ZO & PP Install

[walstib]

Thank you all for your responses to my ZO Help question last week.  Despite trying every setting, my wife has declared war on ZO (perhaps fueled in part by the discussion on the Other board....)  Anyway, I am now contemplating installing PP in addition to ZO in my boat (09 CC 196).  If anyone has done this, can you tell me if there is anything complicated about it?  I would hope that I could have both systems installed and be able to alternate depending on skier preference.

THANKS IS ADVANCE!

[Jody_Seal]

I complain about ZO and have owned Four ZO equipped boats since 07. Have not skied a tournament since May of 08 and have never skied a tournament  round behind ZO I am right at 200#. My daughter also has a dislike for ZO she is a w1 120#. I have talked in depth with Randy AT PP and they are willing to sell or provide their software for the ZO controller. To me ZO is missing out as are the boat manufacturers to not be persuing and providing this software to their unhappy customers. I guess the wheel is not squeeking loud enough yet.

As for the ability to install PP on a 09,, Some early vesions of the PCM E-control ECM had the ability to communicate via the V-guv line with PP however their is not an easy way to find out if the ECM is compatiable without sending it to PCM. All 2010 PCM motors now are not at all able to utilize Perfect Pass as the wiring will not now accomadate it. 

[RichardDoane]

jody - you could begin to suffer through the ZO learning curve as I did back in 07, it took some time, but my tournament scores have gotten better as a result.  ZO forces you to get, and stay early, in order to do well in tournaments.  It was a tough season (back in 07) but ZO is here to stay so people need to make the most of it.        walstib - I'd recommend not spending the $$$ on perfectpass, but instead get your wife some coaching on beating ZO at it's own game.

[Jody_Seal]

Richard- Please dont take this wrong way but You need to read my post! I have had 4 ZERO off equipped boats since 07.

 I ski regulary at least 5-7 sets a week with ZO. when I move over to PP I pick up a pass and a half running the exzact same times. Their are a number of us that just do not fit in the box that Andy and Zero Off have made for slalom skiing , My son who is a great 36mph skier loves it and has not skied better in years. For me It just is not fun getting four at 28 off (Or worse getting launched out the front) one day with ZO and four at 35 the next with PP. I would say suffering thru the learning curve is over at age 53. Maybe this year the AWSA will get the message that their will be more that quit because of ZO. The software is out their for a 4th option (RPM Overlay)! The pig headed elite thinking  Monoplistic industry and AWSA just wont supply it!  Keep in mind I have also sat on the AWSA Towboat committee as a industry rep for the last 10 years and it still blows me away that the committee relenquished ALL control for speed control over to the towboat manufacturers! That's your organization working for You...

[EF]

Jody, I agree completely! In this economy, how could you try to run the sport into the ground any better! /vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-yell.gif

I've only been at this great sport 5 years or so, and this Zero Off thing is driving me nuts!!! after all, if the times are in tolerance w/ an approved boat, WHAT'S THE PROBLEM!!!

[GAJ0004]

I am used to Perfect Pass. Have her try the B-2 setting on Zero OFF. I was told it was the most neutral setting.

[Than_Bogan]

I'm afraid it's a bit of a myth that there is such a thing as a "neutral setting."  B and 2 are simply two parameter choices.  See the ABC/123 thread for lots more -- especially scoke and clemsondave's chart links.

I had some trouble figuring out ZO, and it doesn't surprise me that there are some people for whom the adaptations required are awfully large.

It DOES surprise me that someone who has constant access to a ZO boat would not be able to find SOME setting which, combined with practice, got the same results as PP.

These days I alternate between PP (my boat) and ZO (my ski partner's boat) and not only are my scores the same but I can't even tell the difference.  That's a far cry from where I started -- initially ZO seemed much harder.

I wish I could say exactly what I adapted to, so that I could share that lesson with others.  But it was more like each set just felt a little better.  I must admit I'm still playing with my setting, though -- having trouble deciding between B1 and C1.  I actually don't think I could guess which is which (well any better than 50% by pure luck) if the driver was switching them randomly.  I may have to try that actually!!  Might learn something.

EF, I completely agree with your sentiment here -- absolutely nothing wrong with PP, so outlawing it was quite odd AND horribly timed.  But just for the record (and because I'm annoyingly pedantic /vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-wink.gif), getting correct times is actually not good enough by itself.  I used to ski behind a 70hp outboard, and could pull it off dramatically, but it would average 32 mph through the course.  When I first got behind a ski boat, I was completely shocked that 32 mph was both completely different and MUCH harder.

As a sport, we need to decide how much speed variation is acceptable, and have everybody compete within those guidelines.  But I'd be surprised if PP allows more speed variation in general.  (Does anybody think or know otherwise?)  I think it just does things differently.  And there's no way for a system that only uses speed as an input to emulate RPM-based control, regardless of parameters.  From a control system standpoint, the two just aren't the same.  And since human drivers used mainly RPM based driving for years (at least all the best ones I knew did), it seems very odd to not allow the computer the same option!  Typically the first step in building an Expert System (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert_system) is to figure out what the experts did and do that!!

[thager]

Tanimal,

 

Just curious as to what you weigh? I'm 190 and have ZO in my own boat and my performance is still way down from PP days.

No settings I have used get me comfortable and I have tried them all. I'm 54 and based on this year my tournament days are over. It's just not worth the waste of money. Still plan to ski and have to have USAWS but I'm done.

[Than_Bogan]

170 lbs.

My ski partner is 180 lbs.  He's a fair amount stronger than I am, and I've always guessed that's the reason he had much less trouble "figuring out" ZO than I did.  I had to really learn not to fight it, because I would always lose when I did!

At the moment I'm kinda working on a theory about the settings, which MAY prove to be complete nonsense.  But, for whatever it's worth, that theory would say you'd probably want 2 at your weight and then depending on where you top out, you'd pick your letter:  <= -22: A.  -28 to -32: B.  -35 and shorter: C.

[thager]

I've settled on A-1 lately occasionally gping with C-2. Topping out at 2-3 at -35 in practice. Tourneys I haven't gotten out of -28. Tourney PB with PP was 3.5 at -35 in 07. Although I am running more -32s in practice than ever I never know which skier is going to show up. Being very strong often still gets me into trouble but is always very entertaining for MS!

[Than_Bogan]

Hm, I would have expected A1 and C2 to feel about as different from each other as PP and ZO!  Those are not very similar settings.  (Only A1 to C3 or A3 to C1 would be LESS similar.)  For what it's worth (which again may be little), my theory would say C2 is the one to stick with for you.

Btw, I think being "too strong" is also a problem for getting used to ZO.  Powerful skiers may have become accustomed to being to able "dictate" to the boat.  ZO essentially does not allow that.  The boat always dictates to you.

I can argue that horsing the boat around like that was never really supposed to be allowed, but that's easy for me to say since I couldn't horse around a boat even with five years on the BALCO program... /vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-surprised.gif  And in any case, it WAS allowed for a long time, so I can see how taking that away would seem really freaking annoying!

[ForrestGump]

My ski partner ran into mid 41 off at 36 mph before he took a 4 year hiatus. He came back this year and has only run 2 at 39. I'm not blaming this on ZO and neither is he. BUT.......what he's finding is that with ZO he's changing how he skis.  Before, he was a crank the turn, drop the shoulder away, and lean like a mofo kind of skier. Like Lucky Lowe was all those years.  Now he's figuring out that opening up to the boat is making the effort needed to get crosscourse drop considerably. A byproduct of that is that the boat throttles less. Without even looking in the mirror I can hear when he goes old school and drops his shoulder out of a buoy. It's easily a 50rpm difference in the swing of the rpm compared to when he skis open to the boat.  

[Chef23]

Thager,

 

I am about the same level as you and I run A2 and run about the same in practice behind PP as I do in tournaments. I am probably 50% or a little less running 32 off in practice but I have run 28 off in the last three tournaments I have skied in. I am bigger than you at 230 pounds but people say I am not super hard behind the boat. I haven't put Thanimal's theory that as you improve you need to change settings into play yet. I only ski behind ZO at tourneys so I don't like to mess around too much.

[jaredH20]

If my boat is on a drive by wire system does that mean it will work with zero off?

[Chef23]

The model and year of the boat will impact what the cost is. Some boats can be converted but require new ECMs which obviously drives up the cost.

[jaredH20]

Have a 2006, 206 nautique, 5.7lv v8, drive by wire?pcm engine

[thager]

Jared,

 

My guess is that your 06 has a mechanical shift that controls a mechanical throttle body which is what I had on my 5.7L excaliber. The electronics responded to the air volume sensed. The conversion kit consists of a new electronic throttle body, new ECM, new electrical harness and an electronic throttle potentiometer. You keep the same throttle/shift cable but it attaches to the throttle potentiometer which the electronics then respond to. Zero off attaches to a connector on the new electrical harness which is labeled as engine #1 or engine # 2. Can't quite remember exactly but ZO acts like an engine sync system( as if your boat has 2 engines.) ZO is the master engine and the engine responds by matching its demands. The additional cost Tim quoted you for is probably for supply/demand and the gateway box CC started using in 2003? It got rid of miles of wire by going to the gateway box system thereby making manufacture easier and faster.

[jaredH20]

by air volume do you mean air guides? cause my boat doesn't have air guides?

[thager]

Got me on that one. Never heard of air guides.

[jaredH20]

I believe air guides were used in the older model boats to control the speed they were under the hull and i think sensed the water passing??

 

I know for slalom my boat uses the rpm.

[thager]

Pitots were eliminated in 06 I think and the paddle wheel was used by PP but not neccessarily for slalom. RPM was. Has no effect on ZO so that would not be an additional cost,

[jaredH20]

yup got the paddle wheel. Have emailed correct craft to see what the story is though still waiting for a reply