Both knees should be bent equally distributing equal pressure to both feet.
Is your rear boot Pivoted slightly? (clockwise for right foot back, or Counter clockwise for Left foot back) if not, that might help keep your feet balanced while bending both knees.
east tx skier
07-03-2007, 04:05 PM
Negative Ghost Rider... Both knees should be bent equally distributing equal pressure to both feet.
Is your rear boot Pivoted slightly? (clockwise for right foot back, or Counter clockwise for Left foot back) if not, that might help keep your feet balanced while bending both knees.
I used to pivot mine that way for the "natural" stance. But after a long conversation with MYMC, he told me to get in slalom stance, then pivot my rear (left) foot just counter clockwise of neutral. As I did it, my back knee pushed into my front knee and I knew he had been right all along. Changed my boot on my ski when I got home. Thought it would be uncomfortable, but I didn't even think about it on the water.
Jesus_Freak
07-03-2007, 04:10 PM
I used to pivot mine that way for the "natural" stance. But after a long conversation with MYMC, he told me to get in slalom stance, then pivot my rear (left) foot just counter clockwise of neutral. As I did it, my back knee pushed into my front knee and I knew he had been right all along. Changed my boot on my ski when I got home. Thought it would be uncomfortable, but I didn't even think about it on the water.
I assume your CW and CCW rotations are along an axis looking DOWN at the ski. If so, then yes, I thought about pivoting CW (LFF), then MYMC told me to try the other way. I am scared to try. :o
So, ETS, it helped you? Noticable difference?
#47of100TeamMC
07-03-2007, 04:45 PM
I assume your CW and CCW rotations are along an axis looking DOWN at the ski. If so, then yes, I thought about pivoting CW (LFF), then MYMC told me to try the other way. I am scared to try. :o
So, ETS, it helped you? Noticable difference?
It's funny how different things work for different people.
I haven't heard of turning the rear boot that direction before. Glad it works for you!
Jesus_Freak
07-03-2007, 04:56 PM
It's funny how different things work for different people.
I haven't heard of turning the rear boot that direction before. Glad it works for you!
Actually, I havent tried anything beyond neutral in either direction. I am just asking if ETS saw a benefit from turning his rear foot "in"...
#47of100TeamMC
07-03-2007, 04:59 PM
Actually, I havent tried anything beyond neutral in either direction. I am just asking if ETS saw a benefit from turning his rear foot "in"...
Right, I guess I was misleading when I quoted you and commented on how Eastie seems to like the setup that way.
I guess you gotta try it before you can like/dislike it. Maybe I'll try it too just for kicks.
Jesus_Freak
07-06-2007, 02:31 PM
Negative Ghost Rider... Both knees should be bent equally distributing equal pressure to both feet.
My question about lifting the rear heal stems from two issues:
1. Some of the pros most certainly have their rear knees actually aligned with their front knees after getting their angle set and pulling hard. The knee is not just tucked in behind the front knee, it is actually beside the front knee.
2. To do this, I would have to lift my rear heel. I do not have the flexibility to have my knees aligned with my rear heel flat.
Am I the only one who has a problem with this? What am I missing?
#47of100TeamMC
07-06-2007, 03:15 PM
My question about lifting the rear heal stems from two issues:
1. Some of the pros most certainly have their rear knees actually aligned with their front knees after getting their angle set and pulling hard. The knee is not just tucked in behind the front knee, it is actually beside the front knee.
2. To do this, I would have to lift my rear heel. I do not have the flexibility to have my knees aligned with my rear heel flat.
Am I the only one who has a problem with this? What am I missing?
This is hard to explain with out demonstration. However, here goes... Think about what has to take place in order for you to keep your upper body square to the boat and at the same time keeping your angle across course. in doing so, your knees are bent and feet are pointed in the direction you are traveling, while your upper body is rotated in relation to your legs to keep your shoulders square to the boat, this would bring your knees closer together coupled with the fact that your rear Ankle Angle (the angle your ankle is bent) is less than the front. brings your knees relatively close to next to each other.
Jesus_Freak
07-06-2007, 03:36 PM
This is hard to explain with out demonstration. However, here goes... Think about what has to take place in order for you to keep your upper body square to the boat and at the same time keeping your angle across course. in doing so, your knees are bent and feet are pointed in the direction you are traveling, while your upper body is rotated in relation to your legs to keep your shoulders square to the boat, this would bring your knees closer together coupled with the fact that your rear Ankle Angle (the angle your ankle is bent) is less than the front. brings your knees relatively close to next to each other.
I am trying this here at my desk at work :o . Forgetting my shoulder position at the moment (because that has little bearing on my feet position)...If I put my feet back to back, like on the ski, the ONLY way I can bring my rear knee up beside my front knee is to have my front leg almost straight. I guess there are many degrees of "bent" and "straight", but I just have trouble doing this without lifting my rear heel.
east tx skier
07-06-2007, 03:49 PM
I assume your CW and CCW rotations are along an axis looking DOWN at the ski. If so, then yes, I thought about pivoting CW (LFF), then MYMC told me to try the other way. I am scared to try. :o
So, ETS, it helped you? Noticable difference?
Yes, looking down the ski. Natural stance for LFF is heel left (clockwise). What Mike told me was to go the opposite of natural just a bit past neutral (straight).
As far as noticeable, it's hard to say. My positioning has improved I think. But I didn't notice the new positioning, which is to say, it wasn't uncomfortable or strange feeling at all. It help does put that back knee where it needs to be though.
east tx skier
07-06-2007, 03:52 PM
This is hard to explain with out demonstration. However, here goes... Think about what has to take place in order for you to keep your upper body square to the boat and at the same time keeping your angle across course. in doing so, your knees are bent and feet are pointed in the direction you are traveling, while your upper body is rotated in relation to your legs to keep your shoulders square to the boat, this would bring your knees closer together coupled with the fact that your rear Ankle Angle (the angle your ankle is bent) is less than the front. brings your knees relatively close to next to each other.
JF, think about it this way. What do you do when you want to go fast in the car? You step on the gas. Think about stepping on the gas with that front foot (roll the ankle forward). Then, just push that back knee into the front knee.
If you're in the approach boots, there's already some lift built into them.
east tx skier
07-06-2007, 03:53 PM
I just have trouble doing this without lifting my rear heel.
Move the heel of your rear foot right of center. :D
Jesus_Freak
07-06-2007, 04:13 PM
... What do you do when you want to go fast in the car?...
I let my wife drive.
Thank you all for the input.
east tx skier
07-06-2007, 05:02 PM
I let my wife drive.
Thank you all for the input.
I tried that once. :)
André
07-23-2007, 01:42 PM
Trying to set up a friend's 07 Monza 67".Looking at the Monza page i see that it's all the same set up numbers whatever lenght of ski you're on...
Can someone confirm please???
Thanks.
http://www.hosports.com/gear/product?id=9066
try this numbers André, those are the numbers Wade wrote to me for my 67". Also check in the first page how he put my bindings.
Lenght: 6.85
Depth: 2.522
Tail: .725