SN 200 problem

[Marco]

My friend just launched his new 200 for the first time, broke it in per the instructions, but couldn't get enough RPM's afterwards.  The max it would run is 4100, and it barely reaches 36 mph without a skier.  Our lake is at 5400', and they prop'd it down to 15 from 15-1/2. (That seems extreme compared to the 12.5 pitch I run on my malibu, but I don't know anything abou SN props and gear reduction).  The dealer said they are working on a computer upgrade, which makes me think that this isn't the first boat to have an issue.  Has anyone else at altitude experienced the same thing?

My friend is extremely frustrated, and it didn't help that the heater stopped working after 5 minutes of use and the knob fell apart in his hands.  He's ready to trade the boat in for a Malibu or mastercraft...

[baja]

That's unfortunate for what should have been an exciting day. No advice here, only sympathy. Watched a friend use his ski to paddle his new boat up to our dock on it's maiden voyage. We only abused him for a few years. Hopefully this becomes a good story and not a nightmare.

[Bulldog]

He should trailer it back to the dealer and demand a different boat, if he is having those kind of issues...... sent it back!!!!!

[Marco]

That is on the list of options.  The frustrating part is that before he ordered the boat, he asked the dealer if the 340 hp motor would be suffucient to pull 36 mph skiers at 5400' on a 2000' lake.  The dealer talked to the engineers at CC and they said it would have no problem.  I'd say make them install the 400hp motor, but that is a 6K upcharge, not to mention losing use of the boat while it gets replaced.

 

[radarannex]

bought a 2009 196 for this reason... just traded in from a 1997 gt 40 ski nautique tsc1

 

love correct craft but 4000+ rpm for 36mph is just too much. My brother who has a 2006 196 does 3600 rpm at 36mph and has a top of 48mph and this is a 700 hr boat.

 

I believe the 200 body is just too wide causing too much drag. They should have thought of this during design. Also for most skiers use you actually dont need much more room than a 196 or 206 has to offer, but I know this is a very personal view, what isnt personal however is a newer ski-boat that does too many rpm resulting in less longevity and more fuel consumation, that just isn't progres in my book.

 

Also with the 200 with the standard engine you just don't have the top speed to pull a barefooter, while we have ample speed in the 2006 196 for that, and this is on the 330 excalibur, not the 343...

 

I hope they will be able to sort it out with a newer, better prop, which is the only option they have i think??

 

I really hope they do for you because it is a beautifull looking boat with good fit and finish I believe, really think your heater was just a snag, usually boats, cars, truks, even planes break down early in their lifespan and late.. called MTBF Mean time between failiure. HIghest when new or old...

 

K

[eleeski]

At sea level, most boats run 3600 RPM for 36mph. At 5000' the thin air reduces your horsepower by 20%. You will need to increase your RPM by 20% to get the HP needed for 36mph. So your engine needs to turn 4300 RPM to develop the same horsepower! The engine isn't working harder so you aren't wearing out the engine faster or using more gas. Get a new prop! Actually most prop shops can repitch your prop easily.

Note these numbers are rough estimates. My airplane loses about 20% power at 5000'. I am assuming linear power curves for the boat engine. I am ignoring the extra friction of higher RPM. But running higher RPMs will safely increase your available power (4300 is well below peak HP and redline). You could get a 20% bigger engine and run it at lower RPM for the same effect.

It is a bummer that they didn't guess right on the prop, but there is nothing wrong with the boat engine. The broken heater -  don't give up on the boat for that. The trick wake is another issue...

Eric

[DW]

I would assume that the computer upgrade is actually an altitude compensation or altitude calibration.  The boat is most likely running too rich at altitude, as Eric mentioned, the air is 20% less dense, thus you need 20% less fuel.  With the extra fuel you are both wasting fuel and running inefficiently which is not allowing full power to be realized.  You might check to make sure that is what they are thinking or doing.  You might pull a spark plug and look to see what the mixture looks like.  What type of fuel do you run, you might look in to oxygenated fuels, they would help restore some of the power, but can be hard on some of the parts if the boat sits very long.  Your air cleaner could also be restrictive, a change there could help, I have noticed many boats now run a K&N filter, which is not as free flowing as a good, free flowing spark arrestor.  Also, does that boat have catalytic converters, they tend to be restrictive.

Actually, that is one advantage a carburetor tends to have, they are "dumb" so to speak, and only mix the amount of fuel required based on the amount of air that flows through them, not exactly, but closer than a fixed pulse width injector as it does not compensate unless instructed to by the ECM.

One big difference between cars and boats in terms of altitude is the relative controlling factor on resistance to forward motion.  In cars, once over 30 mph (+/-) the major contirbutor is aerodynamic drag which is less when the air is less dense, wheras a boat the resistance contributor is the water drag or hydrodynamic drag, which, unfortunately does not really care about altitude.  The newer, heavier boats which now design the hull to get flatter wakes by tuning the hull in such a way that increases drag signifiantly over the older, lighter boats  Increased engine power and more efficient props have been developed to keep speed pretty constant over the last several years, but altitude throwns in another wrinkle.

Good luck and I hope the adjustments make the boat satisfactory.

[Deke]

Guys, I think Marco's problem is a little different than some of the responses suggest. He is saying he has to do 4100 RPM to get to 36 MPH but that is ALSO ALL IT WILL DO. A new prop is not going to be the answer. Seriously, Marco, I'd turn it back over to the dealer and not except it back until your satisfied. You shouldn't be doing the factory's R&D or their quality control for them. That's a real shame after 6 months of anticipation.

[Bulldog]

Deke is 100 percent right, Marco's friend paid several thousand dollars for the latest and greatest boat and it is not working PERIOD.  If that dealer has any customer service at all he should be hooking them up with a demo boat and making the situation right! If not tell the salesman to poke the 200 you know where... I bet he was all talk when the deal was made where are they now? Marco I am sorry that your friends new boat experence has sucked so far...

[Marco]

Deke- Thats right.  Also it barely got up to 34 by the time we hit the 55's when I skied behind it yesterday.  The owner has been talking to the dealer, who is guaranteeing they will make it right.  The question is: is the boat just to big and heavy for the motor?  If so there will not be a solution other than upgrading to the 400 hp.

The dealer is talking to the guys at PCM, so we'll see what they come back with.  I don't think a prop change will get the 4-6 mph that is needed.  Hopefully it something simple like an altitude calibration as DW suggested.  We'll know more in a couple of days.

As far as how it skied, the wake was almost non-existent and butter soft.  One pass we spun at the end and the boat barely bounced when it crossed the wakes.  If we can get the power problem resolved, this will be a sweet boat!

[Marco]

Bulldog- To be fair, the dealer so far has been very cooperative.  The problem was identified on Friday afternoon, and the PCM guys were in FL and were gone from the office by the time he was able to call them, so nothing much happened over the weekend.  The dealer did talk to my friend several times on Saturday.  We'll see what happens over the next few days.  The boat owner was going to ask the dealer to come to our lake (300+ miles away) to run the diagnostics rather than trailering the boat back over the Rockies.  We'll see if he agrees.

I would find it hard to believe that CC didn't test their boat at higer elevations.  Hopefully they did, and this problem can be diagnosed and fixed easily...

[DanE]

DW,

Actually a modern injection system do adjust for altitude. There are three big parameters wich the ECM reads to provide the right pulses for the injectors.

MAP sensor (manifold absolute pressure), throttle sensor, and rpm´s together make it possible for the ECM to read the mass of oxygen entering the engine.

Other parameters are present to fine adjust, like engine temp, intake air temp and so on,some systems even has an air mass sensor but the main thing is that the system is very well capable of adjusting for altitude so the mixture should not be at fault.

However, and this is something You can´t do anything about, You will lose power at altitude.Because the air pressure is lower, less air mass is going to enter the engine and the the injection system will adjust accordingly with less fuel injected to keep the mixture right= less power, or You could say You need to push the throttle further to achieve same power as You´re used to at sea level.

[eleeski]

I'd be surprised if the ECM does not have altitude compensation built in. A defective air filter is possible. My old airplane had more power on the lower 87 octane cargas than the 100 octane avgas - fill with regular instead of super. A bad plug or wire (or ECM or sensor) could cut the power output. Clean the algae off the bottom of the boat. These are small unlikely problems. A new prop is very likely to solve the problem.

My old American Skier was getting really tired. It would not pull 36 any more. So I bought a new Magnum Skier. It was a Utah high altitude boat. I am below sea level. So I swapped props from the American Skier to the Magnum. The strong new engine on the Magnum was great with the American Skier prop. The American Skier turned into a strong new boat - easily pulling 36! One of my members used it for several years after that (eventually the engine died totally - but I stupidly overheated it).

The 200 may be big and heavy with a high drag hull design, but 340HP is a huge engine. If you are on the wrong side of the power curve, you can't get into any of the available HP. My American Skier prop was a 14 pitch prop. The altitude Magnum prop was a 12 pitch prop. Repitching from 15-1/2 to 15 is not much adjustment for your extreme altitude. Try an agressive pitch change (14 or 14-1/2).

Maybe then you will find that the boat is a horrible design and the engine is defective. More realistically, you are the high altitude test bed. Have fun with it all!

Eric

[DW]

Did not mean to give the impression that there is no, or the ECM doesn't have, altitude compensation as it should.  I was just commneting on that based on the info given and the problem described as something to verify or ensure is functioning correctly or that the correct software is enabled.

Marco, the 12.5" pitch altitude prop on the Malibu is only 1/2" pitch difference from the sea level props which are 13".  So the 1/2" pitch change is not too far off, and given it's a 15, the boat certainly has a gear reduction trans.

[Marco]

DW- Yes, the boat does have gear reduction.  The dealer is hinting at a prop change solution, but won't propping down further give more RPM's but not much more top end speed, which is what is missing? 

Being a new boat, (less than 1/2 hr on it at delivery), we discounted plugged filters, air or fuel.  Could a weak fuel pump be a possibility?

Eric- it does appear we are the "high altitude test bed".  I do know of  200 promo that will be showing up at a lake a few hours away from ours that is 600' higher in elevation.  It won't be there for 3 more weeks, but if we don't have an answer by then, the performance of that boat will tell us a lot...

[ForrestGump]

The MEFI ecm does not have "altitude correction software" that can be enabled or disabled, per se. It uses a MAP sensor on "key on" to set a baseline for atmospheric pressure. From there it references a fueling table based on pressure vs rpm to find an injector pulsewidth. It then applies a mutiplier based on the air temp. The Exc 343 and 330 with the MEFI have had years of testing so I'm guessing it's not an issue of an incorrect calibration. There are plenty of boats in high altitudes running those same engines. Anything is possible I guess. If it's not incorrecty propped, I would suspect a faulty MAP sensor or knock sensor. I have had faulty MAP sensors on fuel injected race car engines I tune right out of the box, so it's not unheard of. 

[radarannex]

ELEESKI,

 

At sea level, most boats run 3600 RPM for 36mph. At 5000' the thin air reduces your horsepower by 20%. You will need to increase your RPM by 20% to get the HP needed for 36mph. So your engine needs to turn 4300 RPM to develop the same horsepower! The engine isn't working harder so you aren't wearing out the engine faster or using more gas. Get a new prop! Actually most prop shops can repitch your prop easily.

 

Please take no offence eleeski, but I believe you are wromg here, a 737 captain myself, I agree with you that from a thermal point of view the engine isnt really working harder. But frictional wise it definately is. I do not know what excalibur max continuous rpms are, but on my gt-40 it was only 4200rpm, wich agreed was an engine wich was less tuned for the higher end rpm and had more torque at lower end compared to the chevy engine, but running the boat constantly at 4300 rpm compared to another boat doing the same at 3600-3800 rpm wil reduce longevity, and it should use more fuel also, but have to go back to my books for this, piston engines theory was a long time ago ;)

[eleeski]

Pilot, you are right about the friction burning extra gas. Every hypermiler will run as low a gear as possible to maximize mileage. But skiing is not an economy activity (especially with a $$new boat). And the friction will not add the full 20% to the fuel burn or engine wear.

Motorcycle engines redline at 10,000+ rpm, my Cessna 210 limits at 2800 rpm. Engines have design limits and absolute rpm numbers are irrelevant - it is the engine specific rpms that matter. For the PCM 5.7 engine (Crusader is what I found specs for) the max rpm is 5200 and max power (330HP) is at 5000 rpm. They specify a cruise range of idle to 4000 rpm but this range is not a limit (and pulling slalom is not a cruise activity). 4300 rpm is well within the design limits of the engine. The pull can be made to be equivalent to a sea level pull.

High altitude is a more stressful situation for the engine so sacrificing better power, fuel economy and engine life is the price you pay for the beautiful mountain vistas and trees. Of course those rains (and snows) that fill your lakes are something we don't get in sea level San Diego. Maybe that's why we have the most expensive water in the US. The costs may even out...

Eric

[Marco]

Good news back from CC!  This is all second hand, but as it turns out, the software that was loaded into the 200's that were built in the early stages of production were for the 196.  Later on they changed the software to coincide with the higer RPM needs of the 200.  I don't know any of the specifices, but the programming of ZO came into play as well.

The fix is a software upgrade, and they are also talking about propping down to a 12-1/4 x 14-1/4.

As it turns out, this is the first 200 run at altitude, so the problem with the older software hadn't arisen previously.  CC already has the answer.  Hats off to them for being on top of it. 

[aguylikeshark]

Andy was giving joy rides on lake #2 at this level in August '09: Calgary  Elevation: 1,048 M (3,438 FT). i was real interested in the 200.

 

When the placed cleared out i saw a bit of a drag race going on 200 vs 196. the 196 beat the 200 but not by a huge margin. the 200 came out of the water flat and is just gorgeous on plane. the 196 reminded me of the old SN2001 when side by side.

[ForrestGump]

If I recall correctly, they were testing the 200 in Denver last year. Maybe this one is the first customer boat at altitude, but it's not the first 200 run at altitude. Glad they've got a fix coming, though.

[Alberto Soares]

Hi Marco, is the problem fixed? Thank you!

[MAD11]

 

Seems like more issues with the 200. Some locals brand new 200 is sitting at the dealership, but they can't take delivery due to a rudder recall. The boat left the factory within the last 10 days so this must be a new one. Hope they get this fixed quickly.

[ForrestGump]

Marc, there's a big recall on rudder ports at CC right now. It effects some of the wakeboard boats, like the 210, too.  Lot of brand new boats coming back to the dealerships over the next month. It was just identified in the last week and the rudder port manufacturer is working on a fix. 

[JDM]

Friend of Marco's here and familiar with the boat issue and we are aware of the rudder issue and a fix is suposed to be delivered with a new rudder box installation when they recalibrate.  Hopefully this weekend. 

[Marco]

Alberto- As JDM mentiones above, the recalibration is set to happen this weekend.  The prop change was a large improvement, and hopefully the recalibration will complete the equation.  Will keep you posted.

 Shane- From what I understand from second hand information, CC did some higher altitue testing, and pulled an event in Mexico City, but used the 400 hp block, and the problems were not an issue with the larger motor.  I believe this is the first 340 horse motor tested at altitude.

[Deke]

I love my '99 RLx...  

[Old MS Accout]

Thats 3 seconds of my life I will never get back.

[Deke]

MS, in all seriousness this issue is bad. The re-calibration should help and the prop is helping, but the results might only be marginal at best. I don't believe the owner of that boat would have ordered it with the smaller power plant if he new what he knows now. CC is doing all they can to rectify the situation as it stands but the bottom line is they sold him the wrong boat.

 

As for the 3 seconds... Sorry.

 

Deke

[Old MS Accout]

I am a very Happy former CC promo guy. Always wait for the second year of any new boat from any boat maker.  

[Deke]

Marco, this is the weekend. What's up?

[Marco]

Getting the dealer to send someone out has been like pulling teeth.  Its been over 3 weeks since we identified the problem, and they were in no hurry to send a mechanic here.  They wanted the boat to make the 700 mile round trip to them.  They were finally supposed to show up yesterday to re-calibrate, and replace the rudder plate that has failed on some other 2010 CC's. The mechanic didn't show, instead decided to hang out in Telluride for the day with his fiance.  He is now supposed to be at the lake as we speak.

Yesterday, with the smaller prop, we skied 36 mph with a driver and observer, and the boat didn't reach speed until we were right at the gates, but it couldn't hold it. The times were slow and well out of tolerance .  We won't know if the recalibration will solve the problem until the end of the week when we can get back down and ski behind it, but Jr will have some idea sooner because he took baseline data without a skier.

If the recalibration doesn't solve the problem, the only remaining solution is to swap out the motor.  We are running out of time because this boat, and another 200 like it is supposed to pull our tournament in June.  That boat is still in FL awaiting the outcome of our situation.  If it doesn't work, that one will need the bigger motor as well because it is supposed to pull tournaments at lakes even higher than ours.  Needless to say, certain people are getting very frustrated.

I'll give an update as soon as we can test it out after the recalibration.

[radarannex]

Know the 200 is underpowered compared to previous models or at the moment other brands, however, it really shouldn't be that underpowered. A fault that might cause an underpowered engine is one of the fuel pums low pressure or high pressure not functioning correctly. I know because have the problem as we speak. New 196 max rpm 3900, dealer is sending over new high pressure fuel pump....

 

 

[Jim]

I have driven and skied behind the 200 and the 343 just doesn't have the beans to push the surface area of the 200. I'm with Deke on this one, prop and recalibration will help but I can't see it making the kind of difference you need. The boat runs 36 mph at 4000 rpm, reducing pitch is just going to push the rpm's up to increase acceleration and I don't see that there is that much on the top end to work with.

 

Any updates? This boat needs to come with the 409 standard.

[Roger]

I've driven half a dozen 200s in tournaments already this year; I've yet to see one turn 4000 rpm at 36. Typical is 4000 at 34 and about 4400 at 36  (these were all at sea level in FL).

[Jim]

Thanks Roger, I did not realize the rpm's were that high, I was told 4000 @ 36 which I consider to be too high anyway.

[Chad_Scott]

I drove one this weekend during our six round record tournament. It was a 200 equipped with a 5.7 litre engine. I pulled Chris Parrish, Dave Miller and Ty Oppelander at 36 mph. The boat was turning 4400 rpms @ 36 and 4200rpms@ 34. Boat drives great, high rpms did not seem to effect the scores of those skiing behind the boat. From a driver's standpoint it does sound as though you are screaming down the lake turning those high rpms. But a great driving boat. It does use considerably more fuel than the other two boats pulling the same number of skiers.

[auskier]

Requiring a 6lt 400+HP engine, worse fuel economy and 4000+ rpms to ski at 34 and 36mph is not the direction I think the industry should be taking. Whether you like it or not, it doesnt take a genius to think that much higher gas prices, tighter emission restrictions and carbon taxes are going to happen sooner or later...

[eyepeeler]

Bring back the Response LX...ultimate ski machine and economical.

[Gloersen]

http://www.pcmengines.com/images/engines/zr409_for_web.jpg
When it comes to performance, the new PCM ZR-409 is the flagship of the line-up. Incredibly powerful yet fuel efficient, the ZR-409 is rated at 409 horsepower and when equipped with PCMʼs famous Power Plus 1.23:1 transmission, it makes an incredible 492 foot-pounds of torque. The ZR-409 features PCMʼs new HO exhaust system, has high performance aluminum heads, and is freshwater cooled. The distributorless ignition with platinum tip spark plugs stretches maintenance intervals into years. The serpentine belt system and modular raw water pump make routine maintenance a snap. The stainless steel pump is tough and specially engineered for the demands of the marine environment. 

The ZR-409 is super quiet, incredibly smooth, and provides neck-snapping performance. And for all this power, the ZR6 still runs on standard octane fuel while the competitionʼs high performance engines require premium. 

According to PCM from WSM article: supposedly more fuel efficient than the 343 and about the same weight.

Skied & pulled 180 lb skier SN 200 with 343. Revs to ~4700 rpm before ZO kicks in adequately, then anywhere from 4050 to 4400 range at 34mph with a strong skier.

Hard to imagine fuel economy won't be worse than SN196 with the same motor running much less rpm: we shall see.

For complete specifications and features, click here. 

[Old MS Accout]

The 196 was and still is the ultimate waterski boat. There is not an 07-09 boat for sale out there. If you can find one now, the price is way up.

 

[ScarletArrow]

Bruce - is your prop the new Acme 1868?

[GMC]

Scot - they still make the Response LX, a couple clubs up here just got 2010s.  The 196 was a much greater loss to boat selection though  /vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif 

[Jim]

I've heard enough, my 09 196 will be due for replacement next year and I will ask Correct Craft to dust off the 196 mold and build me another one. Can't imagine the cost of a 200 with the ZR-409.

[eleeski]

C'mon guys, if we want to dust off old molds, the 94 Mastercraft might be the best slalom boat ever - and you could trick behind it. If you must have Correct Craft, the late 90's boats were great (I still love slaloming behind mine). But the 196 is a defective boat for tricks. It was the worst boat to trick behind that ever passed testing. Unless your focus is high end slalom only, avoid the 196. Now the 196s are the most reasonably priced way to get into a ZO boat so picking up a used one makes sense but do not spend extra for the boat.

The older Malibus are very nice to ski behind. The new ones are OK for the skier but just too darn big to trailer, dock, fill with gas and even to fit behind the wheel to drive. Plus despite my limited pulls behind them in slalom, they feel as strong as the MC in the ZO slalom hit.

Part of the nice slalom feel of the 200 is the lack of power available to hammer you when ZO calls for power. The timing is right (whatever letter you choose) but the intensity is muted a bit. There is enough power to still get good times - at sea level. It sounds like Marco needs to have a prop (or gear) to get 5000+ rpm out of the engine to get the same feel at altitude. But underpowering a boat to make the pull right seems like a strange way to engineer a boat.

Perhaps ZO can engineer a more muted throttle response for the MC and Malibu. In slalom mode, command 80% of the available throttle (or whatever number feels right) at the timing selected. An altitude compensation factor might also work (set way below sea level to soften for practice?). If this is what 1 2 3 is supposed to do already, the aren't doing it enough or right for the feel.

The great old hand drivers would gently roll in power nice and early, keep adding power until they had enough and back off quickly when the load disappeared. But I'd take any ZO setting before letting Stan hand drive me!

Eric

[ScarletArrow]

bruce - I couldn't agree more. the only thing i would add is a little more room for the skier to "sit" when idling over to the starting noodle. the hinge issue will be corrected on the 2011 model.

[robscholl-OF]

Skied behind a 200 w/5.7liter this weekend and loved it.  I ran 1st round behind my 05 MalibuLXI with PPSG and ran 3@35.  2nd and 3rd round was behind the 200 at got 2@35 and 3@35 with the A1 setting.  Granted the boat revs like a son of a gun, but skis great with very little noticable ZO "Throttling."  I would buy a 200 tomorrow if I had the money (I don't), but would have to get the 6.0.  We are pretty close to sea level and the boat was having a tough time with getting up and settled by the 55's with the 58K skiers.  Granted BroHo has a fairly short set-up, but I have seen many that are much shorter.  I think a 6.0 is a must if you are ever going to pull a jumper or 58K skier.  Just my two cents..............OF

[eleeski]

Marco, have you tried the jump setting? According to a guy who likes a hard hit, he chooses the jump setting on the 200. He claims this lessens the drag on the hull. The boat runs speeds at much lower RPM and has enough power to give him the firm pull he prefers. The wake is not quite as nice but still OK he claims. 

At elevation where power is reduced, cleaning up the hull (by using the jump setting) might give enough power to pull good 36s. Easy and cheap solution to try.

Eric

[Marco]

Eric- I hadn't even thought of trying the jump setting.  The boat pulls fine at my speed of 34, so I am not really affected.  One thing for sure, the boat skies great and drives even better.  It tracks like a freight train, and the low dash/instrument panel makes for great visibility from the drivers seat.  The only thing I wold have changed is the location of the ZO.  It's a little distracting having to look way right to get times.  I would preferred to have it centered on the left side of the dash. 

The wakes are wide, low and soft.  22 seems to have a bit of a bump, but what boat doesn't?  The wakes at 35 have a rough spot right behind the boat, but it is not noticible while skiing.  I have only noticed it when I am standing behind the boat after missing a buoy.  I haven't been shortening the rope much yet, so I can't really comment on the spray from the skiers perspective.  Hopefully in a few weeks.  Summer has finally arrived!

[ForrestGump]

I skied and drove the 200 for the first time this weekend. Tracks like a freight train. And loud like a freight train. All of the boat crews complained about needing Bose ear phones while driving and judging. LOL 4200rpm at 34 and 4450 at 36.

I don't know if it was because I was tired in the sunday rounds or what. But I didn't like the wake on Sunday. It was awesome on Saturday, even at 22 and 28.  But on Sunday it felt stiff. Had to be me.