Jump to content

Zero Off Solution


Horton
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators
The last two tournament weekends in a row I ran about 6 less balls behind Zero Off than I did behind Star Gazer. Needless to say I am pretty darn mad about it. My first reaction is to blame ZeroOff.  Plenty of skiers have said "ZO sucks". That does not help since we are on the verge of an all ZO era.  We are stuck with it so what are we going to do?

The real problem is NOT that ZO is good or bad.  The problem is that it is different than what I ( & most of you) train behind. Since ZO is not available for boats older then 2006 (non "fly-by-wire" boats) most skiers do not have one to practice behind.  As long as I practice behind a boat that feels substantially different then the boat I get in tournaments, my scores will suffer. It would cost me $40,000 to $60,000 to get a boat with ZO.  I have had good practice rides behind ZO.  I think ZO is ok but I train about 10 sets a week behind a 5 year old boat with Gazer.

Until there is a ZO setting that feels like Gazer or a Gazer setting that feels like ZO many skiers are going to be very frustrated. If the sport requires a 2006 or later boat to be competitive, that can not be good for growth in the sport.

Let me restate: We MUST be able to train behind older boats and get a feel like what we get in a tournament. If a new boat is required to be competitive then the sport will only get smaller.  The day that StarGazer has a "ZO feel" setting I will upgrade again.

If you think this makes sense call your EVP or director. Send a link to this post or rewrite it in your words.  If you do not agree but have another solution, lets here it.

 Goode  KD Skis ★ MasterCraft ★ PerfSki ★ Radar ★ Reflex ★ S Lines ★ Stokes

Drop a dime in the can

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I can see how it all happened and as mad as I am, pointing fingers or placing blame does not fix it. A lot of skiers pushing for one “feel” regardless of technology is what we need.

Make calls. Send emails. Post on the other forums.

 Goode  KD Skis ★ MasterCraft ★ PerfSki ★ Radar ★ Reflex ★ S Lines ★ Stokes

Drop a dime in the can

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

 

Early during the buyout process there was some talk regarding a "hybrid" style system.

 Meaning a 2009 Gazer system but has some ZO technologies or something. Only time we'll tell. Of course I would upgrade my 2002 Gazer to that for $400 in a hearbeat.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

The Stargazer I have used comes in soft with barely legal 3 ball times then hammers the skier to end up with a perfect time. Why would you want to train with that system?

Somebody here (but it might have been MS) said to train on PP classic shooting for times about .05 hot to simulate the feel of ZO. I tried that and used a "C" setting and found the feel of the pull was not weird - actually felt pretty good. Of course the firm pull pulled a muscle in my hip - but my buoy count was par until the injury.

Can you turn off the Stargazer and run Classic? Or can you tweak the settings to emulate ZO? When my hip recovers (the jump set didn't help) I'll play with Stan's boat (which has both) to try to figure it out some if nobody else does it first. Of course, it is Eric's feel on that funky new ski...

Eric

PS ZO is sweet for tricks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just got my P101, but only have 2 sets under it with a bad back, so I cant tell anything yet.

My 2 friends that skied last night behind it skied the best thay have this season, so that is a good sign.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

ZO is sweet for tricks. On Stan's unmufflered new MC the noise of the engine throttling up can be pretty distracting. I use "C" and the engine noise changes are minimized. The feel is not a noticeable difference to me.

DBW PP is the horrible system for tricks. Stargazer did not fix it.

Stan has needed a new boat for a while and has held off because DBW PP was so bad. When we got the new ZO boat to use for a couple of days, it was so good he bought that boat.

If ZO would target 16.97 instead of 16.95 I would have nothing to complain about in slalom. Now, the variables that unexpectedly drag the boat down are dealt with by an intentional overspeed to end up with a perfect time. That sounds like a violation of the rules! If instead any errors in times that occur are carried to the end of the course, the times won't be perfect but compliance with the rules will be. And the ride might be better.

Nothing can help my jumps.

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eric wrote - "The Stargazer I have used comes in soft with barely legal 3 ball times then hammers the skier to end up with a perfect time. Why would you want to train with that system?"

This is a setup issue that is easily corrected with the Gate, One ball, Three ball settings

Eric wrote - "Can you turn off the Stargazer and run Classic? Or can you tweak the settings to emulate ZO?

This is again, a setup issue that is easily corrected by running it in the PP Classic settings and make any adjustments needed, Kx, Px, add or subtract rpm's

Eric wrote - "PS ZO is sweet for tricks!"

Gazer works great for Trick and still has the PP Classic Trick 

Yes, it does suck that ZO is the only thing approved in '09 and since most of us can't afford or don't want to buy a new DBW boat, AWSA should pull their heads out and correct the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

PP with the throttle cable is excellent so keep your really old boat and speed control.

PP in the DBW boats is unacceptable for tricks. Crappy practice sessions and tournament rerides are the norm for PP recently. The Stargazer system did nothing for tricks except calibrate the paddlewheel.

I have not yet skied behind an acceptably set up Stargazer system but all of my ZO rides have been OK. And tricks are really good behind (and driving) ZO.

With so many setup variables to correct the problems I have encountered (including the boat used by high level skiers last week) someone here needs to detail the parameters (and how to set them) to fix the problem Stargazers we are training behind.

For many years PP was the only system allowed. The precedent for one system exists.

Until the DBW boats PP was great. My slalom buoy count dropped when the DBW boats arrived (OK maybe I just aged and got worse) and I got rerides in tricks (not good - it tires this old guy out). If the boat manufacturers offer throttle cables as an option PP could regain it's market dominance.

I train KX- PX10 behind my PP classic and it feels close enough to ZO "C".

And I love my old PP boat so I have nothing against PP.

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

A good idea may be a StarGazer setup database like the fin database. You could list boat, motor, year, SG version, and parameters. Maybe even altitude could be listed since it has quite a effect on response. I would like to believe PP is doing that, but where would they get their data? I'm sure their hands are quite full with newer boats than mine, that's for sure.

 

Deke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
I spoke to Randy at PP yesterday regarding the parameters for my boat.  They do not catalog settings for different boats.  It's up to the owner to "dial-in" his/her boat.  This is not good.  For all the hand wringing about ZO, Star Gazer is a much bigger problem.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Joe, I don't see that as a problem at all. It took us all of about 10 minutes to have our stargazer dialed in. At 34mph we see 1.77-1.78 1 balls, 7.12-7.14 mids, and 16.94-16.96 end times with a 160-200lb skier. Now, this is not a DBW boat.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

My boat is not DBW.  The others I have set up are.  The big issue is "who" you dial the boat in for.  If you dial it in for a 180lb skier and get 7:13/16:95, you will get a slower 3 ball time when you pull a 200lb skier.  When I say "slower", I mean 7:16 to 7:18.  Again, the point of cruise is to provide consistent speed thru the course. 

As for my boat, I'll just have to dial in the 1 ball first and then chase the 3 ball times.  Otherwise, I'm all over the map.  Hopefully 'dawg can get a kitchen pass tonight, come over and be my guinea pig!

John - Randy would not say what they are currently working on relative to the ZO "feel" but I got the impression that something is in the works. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Does ZO and/or SG, and PP for that matter,  react to what the input is from the skier or do the settings predetermine when the RPMs or MPH are applied.  For instance, does ZO know how far it is away from the turn ball, relative to the boats position in the course, and apply the gas in anticipation of where the skier SHOULD be pulling; or, is it waiting for the load of the skier to adjust? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Skibug - ZO does not anticipate the pull of the skier relative to where it is in the course.  In fact, it responds to the pull of the skier OUTSIDE of the course.  When the skier pulls out at the 55's, ZO responds appropriately.  Therefore, I can assume that the course has nothing to do with how ZO responds to skier input.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I guess that was sort of a leading question......so the intent is to always travel at a constant speed; but, the boat is waiting for the skiers load input to adjust accordibngly, same as PP or SG.  With this scenario we will never get to a constant speed.  It is impossible.  Speed is still calculated as d*t; because that is what speed is.  There will always be an impact on the skier; it is just a matter of how much and where you want it.  The DBW boats will always feel different then the cable throttle boats.  They react faster.  There are computer chips talking to computer chips in the DBW.  The electrical signals are generating faster inputs and outputs, etc.

 No two skiers ski the same.  Some load up off the ball earlier than others, some are more fortunate and S.L.A.G. (ski like a girl).

My point is, if the beauty of ZO is to have GPS, and no other inputs except skier preference on pull feel(A,B,C); why can't they collectively; and by that I mean PP and ZO, work to make ZO and SG feel like PP.  I don't see this as a step backwards; just as a step more in line.  ZO has got what they want out of the deal, exclusive rights to the OEM and tournaments.  Maybe pride should take a back seat and the benefit of the masses should come to the forefront.....and no I am not a Democrat 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You cant make a 16.95 (55k) feel like a 17.00. That is the problem. My PP clasic practice times with a quality driver were like this.

28 off, 16.95

32 off, 16.96

35 off, 16.98

38 off, 16.99 or over 17.

A real good driver that has pulled me a few times would know that I need another 10-15 RPM when I get down to 38. A driver that has not pulled me before would maybe not add enough RPM to keep me at 16.95. I sneek up on drivers with stronger pull at 38 as most skiers would.

The point is that if you slow the boat down at some point it has to speed up to get in at 16.95.

Is there a point where you can afford to have the boat take away from you? At what point do you want the boat to pull back to gain time?       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always thought this....

 Would fix everything. Incorporate a Load cell in the line, much like the jump switch, but measuring the actual load on the rope. This feeback could be then incorporated in the software.

There's some pretty cool load cels out there, ones you can pull from each end, & even bullet shaped ones that can be put inside the rope & measure how much they are compressed as the rope is tensioned.

For those who don't know what a load cell is, it's a device that measures load electronically. What's in all electronic scales.

 

http://www.appliedweighing.co.uk/prodisplay.asp?proid=66

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Yesterday's tournament............ First two rounds they used a malibu with SG. I equalled my pb and I HATE skiing behind the new malibus. Last round was a MC with ZO only(last week it had both SG and ZO). My group was M3 and M4 skiers. The 3 skiers before me and myself went out on our openers. I'm not talking almost making it through the passes. I'm talking losing it at 1 and 2 ball. WTF?!?!?! The difference between this same boat last week with SG and this week with ZO is HUGE!!! Now, the better skiers that normally run up into 38 were able to ski closer to their averages, but almost all looked like they were scrapping on all the passes to do it. Can I adjust to ZO? Sure, but getting 1 or 2 rounds a month at tournaments isn't going to let it happen anytime soon.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What settings (ABC) are most of the skiers using at your lake?  What difference do they feel when changing from A to B to C and so forth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have alot of 32/34 mph 15/22 off skiers that were all skiing A with the Ver P. They are all now using B and are having more success. None of them have went back to A to try it with the P101 and I have not either. The general feeling from our skiers is that it is just plain softer then the old version P.

I have been playing with C a bit, but have really been stuck on B myself. I have so far wasted my whole summer with a varity of issues. ZO origional, then to P and now P101. I strained my lower back and was forced to take 2 weeks off, I sold my 07 superstar Monza before I dialed in my 08, testing my RS1 and last week I broke my ear drum again. I am not skiing regionals due to them being in Wichita,Ks. That is just to far to go for 1 set behind a Malibu with SG that I do not practice behind. Nats are in Fl behind the same boat and again, only 1 set for some huge price. 

I will spend the rest of my summer just having fun and skiing at sites that I like. Cotton Wood and Old Oaks, The Ranch, Deans and If I am lucky, Hancock.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont agree with the star gazer comments though. If the boat is not dialed in with a quality driver skier combo, it sucks. Below are some comments from a real good skier that I am exchanging e-mails with.

   This year has been maddening with all the speed control BS!  I got jacked by SG in a malibu a month ago and ended up falling half way through in two rnds because the boat entered the course with 1.80, 7.22 times and left with a 16.95 time.  No one seems to know how to set these boats up and even when drivers do know it's always a different version then what's back home....  The USAwaterski execs want to grow the sport to increase their budgets but they keep pissing off the constiuency...

If you get a boat that is not dialed in by someone that knows ther stuff, it will suck. We have 3 malibus and 3 MC in our state. I will only ski behind a couple of them.

You cant just bring the boat to a site and dial it in over a few passes up and down the lake without a skier on it. It takes a few sets with differant skiers pulling on the boat and a driver who knows what is going on.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
I read somewhere else that we do not really know how wrote the above letter. It may be Emma or it may be the smart ass that tried to get me to give away fins via the ProTour web cast. I totally agree with the text but reader beware...

 Goode  KD Skis ★ MasterCraft ★ PerfSki ★ Radar ★ Reflex ★ S Lines ★ Stokes

Drop a dime in the can

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I am coming around to the point where I just do not know what to think about this whole thing. If I was the only one confused, I might just drop the subject. So here is the history of my experience with ZO.

Last fall I skied behind a very early version of ZO and thought it was freak’n sick fantastic.

I skied 4 to 6 sets a week behind Gazer all spring with no complaints except strange segment times. The pull was just fine.

In May I skied in Florida behind a ZO boat for 3 days and had no issues. This was a boat that I think Andy Mapple had personally tweaked.

I have skied about 6 to 10 sets a week behind Gazer since then

First two tournament this year I skied about my average behind a Master Craft with Gazer and 6 balls less behind a CC with ZO. CC round felt totally foreign both times.

3 weeks ago I spent an afternoon with a MC Promo guy and a M5/55k skier that I have huge respect for. We spent the day just trying the letters and trying to get a handle on it. I left there skiing ok but not really happy about the pull.

Last Saturday I had a round behind a MC with Gazer that felt like crap. If I had not asked for Gazer I would say it felt like ZO “B”. I then got a round behind a CC with ZO “A” that I have to say felt pretty good. I did not ski very good but behind the CC with ZO but in that case it was not the boat.

I am sure there are those who think I am just mental. Your wrong. I am not the best skier around by a long shot but I am consistent and am aware of what is going on. There are not a lot of non-pro skiers around with more water time on different skis, at different sites with different …whatever.

Now I am wondering about different versions of ZO and Gazer. One old time guru tried to tell me that maybe it was all about what props are on the boats. I do not see it but why not? Nothing else makes more sense.

All I want is for the boats be as similar from brand to brand and year to year as they were with PP Classic. Last year you could get a ride behind an early 90s MC then go ski behind a 2007 Malibu and get nearly the same pull. Until this year I never cared what boat I got in a tournament.

 Goode  KD Skis ★ MasterCraft ★ PerfSki ★ Radar ★ Reflex ★ S Lines ★ Stokes

Drop a dime in the can

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...