Tweet
This is only my second season riding, and I am still a hack at it, but getting better.
My experience is limited to my wife's 1976 js300 former 440-superstock (now with a rear seized piston) and our '94 SN Superjet and our 550sx (with 184 compression). Here's my hull preference. I prefer the hull of the Superjet the least. The 550sx the next. And the X2 the best.*
Although I love the low end pull-you-out-of-a-turn (even a badly executed turn) power of the 701cm Superjet, I just don't like the hull. It feels heavy to me and does not respond well to my (likely poor) body English.
The 550sx is a handfull straight-lining at WOT with any chop whatsoever.
The X2 is a delight at straight-lining at WOT but is still entirely flickable! Just like the 550sx, I can either rotate the X2 by sliding the tail flat and then accelerating out of the turn, or I can dig in the inside rear corner of the tray and pivot into a carve and out of the turn. I like it.
But I don't like the fixed pole setup of the X2. My neck is sore from being hunched over. I am becoming bowlegged from mounting it. I think I prefer a movable pole ski with a true stand up tray like the 440, 550 or SJ.
So my question to you guys is: Did Kawasaki put the X2 hull or something like that on any of its other skis, like maybe the 650? or the 750? or whatever?
* Because I am a noobie rider (and maybe because I am also an alpine ski instructor of 20 years), I lean to initiate a turn with my body and then I can correct a poorly initiated turn with only body English. This style is to my mind "anticipatory."
In contrast, I always get thrown off the Superjet, because in my limited experience you turn it with the handlebars and then only lean to accommodate the turn that the well designed hull/nozzle combo defines. This style is to my mind "reactionary."
But here's the real deal. I don't have enough experience yet to know what I will eventually prefer as my skills grow... But I would like your input as to the X2 hull design and also what skis to try next.
My experience is limited to my wife's 1976 js300 former 440-superstock (now with a rear seized piston) and our '94 SN Superjet and our 550sx (with 184 compression). Here's my hull preference. I prefer the hull of the Superjet the least. The 550sx the next. And the X2 the best.*
Although I love the low end pull-you-out-of-a-turn (even a badly executed turn) power of the 701cm Superjet, I just don't like the hull. It feels heavy to me and does not respond well to my (likely poor) body English.
The 550sx is a handfull straight-lining at WOT with any chop whatsoever.
The X2 is a delight at straight-lining at WOT but is still entirely flickable! Just like the 550sx, I can either rotate the X2 by sliding the tail flat and then accelerating out of the turn, or I can dig in the inside rear corner of the tray and pivot into a carve and out of the turn. I like it.
But I don't like the fixed pole setup of the X2. My neck is sore from being hunched over. I am becoming bowlegged from mounting it. I think I prefer a movable pole ski with a true stand up tray like the 440, 550 or SJ.
So my question to you guys is: Did Kawasaki put the X2 hull or something like that on any of its other skis, like maybe the 650? or the 750? or whatever?
* Because I am a noobie rider (and maybe because I am also an alpine ski instructor of 20 years), I lean to initiate a turn with my body and then I can correct a poorly initiated turn with only body English. This style is to my mind "anticipatory."
In contrast, I always get thrown off the Superjet, because in my limited experience you turn it with the handlebars and then only lean to accommodate the turn that the well designed hull/nozzle combo defines. This style is to my mind "reactionary."
But here's the real deal. I don't have enough experience yet to know what I will eventually prefer as my skills grow... But I would like your input as to the X2 hull design and also what skis to try next.
Comment