Took first ride behind a 5.3 w/ single puck yesterday

[MISkier]

@ALPJr, they will ask you for a setting. If you don't know or don't have a preference, drivers usually set you on B2.

 

You can change settings on each pass in your round, if you want. That way, you are not stuck with a setting you don't like. But, that can get to be an issue, too, if you are adjusting each pass to a new pull.

 

Welcome back to tournament skiing.

[Moskier3ev]

Horton we have a 5.3 in our area that is really hard. But my neighbor just got a new 6.2 I have gone back and forth between it and my 15 CP 6ltr A2 (no worries) feels good.

 

Jeff Lindsey

[Razorskier1]

@Drago -- I get it, but to me it is just like ski design. There are more M3, M4 and M5 skiers than any other group. It would seem that if you wanted to sell boats, you'd want to make that group of skiers happy. Same applies to skis. Build something that a bunch of us average guys can ski well on, and you will sell more skis.

[A_B]

Skied on new 5.3 single tonight. Didn't make my opening 28 after 5 tries. Got to 5 ball at best. I'm a big guy normally ski A1+ and haven't missed a 28 in past month. Felt totally out of sync and I also thought the wake table /wash was more noticeable. Had been skiing a 2014 and our 2007 dual pucks. Even had an OTF out of my onside turn. Felt like the lake gremlin grabbed my ski and didn't let go. Hadn't done that in like 100 years.

 

Thoughts for A1+? Didn't ski a second round due to time, but was planning to go out at B2. The two guys I was skiing with both also struggled. One normally runs 35 and the other 38.

[MISkier]

I also skied the 5.3 single puck tonight. On my opener, I felt almost thrown forward at the wake through my gate shot - it seemed strong at that particular moment. I don't know if that was the single puck or the 5.3 or the different wake or a combination of those, but I also felt like it was on me more into one ball. The rest of the pass did not feel too bad.

 

I adjusted after that opener, which I did run. But it is important to note that today was my first day transitioning from my late season 36 mph tournaments back to 34 mph to finish the last tournament of the season. So, I was accustomed to more speed and boat strength. I think it's different, but I didn't change my setting. I skied about to my average.

 

I'd like to get more exposure to it. I'm assuming the next year's boats across all manufacturers will have it and I will see more.

[The_MS]

@A_B Just move the letter and not the number. Try B1+ and C1+

 

[A_B]

It is now in the stable of boats that I ski behind so will give B1+ a try next round.

I was surprised by the reduction in floor space as well. That is a big motor box!

 

Just felt like I was out of sync the whole set.

 

 

[MISkier]

I agree with @A_B on the out of sync feeling. C2 didn't feel like C2 usually does. It felt that it was on me more into the buoy and not there for me as soon after the buoy. I felt I was waiting more to hookup so that it was ready to support me. If I got extra aggressive in snapping a turn, I needed to be more patient than usual C2 before loading. It was different.

[The_MS]

Your looking to sync back to what feels good so by moving the letter you will get a different pick up point. You want to leave the length of the acceleration (number) the same.

[MISkier]

@MS, how could I get an earlier pickup point, when I am already on C? Going to A would make me wait even longer. Same with B. Both of those are later in pickup and would also be on me longer into the buoy than C already is, which I don't want either.

[A_B]

Was gong to ask the same. One of my friends is B2 and the other is C1/2

[DanE]

While you' re comparing letters and numbers between boats make sure the pylon is tightened and solid. A loose pylon will throw everything you know about ZO out the window.

[The_MS]

If your at C already, I would try B then A.

[MISkier]

My theory on the difference (at least for the C setting) with the 5.3 and single puck is this:

 

1. The single puck is more responsive with the new sampling rate. Therefore, you do not pull the boat down as much going into the buoy (i.e., feels like it is "on you" longer). That is, the boat is able to keep pace with your load and adjust as you pull through the wake and you do not break free of it like you previously did.

2. Since you didn't pull the boat down as much going into the buoy, it does not need to accelerate as much after the buoy to return to speed (i.e., feels like it is "not there for you" soon enough). It is maintaining better speed and you are turning into it while it is already still at speed, with no need for extra acceleration to recover. You expect it to pull more than it does, but it no longer needs to.

3. The 5.3 engine makes this even more pronounced, since it is strong and with direct injection is also more responsive when the more responsive single puck ZO asks for more. Thus, it is able to help prevent you from pulling the boat down by shortening the recovery period for each fluctuation in speed.

 

I don't know how the + figures in here, but maybe the addition of the + would bring back some of the speed we believe we are missing. It would have a hot gate and let you pull down the boat going into one ball? Then, it would be a hotter pull throughout and would allow more fluctuation, as you are not actually able to pull the boat down? Perhaps the move from C2 is to B2+?

[DanE]

As for different engines " responsiveness" direct injected or not remember that you do not have a mechanical connection between the accelerator lever and throttle anymore, it' s all electronics now. Wich is why, assuming the engine has adequate power the responsiveness is in the hands of the programmers settimg the ECU up.

Since all engine options is strong enough to maintain slalom speed it really comes down to gear reduction, prop of choice and ZO software.

[thager]

@MISkier Trying to make logic work doesn't always work with ZO. I normally ski C1 but B1 worked was nice behind the 5.3

[A_B]

I thought the RPM's sounded higher so wonder if a stiffer pitch prop would provide more bite and tone down the revving?

 

My offside lean is not where it use to be, so hold longer into my onside turn, and that is when the boat yanked me out the front. Didn't have my hand back to the handle and it was accelerating hard and with the Vice glove, I was yanked OTF. Cannot remember last time that happened, if ever.

 

I will try some different settings next few times to figure it out. But A1+ worked on our 2007 and the 2014 that I ski on. Felt the same. This one isn't close. I am also 260+ lbs.

[brettmainer]

Reading all of these postings, I have to wonder if there are problems with individual boats. My 5.3 2016 promo 200 is awesome to ski behind. 185hrs, at least 100 different skiers have skied behind it. Zero complaints. Skis the same as last year's boat but is more fuel efficient and quieter. I am 180lbs, have a PB of 3@39 and ski C2. Most of the guys I ski with behind the boat use C2 as well.

[lpskier]

So following up on my last post, I hear the base motor on the 17 200 will be the 6.0, but that the 5.3 and 6.2 motors will be exclusively used in tournaments, which I take to mean that the stock 6.0 motor won't be used in the boat tests. So, if you want a tournament capable 200 ( in other words, if you want to practice behind what you will compete behind) you have to buy an upgraded engine. Said differently, the base Nautique will not be a tournament tow boat. WTF?

[dave2ball]

@lpskier That doesn't mean the 6.0 won't be an approved tow boat. It means that the promo boats/members are required to have the upgrades 5.3 or 6.2

[Jody_Seal]

@OB1

Differences are the first series LS -ZR6 engines were non cat and rated at 390 hp. The next gen had a cam phaser device that allowed for variable timing and the engine has catalytic converters along with more robust programing in the ECM. so there are actually physical differences between the different hp rated engines.

[bkreis]

@lpskier same as 2015/2016, bas was 5.7, 5.3 was upgrade. They must have a few, lol, 6.0 blocks leftover

[Andre]

Are the rpms @ 34.2 as high with the 5.3 as with the 5.7 ?

[DanE]

@Jody_Seal What about the 6.0 that is labeled 409 hp? Varable valve timing and different programming as well?

[dave2ball]

@Andre no the RPMS are not. The are about the same as the 6.0L.

[A_B]

The RPMs were around 3900 for for 34.2.

I went from A1+ to B1+ and felt a ton better in sync. May try C1+ next round.

 

I like the plus for whatever reason. The extra bump at gates is not a big deal due to it being my onside lean and I find the boat stays off me at one ball. Maybe it's that I am 260+ and pull hard through the gates, but regular settings were taking rope away from me too soon at one ball.

[wtrskior]

I ski b2 usually but go to c1 on the 5.3 nautique fwiw. I've found the limited rides I've had behind it, it stays on you longer out to the buoy than either the 5.7 or 6.0, which has made it more difficult for me to stay connected and let the ski cast out.

[A_B]

The official word from a pro skier who will remain nameless is that there is a slight delay in picking you up at the buoy. So go up a letter or if at C try number up.

 

That explains why I died at 2 ball and then went OTF.

[acmx]

Does anyone know if the 5.3 boats you thought were harsh had the LINK system with built in ZO or standard gauges with separate ZO ?

[MISkier]

The one 5.3 I thought was different was with separate, not integrated ZO.

[dave2ball]

The ZO is no different from a team boat or a std edition. The boat will have the same pull. The only thing the link system has is ZO Is in the screen

[LeonL]

So Dave, all the software is the same? It would seem that there would have to be some software change somewhere, or does the LINK just translate and assign screen positions for display?

[acmx]

@Jody_Seal , care to chime in?

[MISkier]

It is my understanding that the actual pull characteristics are programmed into the eControls ECU and the display (integrated or not) interacts with the ECU via the CAN. I think the interface the ECU exposes is the same and the available methods are merely called by the display, which has its own programming to present the interaction to the user. So, the look and feel of the screen will vary, but the underpinnings affecting pull don't.

[acmx]

Reason I'm asking is I'm thinking about ordering a standard edition but have only skied LINK system. So am hoping @dave2ball is correct.

[Roger]

The accelerometers are different between the LINK version and the standard version due to the standard version being installed at an angle to the center-line of the hull. I know when the 200 first came out that if someone accidentally installed a standard unit for a 196 in a 200, it caused all sorts of problems with the pull (no doubt not just the accelerometer difference). I doubt that happens these days (at least from the factory).

[dave2ball]

@LeonL yes. To my knowledge the software is the same. There may be slight difference in the hardware due to the angle of the head in the std edition. I have skied behind both team edition and std edition and I have not felt any differences.

[Jody_Seal]

 

No comment!!

 

[acmx]

Come on @Jody_Seal ,speak to us!

[mbabiash]

I've been told by a nautique sponsored pro skier to not buy a 2016 with either engine because the ECU on both have quirks to work out.

I was told to go with a 15 6.0.

[The_MS]

Hell of a way to treat your sponsor.

[Jody_Seal]

Someone asked but I got nothing. We had a 5.3 linc at Lake 38 2 weeks ago it performed very well, as expected from a 200 nautique. Most all my experience is with the 6.2 power. I have not heard or experienced any differences between linc and standard display. Me and krusty thinks it is all in someone's head and may have preconceived notions! ???

[MISkier]

This summer, I skied a 2015 200 at our State tournament and equaled my PB. I also skied a 2016 200 with the 5.3 in a tournament and in practice. The 2015 felt normal to me. The 2016 felt different and I struggled with it. Maybe we didn't get the latest ECM in the 2016 that was here, but it was definitely a change from the 2015. Not in my head.

[Zman]

There was a 2016 SN with 5.3 engine at the Lake 38 August Record and everyone seemed to like it, especially one high level men's pro skier. It had a 4 blade prop if that matters. Not sure if it was single puck or not, maybe @Jody_Seal can comment.

[bkreis]

the 5.3 and 6.2 feel very different from 5.7..less rpm swing possibly..i love my 5.3, the pull feels so much more consistant.. @MISkier the 2015 did not have a 5.3 or 6.2, so it would feel different..if it was a 5.7, very different, if it was 6L, that's closer to the 5.3 by feel

[A_B]

I have been around the block a few times, so pretty sure the 2016 5.3 was different than the two 2007's and the 2014 that I have skied all my passes with. The Big Dawg skier in our group who rarely misses 38 ran some sloppy 35's and was only mid-38 behind the 2016 5.3. That seems significant to me.

[skiinxs]

I spent a lot of time this summer behind my past 2016 6.2. To me it felt pretty much like all of my past 6.0's after going down a letter on ZO. It was a LINC boat. Everyone skied very well in the 10 tournaments I pulled with it, many pretty well at or better than their PB's. I had zero complaints while in the boat or at any other times in the tournaments. There were lots of "Thanks for bring the boat" and "Boat felt great" comments. I did not drive or ski any base models, so can't comment on if the pull is any different. I do know that the head units are marked as "angle mount" for the 200 if a LINC is not used. The LINC boats do have a head unit (referred to as a "dongle") under the dash, so I would think that the two are pretty well identical. Maybe this discussions was caused by a non-angle mount head unit installed in an angle-mount application or a dongle not installed correctly?