ZO & SG segment timing

[skibug]

I have a question to all the GPS and speed control gurus out there.  Is it possible to have "actuals" for all the segments, all the time?  I am told that ZO is perfect on every segment time, all the time, and it shouldn't matter how, when, or how long someone loads up the line.  Since these systems are all reactionary, or at least that is how I percieve them to be, wouldn't logic follow that there may be some variation in the segment times; but, overall the system is going to "react" enough to come in for the overall at 16.95.  For instance, my last set behind SG today I had:

1.76 = -.01

4.45 = .00

7.15 = +.02

9.82 = .00

12.50 = .00

15.17 = -.02

16.94 = -.01

Some of my other sets varied a little more or less depending on if I was scrambling or smooth.  Do these numbers seem too out of line?  Some opinions is that they are.  Any comments??

[lkb]

With a skier, my ZO is always slow by .02 or .03 at three ball. Not off much but it seems odd that it is always on the slow side. The end time is always 16.94, .95, or .96.

[skibug]

lkb,

That would mean that the second half would be hot since the system has to catch up to make the exit time.  Did you notice where it was losing and gaining, sort of like what I listed above?

[Ed_Obermeier]

The splits we were getting Saturday with SG in my buddies '06 197 TT were very similar to yours.  Right on to .01 or .02 hot for first segment splits, second segment they would run .01 to .02 slow per split with total times around .96 to .98 max.  If it's gonna run anything hot I'd sooner it was in the first half than the second.  Not that I can tell the difference in 1 or 2 hundredths.

Ed

[skibug]

Ed,

 I can't tell the difference either.  I was just inquiring because I don't have access to a ZO system and I was wondering if the times were coming out with some of the same deviations.  I am not going to mention any names; but, I ski with two pro event drivers and they seemed to think that the deviations they were seeing may not be acceptable.  I sort of find that hard to believe since all segments were in tolerance.  There belief was that ZO gave perfect segment times, all the time.  Which again, I sort of find that hard to believe as well.  There has got to be deviations based on how the boat is reacting to the load a skier puts on the boat.  Just my thoughts.  I may be way off. 

[eleeski]

Times should not be perfect! Skiers are not perfect and their pulls will vary. The autothrottle should aim for the closest possible times but it should never calculate reactions to get a perfect end course time. This fixation with perfect times all the time is giving an awful feel. Especially when 5 and 6 ball run hot to make the end course perfect. Do I have to practice at 36 on my PP classic to make it feel like 34 GPSed? Bummer...

Eric

[Ed_Obermeier]

I think you're right on Skibug, for whatever that 's worth to you. 

Gotta agree with Eric too.  If we're worrying about one one-hundreth of a second here or there we've become so freaking anal that it doesn't even make sense anymore.  With GPS'ed times the tollerances are way tighter - as long as it's in tollerance isn't that good enough?  I'm not hearing of anyone getting end times any slower than .98 or so, jeez...  With Classic we used to try to program for 17.00 - 17.02 just to get a little forgiveness, with my limited time with SG at .96 - .98 it feels softer than the 17.02's used to feel.  I really don't understand what the bitching is all about. 

I have a buddy with a new 197 promo that has ZO and SG in it but haven't gotten to hook up with him yet.  Hoping to get to try ZO soon, it will be interesting to be able to compare the two.

Ed

[lkb]

Skibug, the only noticeable pattern I have seen is the slow three ball thing.

 

[scoke]

 

Skibug, what boat was this setup in?

 Like JD said, it seems to be more boat/engine setup than actual Gazer. I tend to agree as I skied the gazer again this weekend.

 At 36mph, 28off, was getting smoked by 0.1 seconds on the first segment but end times were 16.08's. pull felt great and actually pb'ed for the year in the same set. very weird.

 

scoke.

[skibug]

2003 Malibu Response LX - 335 Monsoon engine.  I ski @ 34 mph.

 Scoke - did you mean .01 or .1?  Was that at the split?  If you actually meant .1 then you were really, really hot.  I would expect the boat driver to noticably feel the boat gearing down after 3 ball to come in with a near actual.  Do you have a short set up; or could the driver be hammering the throttle and the boat doesn't have a chance to fully settle before the entrance gates? 

[lkb]

Skibug, I watched ZO closer yesterday. I drove 6 passes. Every pass was .02 or .03 slow on buoys 1 through 5. At 6 it was .01 slow. At the endgate it was 16.95.

[eleeski]

That is a problem as I see it. If something is missed, a driver goes to the correct speed. The time is not perfect but the only error is the initial deviation. When the driver tries to make up on a later segment, an error is intentionally introduced - now there are two deviations. But the end result is perfect despite a worse pass.

Unfortunately, people don't understand tolerances. Would the powers that be accept a system that had a wide error scatter on the final time - even if the speeds were more accurate? It's tough to say it's broken when the times are perfect, but it seems to be. Getting hammered at 6 so the time can be perfect sucks.

Eric

[lkb]

Eric, I'm not sure if I made it clear but it isn't saying that it's .03 slow for the first seg, then an additional .03 for the second seg, and so on meaning that when it got to six it had to make up .15 seconds. It was .03 cumulative slow then it picked it up just a fraction at the end. Sorry if I was unclear.

I really like the pull. Since I got the revision I have been using C which feels nice.Yesterday I switched to A and I like it a lot too. I e-mailed Mapple to get his description of A, B, and C. He says he uses A when he skis 34. He said it picks you up later and lets off of you later which in is opinion helps keep speed up coming into the buoy. He says C picks you up more agressively off the ball and it gets off of you quicker. He said he uses C when he skis 36 so that he has longer to slow down approaching the ball.

[eleeski]

While the early Stargazer I (tried to) ski behind felt like it was making up .12 at the end of the course I did understand your comment. Of course if it ran every segment .02 slow and lied about the end course....

I think the boat should be shooting for the closest to actual on every segment of the course - not making up on segments for earlier mistakes. The end course time is not the perfect measure of speed. Given the sophistication possible with GPS to manipulate the end time, it is not even the best.

How do A, B and C translate to KX and PX? Specifically what feels closest to the KX- PX10 that I like? Or the Normal 0 that many of the people I pull prefer? Thanks,

Eric

[lkb]

Mapple said that A is the most like an RPM-based speed control. That's all I know.

[Horton]

I skied behind the latest SG yesterday (in the wind). Turns out that the times were perfect and the boat felt as it should. I still wish if felt like the ZO I tried last fall but at this point I am fine with it.

[Old MS Accout]

ZO rocks.

 

[ktm300]

MS, I am trying to figure out the second wake out with 0off.  So far I am too deep and way up on the boat for the given line length without much preturn.  As soon as I try to back up the edge change, I end up narrow.  Just a few sets so far but have been skiing A at 55k.  It feels like it stays on the gas a little too long past the second wake for me.  We tried B but just could not establish a good swing with it.  Maybe there is an A- in the future.  If I stay on the handle with two hands longer than I am used to, it does get me way wide but, again, deep, and way up on the boat.  This is at 35 not 39.  I have thought about taking a heavier bite at the finish of the turn thinking that if I slowed the boat a little more and earlier, that it would react sooner and release me sooner off the second wake.  With PP I spent a lot of passes learning to hide from the boat at the finish and not load till closer to the first wake.  Any words of wisdom would be appreciated.

 The customer support and info coming out of ZO is pathetic.  Were it not for these message boards, we would all just have to reinvent the wheel.  Roger Clark's post regarding the gate differences confirmed what I was feeling on the gate but, would it kill ZO to tell us this kind of stuff up front: apparently so.  It may end up being a great system but, their approach is damned disrespectful.  i.e.  we better ski it and like it cause by next year we won't have a choice.

[Old MS Accout]

KTM,

I tried A & C the first day and did not notice any big differance. I have put it on B and have not changed it since. Do you have the upgraded P? I did notice a big change from the origional to the P. I am only 170lbs and am known as a pretty smooth skier that the drivers do not feel. My ski partner is having an adjustment to deal with as he is a yank and cranker. My wife cannot tell any change and she has not skipped a beat in her skiing. I would for sure pick a setting and stick with it. You will adjust to it in no time.     

Try to get off the second wake and just ride it out on the edge change to full extention. always think back siding the ball and keeping speed. If you slow down and take any hit, ZO will gas you at the same time. When I look at the speedo, it is always at 34.2. It does not vary much up or down. With PP, you could slow it down and it would gradually get you back to speed. Let the system work for you. I assume you are on a surveyed course? If you are long or short you will have problems. It knows exactly how far it needs to go from the start gate. The end course entry into the system is just to know where that start gate is on the other end, not the end point for the course. It is early in the season and it has been cold all spring. New speed systems and all. Patience my young Jedi, use the force.