Jump to content

jpwhit

Baller
  • Posts

    428
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by jpwhit

  1. I’m not sure, never heard of anyone commenting about that. I think the only thing you could try is the 3-blade jump prop. There really doesn’t seem to be a lot of prop selection right around the size of the standard ProStar prop. I have a 19 ProStar with the 5.7L and I do wish it had a larger engine. The course at my lake house has a medium distance setup on one end, and my ProStar just gets to speed at 34mph right at the pre-gate balls. And 36 doesn’t lock in until halfway between the pre-gate and gates. We have a 5.7L 200 at the ski club, and it’s noticeably stronger than the 5.7 in the ProStar. I assume it’s because the PCM 5.7 is 343hp and the Ilmore is 320hp. Overall, I like the ProStar better than the 200, I just think it would be perfect with the 6 or 6.2L engine. People with long setups say the 2014 is fine, but I know it wouldn’t work for me. I bought the 3 blade jump prop to try on my 19 at the end of last season, but I never got around to trying it yet. I also actually picked up a virtually brand new Ilmore 6.0 for a steal, so that’ll probably end up in the ProStar.
  2. For example, this boat can likely be had in the 40's. https://www.ski-it-again.com/php/skiitagain.php?endless=summer&topic=Search&category=Boat_3Event&postid=68613 And probably won't need much of anything until 1500 hours or so. It may end up being a much better deal over the next 10 years of ownership. I'm someone that typically isn't that concerned with high hours. But at 2700 hours, that boat is almost certainly going to need fairly significant work pretty soon. I'm basing this on our ski club boats. We typically run them up to about 2500 hours. Pretty much after that, they really do need a complete refurb to be a boat you can count on. So in addition to what it'll cost, I think you need to think about how you'll feel if the boat breaks down a lot and ruins your boating outing. I think the right buyer for the original boat posted, is for someone that wants a project and will take it and immediately tear it all down and do a compete refurb. Otherwise, I think you'll end up with a boat that lets you down too frequently. Also it says trailer optional, so I bet 35k isn't including the trailer. And a nearly brand new tandem axle trailer isn't cheap.
  3. Another thing to keep in mind. The 2014 ProStars with the 5.7L engine were pretty slow out of the hole. They changed the transmission ratio to address that in 2015 and onwards. Personally, with the market being so soft, Id probably make some offers on boats with less hours before I actually bought this boat. Don't let asking prices drive your decision making, there can be big differences between asking prices and selling prices. Especially in a really soft market like it is now.
  4. Yes, I think this it is likely more of a psychological factor. A fundamental fear of the wakes combined with certain people really having a very hard time taking verbal direction on body position and movement and turning it into execution. Seems to create a barrier sometimes that is hard for people to break through. And my observation is these are often the folks that lose interest and give up skiing the course. And if you've got the novice balls only 5 or 8 feet in from the normal balls, by the time you've moved them out, and you're going 28mph, you can't make it just being casual about it. Maybe it would seem casual to an experienced skier, but not someone new to the course. They still have to get the balls early enough, have a reasonable pre-turn, get a wider than the ball, and pull through the wakes more than casually. Oh, and I forgot to mention, that most of the time I do this at 22 off. But that depends a little on the boat and the exact speed and how the wakes form at that speed. A lot of people that are afraid of the wakes, have an easier time crossing sort of one larger wake at 22 off, rather than 2 distinct wakes you often get at slower speeds. Often the first wake knocks them further into a bad forward biased position, and the 2nd wake is more likely to take them down. I also feel like being at 22 off with the narrower balls, does tend to have the mechanics more like 15 off with the regular width balls. But the first thing I do is decide the speed and rope length and always start them off with something they can make. Then the only thing I change going forward is the width of the balls. I think part of why it works, is let face it, people like to succeed, and it makes them feel better and have more confident when they feel like they're succeeding. So, if they are making the novice balls, even if they are pretty narrow, it causes a mental shift. And it's very motivating for some people. When you start moving them wider, they are motivated to try harder to keep making them. Especially if you move them out slowly. And I think pretty soon they are attacking the wakes more aggressively because they've replaced the fear of the wakes with the motivation to keep making the balls. Maybe another way to say it, is they start improving their form through the wakes because they have to to keep making the balls. Instead of explicitly thinking about it. I tend to think explicitly thinking about it can lead to the fear of the wakes creeping back in. I do give them tips on crossing the wakes at the right time, but in the form of "if you can bring your shoulder and upper body back, you're less likely to crash going through the wakes." Frame the comments in the form of addressing the fear, not in if you do this you can attack the wakes more aggressively. Telling someone they are afraid of the wakes, and that's holding them back, is never really a good idea. But with that said, it really depends on the person and how they are responding to other forms of coaching. Its very much a judgement call as to if it's a good approach. But I've had good success with it from some people. But if you don't see it creating motivation by making the narrower balls, then it's not likely the right approach. I've had other people that can take verbal direction and turn it into execution very readily. My daughters were like that, and it's really great to coach them. I attribute it to the many years of dance lessons and competition they participated in growing up. They learned the skill of taking verbal direction and turning into the execution of body position and movements. So, I never used this approach with them. They started out doing the full course at slower speeds on a larger ski at a pretty young age. But it's also very satisfying IMO, to help people who are having a harder time, break through the barriers that are holding them back if it's not as naturally easy for them..
  5. Are those parts aluminum? If they are Aluminum, then Tig welding would be the best way to go. That latch piece looks pretty simple to make. If you don't have the equipment needed to make one, send me a drawing with dimensions and I'll make you one on my CNC machine.
  6. I use a 69” Senate Alloy when teaching folks at this skill level to ski the course. It’s great at slower speeds for someone in his size / weight range. I do agree with the other comments in this thread that having him attempt the normal width balls isn’t really helping the situation. It’s forcing him to practice bad form. And practicing bad form isn’t going to get him anywhere. Slowing down the boat is one option, but I prefer using novice balls at a narrower width and keeping the speed a little higher. From what I see in the video, I would probably keep him at 28 with the novice balls. The novice balls on my course are easily adjustable for width. With that setup, I would then work on having him get early to the balls, and develop a good overall rhythm in the course. I’ve found that for people that have trouble getting comfortable keeping solid form and crossing the wake aggressively, that also don’t respond well to drills or verbal descriptions of form for more aggressive wake crossings, that it’s better to get them comfortable with good rhythm, early to the balls without struggling and then ease them into better wake crossings by slowly increasing the width of the novice balls. I find that once they are use to making all the novice balls, and they believe they can make them all consistently, they are more motivated to attack the wakes and develop better form crossing the wakes, as the novice balls get wider.
  7. I've had a lot of experience in the patent system over my career. At one point I read all the Zero Off patents as well as the perfect pass patents. I don't have as much experience in legal and court settlement issues so I've never tried to find and read whatever is public relative to the legal case between Perfect Pass and Zero Off. This always seems to get portrayed as Zero Off got a patent and forced Perfect Pass out of the picture. From my understanding that's an over simplification. Both companies had multiple patents relative to boat speed control systems. The problem really came down to they couldn't agree on joint licensing arrangements between themselves. Which is often how companies in competing spaces handle circumstances like this. And my understanding is that each company had claims that the other was violating their patents. As a result it went to court as a patent dispute case. My understanding of the results of the settlement is they divided the market. Zero Off can sell systems into DBW markets after some date. PP sells to DBW before a certain date and all mechanical throttle systems. It should be noted that PP is still in business, and I wouldn't scoff at the value of the speed control retrofit market. Since this was settled via a lawsuit, the terms of the legal settlement will often render the patent expiration dates moot. It just depends on what was decided in the settlement in terms of time periods. I suspect the boat manufacturer and engine marinizers choice on what system they preferred played a significant role in how this played out as well. And I suspect they preferred sourcing the engine electronics and speed controls system from a single supplier. If you want to speculate on where the market may go from here. I think the right question to ask yourself, is what would motivate the engine marinizers and boat market to move to something other than Econtrols engine and speed control electronics?
  8. Tuners work with automotive ECUs. And due to the nature and scope of the automotive market, those ECUs are pretty open. EControls is in the industrial market focused primarily on heavy equipment. Their ECUs are very different. And the Industrial heavy equipment market is extremely closed and protective. Sure, they will make/customize an ECU for you if you want to be your own marinizer. But the “design” fees aren’t going to be cheap. If you’ve ever tried to buy a replacement EContols ECU, you’d understand a lot better.
  9. If you’re talking new PCM, Ilmore, or Indmar with warranty. Now that the 5.7L and non-cat versions are no longer produced. You’re talking $30K.
  10. Caveat, I haven't actually tried this with a boat. But in the automotive world, for situations like track racing, you can remove the Cats and use an O2 sensor "simulator" box for the after Cat O2 sensors to keep the ECM happy. I would think the same would work fine on a boat.
  11. There are 2 ski clubs, Panther Lake, and Lake Magnolia, in addition to Coble Ski School all within 30 minutes of you. As well as a very thriving community of slalom skiers at both Kerr Lake and Lake Gaston. Just for kicks, I started writing down a list of people I know in the area that are active slalom skiers. I came up with about 50, without much trouble. If you're judging by how many people you see at lakes like Harris, Jordan, or Fall's lake, then I understand your view. But all those lakes are way too crowded, so the slalom skiing community mostly ignores them. If you want to get connected with more slalom enthusiast in the area, send me a PM. I'll be contrarian in this thread. I think slalom skiing is a niche sport now because there are so many other recreational options for people, but I don't believe its on it's death bed. I do agree that tournament skiing faces a lot of challenges. But I think that recreational slalom course skiing will continue, and I know way more people doing in now than 10 years ago. I've introduced and taught at least 10 under 25 folks in the last couple of years that are now passionate about course skiing. I think there is a big enough market that'll it be a viable business for someone to continue making ski boats well into the future.
  12. When I joined our ski club, we had a 07 196 with Zero off. After a couple of years, when my daughters were skiing for UNC, I bought a 200 so we and the team could ski at other lakes besides the ski club. At slower speeds, below 32, everyone thought the 200 had a noticeable smaller wake at 15 off than the 196. At 32 and higher, I really couldn't tell much difference. We had enough people that skied slower speeds at the ski club, that we sold the 196 and bought a 200 at the club. When I bought a lake house 4 years ago, we bought a 19 ProStar for there. The ProStar has an even better slow speed wake than the 200 according to my wife and her friends. I ski at 34 and am perfectly happy to ski behind the 200 at the club or the ProStar at the Lake House. My wife prefers driving the 200, but she does fine pulling me behind the ProStar as well. I prefer driving the ProStar because I like the livelier feel. In terms of the overall quality of the boats, I think the ProStar is significantly better than the Nautique. Just about every rubber gasket on the engine box and every storage compartment has fallen off on the 200. Screws have fallen out of the hydrogate a couple of times and I had to completely rebuild the hydrogate with new metal plates once. The Pedal Position Sensor has failed a few times and the last time I had to upgrade to the revised part and re-flash the ECM. Also had to replace the 40 series transmission with an 80 series on the Nautique. I haven't had to do a thing beyond normal maintenance on the ProStar. Granted the 200 now has 4x the hours than my ProStar, but even at the current hours that are on the ProStar, I had to do a lot more stuff to the 200. I certainly wouldn't call the 200 a lemon or a bad boat by any means. But the ProStar has just been noticeable better. And that's compared against my personal 200 and the ski club's 200.
  13. Furniture upholstery shops have to do heavy duty zippers. I wonder if you could find one that would repair your ML case.
  14. It's 80% unbolt and re-bolt. The kit includes a different much larger transmission cooler. So that has to be fitted and requires some reworking of the raw water plumbing and mounting brackets due to the significantly larger size. It's about twice the size of the typical cooler that came from the factory with most 40 series installs. I don't know that the larger cooler is absolutely required with the 80 series, but I'm sure it's a good idea and will extend the life of the new transmission. Unless you're doing the electronic shifting version, the routing of the shift cable is fairly different than the 40 series. We had to reroute the shift cable to go under the engine with the 80 series. The original routing with the 40 series was over the engine. The kit also includes a new damper plate. Which is always a good idea to change when you're changing the transmission. But it's a fairly differently designed damper. So mounts to the flywheel a little differently. Not really a big deal but did cause a bit of confusion. I honestly can't remember why now. And then of course you have to re-align the engine / trans / driveshaft
  15. One of the other members of our ski club and myself did ours one evening after work. We're both pretty experienced with this kind of work.
  16. I tend to think the issue with surf boats is a bit different than with other water sports that have caused contention with other boaters and dock owners. There is effectively an "arms race" going on with surf boat companies to create bigger and bigger wakes. It's just like the megapixel race with digital cameras. The way you get people to upgrade to the newest boat, is to have a bigger and better wave than the previous model and your competitors. Especially with people that live on lakes, they recognize this trend, and they have to think when will it stop. And because nobody see's an end to it, I think it prompts people to feel like they have to take action. I also think that's why the problem can't be fixed simply by educating the boat owners. On the lake where I have a house, which is in a fairly rural area, for the most part the majority of the boat owners actually are fairly competent. But even with operated well clear of other boats and docks, the waves on the latest boats are still causing issues. I have wondered if it would be practical to put a size restriction on generated wave size. It would have to be done at a certification level directly with the boat makers just like emission controls are done for cars. The certification test would have to be based on measuring wave energy at a set distance from the source (boat). I think this would drive a more sustainable approach by the boat makers. They would have to focus on the quality of the waves produced instead of the size.
  17. For the sake of discussion, let's imagine that a worldwide ban on any wake enhancing device such as ballast, surf tabs, surf gates, etc. became the reality and could be fully enforced. In such a scenario, I do agree it would cause profound changes to the entire water sports industry. But I do not agree that it would result in the demise of the 3-event skiing. Would some of the existing boat and equipment companies go completely out of business because they couldn't adapt quickly enough? I think that's certainly possible. Could it result in fewer companies making ski boats as a result. Yes, I think that's possible as well. I do not think it would stop people wanting to be out on the water doing water-based sports. Therefore, there would still be a viable market with enough revenue potential to fuel the rise of new companies to fill the demand for products. Change always tend to be a little scary and unsettling, but sometimes change is good and results in a better outcome in the end.
  18. I also wonder if there is potentially the beginning of legislation at the federal level and that's what prompted Mastercraft's email. And at the federal level, I can see proposed legislation easily being written very generically such that it applied to all towed water sports.
  19. The way I would interpret that, is the way a majority of these rules are being drafted, that Mastercraft is correct. They will impact towed water sports in general. But I'm still a firm believer that the root cause driving the proposals is the fast growth of wake surfing. I'm seeing a lot of legislation being proposed in many states that is aimed at limiting wake surfing. But the way much of it is drafted, it'll apply to all towed water sports. If you accept the premise that wake surfing is what's driving the change. Then there are two ways to move forward on trying to fight against the change. Go along with all towed water sports are all essentially the same and attempt to resist any changes or limit them to something you think is workable. This seems to be the approach Mastercraft is adopting. And they think 200' is acceptable compromise. I can see why this would be the best approach for MasterCraft. But I'm not sure it's the best approach for tournament style slalom skiing since a 200 foot restriction would impact a lot of ski courses. Mastercraft may be betting that the rules are unlikely to be enforced in most slalom courses, and they may be right 90% of the time. But it will give the unhappy neighbor another way to get the slalom course they don't like removed on public water. The other way to try and protect slalom skiing, is to argue that it's very different than wake surfing. That's the approach that I'm advocating. I've seen some states write the rules to be specific to wake surfing. And that seems to be more often the case for states that have a lot of lakes and water sports. In states where that is not the case, the proposals tend to be a lot more general.
  20. This does seem like news that is relevant to the waterski community. Thanks for posting it @Horton As someone that both wake surfs and slalom skies, I'm accepting of reasonable restrictions on wake surfing because so many people can't seem to be responsible on their own. And over the last few years, wake surfing is drawing enough negative attention that it's really only a matter of time before more and more restrictions get put into place. The reason this is very relevant to the 3-event skiing community, is because 98% of the population doesn't understand or even care about making any distinction between wake surfing and waterskiing. So waterskiing is likely to become a casualty in the process of trying to "fix" the wake surfing issue. So, the important point of action for the waterski community is to try and educate and ensure that waterskiing doesn't get included in future restrictions. And honestly, that's going to be really tough to accomplish. In general, I don't agree that you can create laws to very effectively limit people from being inconsiderate or stupid, but that's not really the practical consideration here. If our community's approach to protect waterskiing is to take the position that no restrictive rules should be put in place, then in my opinion we will fail, and waterskiing will likely be impacted as a result. Wake surfing is creating way too much ire in the overall lake communities to stop the trend towards restrictions being put in place. I think MasterCraft is taking the approach to try limiting the restrictions in general, because that would be best for their business, but personally I don't think that's the best approach for the waterski community. For all the folks here, that jump on the bandwagon about how 3-event boats are the step child of the big surf boats, here's your chance to shine!
  21. You can remove the serpentine belt to test your setup.
  22. The best place to monitor is the temperature of the rubber hose coming off the exhaust manifold(s). That's where you'll see the earliest rise in temp if there isn't much raw water flowing.
  23. The best outdoor storage boxes I've used are Taylor Made Stow 'n Go Fiberglass Dock Boxes. They meet all your criteria with the possible exception of cost. But this may be one of these cases where you get what you pay for.
  24. I doubt Ski Boats are the target market for this. I think they are likely focused on the fishing market. Since a lot of the fishing crowd go year round, and don't winterize or wrap their boats for the winter, this has more benefit for them. Many of them also drop ton's of money into their boats, a good bit of which is just to impress people at the launch. So this would fit right into that culture.
×
×
  • Create New...