How old is your training boat?

[Horton]

Your boat

[slalomdude]

2000 SN with GT40 and Stargazer for me/vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-cool.gif

[shortlineskier]

2004 Response LXi

[ForrestGump]

05 SN 196

[Roger]

2002 SN 196, GT40 Classic PP

 

[BillBarton]

2005 Malibu RLXi

[skibug]

2003 Malibu Response LX - Monsoon 335 - StarGazer

[Edmund]

1998 SNOB 196, GT-40, Classic PP

[kpickett]

1994 MC ProStar 190 w/ LT-1 - Classic PP

[KG]

1999 Malibu Sportster

[ScarletArrow]

2007 CC 196 Excaliber 330 w/ ZO version P

[scoke]

2002 SN 196, GT40 Stargazer

[Horton]

scot is a show off

[auskier]

04 LXi. a perfectly good boat but not good enough these days...

[malibuowner]

2001 response  monsoon  pp6.5ng

[JAYK]

'O3 196 w/Stargazer

[Director Darwin]

I vote "99 or older" since my personal boat is a 1997 SN.  But, we have an 08 Malibu LXI and 08 SN 196 on site that we train behind most of the time.

[JH]

2008 SN but I think the old 1999 is better for slalom.SN from 1997-2001 has the best hull for slalom I think. F*** trick and wakeboard.

 

 

[RichardDoane]

1992 MC Prostar 205 w/ Stargazer

JH - Real men are 3 event skiers !

 

 

[eleeski]

Kirk's boat is a 79 American skier. Lots of spray but a soft pull with tiny slalom wakes. But the restoration is not done yet. PP classic?

Best performances behind a 97 Nautique with PP Classic. (The trick wake is better than the new Nautique's.)

I struggle behind my 04 MC with PP classic.

I'm looking forward to training behind Stan's new boat with both PP and ZO.

How do I answer the poll?

Eric

[Director Darwin]

Best performances behind a 97 Nautique with PP Classic. (The trick wake is better than the new Nautique's.)

Eric - my daughter has been saying this for years.  And I think the 1997-2001 hulls were the best for slalom as well.  The 08 we have on site has a bump at 22 and a slight bump at 28.  My 97 is flat from 22 on in.  

[boarditup]

2008 MasterCraft X-2 with trim plate.  Has PP Wakeboard Pro with slalom mode - no ability to use magnets, however.  I figure that if I can be consistent behind a V-drive with a larger wake, a slalom boat will be easy.

 

[JCH]

99 Nautique w/ PP 6.5ng.

The wake is great. The boat is great. I've had it since it was new, and from what I have seen on this board, why upgrade?

[Old MS Accout]

I have a 2008 196 with P101 in it for sale.

[bricas45]

2002 Malibu Response LX

[Horton]

So after 40 votes 2/3s of you can not get ZO in your boat!

[eleeski]

Hmmm, interesting tone of your comment, John. Isn't the purpose of the speed controls to eliminate speed variables?

With 3 user selectable variables in the pull, it should not take too many rides to select the ZO closest to your training setup. Or figure out how to adjust your training setup to match. Technology advances - embrace it or get left behind.

I would like a new boat and the ZO is a big attractant - almost as big as not having to replace fuel pumps, water pumps, exhaust manifolds and steering cables. But if I run hot times with my PP classic I can simulate the feel for slalom. And for tricks ZO is nicer only for the driver - the skier can't tell. And nothing will help my jumps. New boats will happen. Patience.

Eric

[Deke]

1999 Malibu Response LX with PP ver 4.xx !!!  Wonder how that stacks up against ZO or SG ?

Deke

[Horton]

Eric says Technology advances - embrace it or get left behind.

If it costs an additional $50k to keep up then maybe I will go surf. All those old boats are junk next year unless they find a way to make the old boats feel more like the new ones or the other way around. I known I am beating this point to death but I hope some one is hearing me.

My point really is as follows  http://ballofspray.com/vanillaforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=548&page=1#Item_0

[eleeski]

Kirk's 79 American skier(even after the several thousand we will spend on the restoration) is a very different boat from today's boats. I can still ski and train behind it but I will be unfamiliar with tournament boats and it may cost me some scores. The differences between his hand driven boat and either GPS based pull is orders of magnitude different than the differences between ZO and Stargazer.

If these differences are really hurting you, maybe the blame is with your training system. The Stargazers I have driven (and tried to ski behind) are weird. They come into the course slow and go out fast. I hope ZO never tries to copy that. PP has a fantastic system already that works for 99% of their customers, how much R&D on an orphan system should they undertake? Dump the Stargazer, run classic with times a bit on the hot end and it should be pretty close to ZO.

Then decide if the 50K plus the lake costs plus the gas plus the tournament entry fees are worth it. You can always sit on the sofa, drink Nati Light, eat Cheetos and watch poker on TV if you want a cheap activity. Sorry if it looks like I'm picking on you but you and the people on this board have too much of an unreasonable passion for the sport to give up.

Eric

[MrJones]

2001 SN with PP that we just got. It is is a nice modernization from the 96 MC 3 blade we skied behind before!

I have been running + on the PP in an attempt to mimic ZO B. In truth I have very little time behind ZO and am not sure what it really feels like. 

sj 

[Lakewaterjunky]

2002 Malibu Sunsetter SV23 Diamand hull 325hp MPFI, PP 2007 digital pro

[DaveD]

1990 Euro F3 driven badly by my brothers.  I'm a lot like Mr. Darwin, that's my personal boat but I don't train behind it.  I train behind anyone's boat that will take $20 for a couple sets. 

[Brian]

98 Nautique w/ PP

brian

 

 

[DW]

Poll is now 75% non DBW boats.  Thus, 25% of the polled skiers have a significant edge on the rest.  Is the investment worth it, I am sure for those that spend it, yes.  For those that don't or won't, time to be creative and find a way to mimic ZO if that is the goal. 

Interesting comparison of technology can be used in bike racing or track and field with significantly more serious implications.  Technological advancements in the world of medicine have forced the athletes in those sports to decide if doping is acceptable to them, a pretty heavy burden from both the competitive side and ethical side.  Basically, if you don't or didn't, you were pretty much left behind in the top ranks of those sports. 

For a small niche sport, a $50k additional investment can be a steep price to keep up, especially since there is little or no return on that investment.  When, say, a professional sports industry causes the entire field to build new equipment to compete, as in the Nascar Car of Tomorrow, but also offers significant financial rewards for winning and has a business model that attracts significant sponsorship backing to offset the costs, then the return is acceptable.

I think the poll indicates that the purge time for having everybody pretty much on the same playing field is going to be pretty long, more than 10 years.  New technology that becomes the standard usually hastens that process, so in reality if it becomes the standard, the purge rate will accelerate significantly.

[Old MS Accout]

For a small niche sport, a $50k additional investment can be a steep price to keep up.

DW,

Its not 50K. You can sell your current boat and buy mine for upper 30s and you are not out 50K.

I have the new p101 ZO installed and I like it much better then the P.

[DW]

Agreed, typo on the amount, regardless it is much more than replacing the ski.  It is interesting that the big expense is not the competing tool but the towing device!

[Old MS Accout]

I agree. I am just trying to sell my boat.  

[Horton]

It will be a lot harder to sell a 2004 boat then a 2006! Older boats will be less interesting to tournement skiers.

If it takes 10 years to purge the we will lose a LOT of skiers. Personally I am not interested in skiing in ZO tournements at this point

[Old MS Accout]

You need to make sure that you try P101 before you quit. It is very friendly to the skier. I think it may be tougher selling my 2008 if everyone quits.

Either the P101 is better or the RS1 really took my skiing to the next level. Or both.

[eleeski]

Gas: 100 hours at 10 gph = $4000

Lake ownership costs =$15000 and up

New ski = $1000 (if you get it right the first time - or don't build your own) 

Tournaments (including travel to regionals and nationals) = $5000

Costs to upgrade boat (old boat sells for 25k) shared by 5 = $5000

Waterskiing is an expensive sport. There are much worse sports. Jogging might be cheaper but... 

Right now the  boat manufacturers are supporting the pro circuit. Is it such a bad thing to be forced into supporting them? I'm not saying it's right but it's not worth quitting the sport over.

Eric 

[cbuski]

2008 SN 206 with ZO, couldn't be happier

 

[kdeupser]

1995 ProStar 205, PP 6.5 one schweet pull

[BuoyChaser]

2005 MasterCraft ProStar 197 with MCX Engine (Drive By Wire with Perfectpass Stargazer Upgrade)

[Jim Neely]

1994 Nautique, Stargazer

[DW]

Might have gotten just a little bit tougher for the boat manufacturers to sell those new boats, particularly on credit.  Hard to get a credit line for a hobby these days let alone a house.  Hope the economy turns around sooner rather than later.

[JohnN]

1997 MC PS190, LT1/Slot with Accuski (foot pedal version).  Love it and haven't found any new boat that skis better (many drive better).  Maintenance is nil, and fuel economy is better than most.  Now if I could just re-flash the Hammer mode to be a crazy ZO mode I would be able to simulate Tourney pulls. 

[Guest]

Whatever is available on the lake. Usually a 2000 Malibu LX, 06 Malibu LXI , o7 Malibu LXI or my 08 Malibu LXI. Public lake skiers really don't care. I have great drivers and great fun. Oh yeah, JDarwin, why the trick wake comment. Slalom skiers don't care. Merry Christmas.

[Director Darwin]

Oldskeer - actually, I was commenting on Eric Lee's remark about the trick wake on a '97 SN but you're right, slalom skiers don't care!  Merry X-mas to you.

[Ed_Obermeier]

Horton wrote "It will be a lot harder to sell a 2004 boat then a 2006! Older boats will be less interesting to tournement skiers."

I respectfully take defference to at least part of your statement John.  "Serious" tournament skiers are what, maybe 5% of the totality of "serious" course skiers?  A new '09 averages at $45K minimum, you can get a nice, well kept '03 - '05 197 or RLXI in the $22 - 30K range and they will ski as well, look as good, yada yada as a new one.  In this economy I woud tend to think those boats will sell much more readily than a new '09, especially to someone just getting really serious.  Top dog skiers and promo driver/skiers may get new ones every year but how many others?  I just bought a sweet '05 RLXI for under $30K; had I really wanted to I could have bought a brand new one.  Didn't want a new one, this was the boat I'd been waiting to get because I think it's one of the best late model slalom boats available and the price was good.  My opinion.  StarGazer rocks, assuming of course you take the time to READ the manual and dial it in properly.  If you're not a serious tournament skier that's all you'll ever need speed control wise because you'll never have to deal with ZO.  But that's just one opinion. 

"If it takes 10 years to purge then we will lose a LOT of skiers. Personally I am not interested in skiing in ZO tournements at this point."

It will take more than 10 years IMO.  Example - One of my favorite boats to drive and ski is my buddys '95 MC190 LT-1/PS in immaculate, well kept condition (maintainance is critical).  The guy is a freaking doctor, he can buy a new boat every year if he wants.  He has no intension of buying a new one anytime soon and I think he'd be crazy to.  It don't get any better than that.  Why get rid of a perfectly good boat that skis perfectly?  Only three reasons I can come up with - you're a promo guy and you get a new one every year regardless; you can afford it and you got to have a new one regardless; or you're freaking nuts.  :>)  Can't argue with the 2nd half of your statement though...

Ed