Is the cost of new boats really the problem?

[sgregg]

23 hours ago, Dano said:

What is being proposed is a 60k boat that can perform as well or better than  the flagship  models.

The “new” $60K tug already exists if someone wanted to get into the business of buying up old hulls and refurbishing them:

• Used Bubble Back - $15K

• Repower/Trans/ZO - $20K

• New Upholstery - $5K

• Gel Repair/Detailing - $5K

• Misc parts/prop/carpet/rub rail - $5K

• Trailer refurbish - $5K

 

Total:  $55K +/- for a completely refurbished, mint, ZO tug.

 

The pricing for everything that needs to go with the hull just doesn’t leave much room for someone to try and design/manufacture a completely new hull if $60K is the target.

[Mastercrafter]

45 minutes ago, Dano said:

@RAWSki a new prostar weighs in excess of 3300lbs.  My centurion falcon weighs 2500lbs and my boat is full of wood.  Lighter than the prostar  can definitely be done.  I see no reason to be married to a Cat engine.  There are endless options to choose from. 

If you want a new production engine, and if you want  Zero Off, you need a (heavy and expensive) cat engine. 

[Dano]

@Mastercrafter To the best of my knowledge ZO is a product of enovation controls.  Enovation controls makes engine management systems. Seems to me that enovation controls could make an engine management system to suit virtually any engine.  I don't see this as being a hurdle.  I may have misunderstood what you meant by Cat engine. I think you meant catalytic converter not the Cat brand?  Either way it's not he hurdle.

[Horton]

@Dano I do not speak mechanic so let me massively exaggerate. 

You can not simply put ZO on a 1985 carbureted 5.7. 

[ReallyGottaSki]

Interesting.

Absolutely viable if one is doing it for oneself, one can make a smashing boat for very low coin.  I'm building a second now, and a third is staged.

The quandary is,  farming out any services is absolutely budget-busting, no margin left.

IF one can sew, so much better. but even pre-made skins and bulk foam is 5k and rising. more for open  bow.  the hours to just break upholstery down and reinstall is immense.

its easy to put in 400-700 hours to make something impressive, soup to nuts, new boat equivalent.   i recently built one, without repower, for 18 all in, thats boat,trailer,cover, platform, speed control, de-foamed, floor leveled and reinforced, cables, helm, hoses.  Every component scrutinized, replaced or refurbed.  Then, say it was somehow worth 40 to someone after that, thats 'paying me' 30 bucks and hour or so in this 700 manhr case, 😐. pre tax..

55k could make a smashing boat! Unfortunately If one spent 55k to make such a boat we all desire, and one could sell for 60k, thats  10 bucks an hour for 500 hours of work or so. 

Boat 2 will be extensively modified to have mind-melting performance (for what is), and,  will do some things better than 100k+ new boats, including skiing.    challenging myself. 

I concur careful weight control is a major factor and solves multiple parameters. 

However all that said, i'm also not chasing  ZO solutions for myself either.

 

 

 

[Horton]

It is only a matter of time before refurbing boats for profit is going to be less of an oddity. Currently, a few guys are doing it but if new boats get harder and harder to find maybe we will see more refurb shops. 

[Golfguy]

With all due respect, and I think the idea has merit, it does not address the dwindling supply problem. If no, never before existed boats are not produced, eventually the supply will be gone. Once the supply begins to diminish, the cost will approach the  prohibitive level.

[Horton]

@Golfguy Yes if suddenly there were no new boats on the market eventually it would become critical. The question is how long would it take? Every year for the last 50+ years more ski boats have been built than sent to a junkyard. Clearly there is a limit to how old is still viable but there are a lot of boats out there that could be retro fitted. 

How many Ballers have ever sent an old boat to a junk yard? 

[jpwhit]

1 hour ago, Horton said:

It is only a matter of time before refurbing boats for profit is going to be less of an oddity. Currently, a few guys are doing it but if new boats get harder and harder to find maybe we will see more refurb shops. 

https://www.silvercovemarine.com

[Dano]

1 hour ago, Horton said:

@Dano I do not speak mechanic so let me massively exaggerate. 

You can not simply put ZO on a 1985 carbureted 5.7. 

You are correct.  But if you are talking EFI.  basically you have a fuel delivery and ignition system that is controlled by a computer.  E controls is that computer.  ZO is proprietary to econtrols which is why they play nice together.   I'm not an expert but it seems to me that Econtrols is similar to a custom tune or computer for a car and could be adapted to just about any efi engine if they wanted to do so.  Tuners have been building computers to custome tune efi systems for years.  Essentially Econtrols is just that, a customized engine control system.   If you can control your engine with Econtrols you can have ZO.    If you control your engine with anything but Econtrols ZO is no longer an option. 

[jpwhit]

4 hours ago, sgregg said:

• Repower/Trans/ZO - $20K

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. 

[Horton]

@Dano I'm under the impression that anything older than roughly 2008 the fuel delivery systems are incompatible. I think mechanics speak is something like you have to replace the top end of the engine to make those computers work. Something like that.

 

[Dano]

@Horton  I think what you are talking about is the fact that a lot of EFI configurations were throttle body prior to 2008 and were cable throttle's still.  in which case Econtrols is not equipped to control those engines.  DBW became popular around that time and ZO was born.

This conversation is about producing a new boat with a new motor. All I was suggesting is that econtrols could be used to control any modern engine.  We are not limited to ilmore, or PCM.   Marineizing is not that difficult. 

[sgregg]

19 minutes ago, jpwhit said:

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. 

Absolutely true - Skip has a couple 5.7s listed on SIA but the end is certainly near for new 5.7/6.0s.  And then there will be motorbox fit issues to address.  

The point I was trying to make is that $60K for a new boat (or even a re-engined/fully refurbished one) is a tough price target to meet.

[jpwhit]

21 minutes ago, Dano said:

@Horton  I think what you are talking about is the fact that a lot of EFI configurations were throttle body prior to 2008 and were cable throttle's still.  in which case Econtrols is not equipped to control those engines.  DBW became popular around that time and ZO was born.

This conversation is about producing a new boat with a new motor. All I was suggesting is that econtrols could be used to control any modern engine.  We are not limited to ilmore, or PCM.   Marineizing is not that difficult. 

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. 

[Interjon]

1 hour ago, jpwhit said:

https://www.silvercovemarine.com

Jeff there does great work.  I bought a totally refurbished 196 from him last year. 

[Dano]

@jpwhit I understand this aspect of it.  Econtrols has our sport held hostage until another speed control exists.

[NautiqueJeff]

Thanks for the kind words about Silver Cove Marine.  I'm always happy to help keep these great machines on the water.  

[Jody_Seal]

2 hours ago, jpwhit said:

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. 

in some cases a e-control ecm can be less price wise then a older mefi 4. just ordered one for a 19 6.0.

I have done some digging on components and this little gem is $250 used. and that's the larger white component shown in this cut away of the gps single reciever . is the actual antenna so to speak.

[RAWSki]

On 3/1/2024 at 4:59 PM, Dano said:

@jpwhit I understand this aspect of it.  Econtrols has our sport held hostage until another speed control exists.

@Dano AWSA has a history of "getting in bed" with a single speed control provider, FIrst Perfect Pass and now ZeroOff.   

Don't hold your breath..... 

[Horton]

@RAWSki 

10 minutes ago, RAWSki said:

AWSA has a history of "getting in bed" with a single speed control provider, FIrst Perfect Pass and now ZeroOff.   

I do not think this is accurate. In the case of Perfect Pass they dominated by being the best system at the time. ZO drove PP out of the market with patent law. A few other companies tried to get into the market. If Accuski or Medallion had a better systems we would have used them. I skied with the Medallion system once and was impressed. What I heard was that they could not get jump to work and gave up.

[RAWSki]

42 minutes ago, Horton said:

@RAWSki 

 If Accuski or Medallion had  better systems we would have used them. 

@Horton have to agree to disagree.  2001 is a long time ago and it's all history at this point. 

 

[Dano]

PP DBW systems are very good.  I think ZO loses their ability to keep PP on the outside in the next couple of years.  Will be interesting to see if PP competes for the business. 

[Horton]

My understanding is there was a court settlement where a perfect pass agreed to not supply speed control to any new boats as OEM equipment

[Dano]

1 hour ago, Horton said:

My understanding is there was a court settlement where a perfect pass agreed to not supply speed control to any new boats as OEM equipment

From the thread titled "why can pp not be like ZO"   seems the patent expires in 2027 noted by MattP.   I see the date listed on that page as being 2025-05-08.  but I can't see how to read more about it?  I'm not sure if that changes anything but it seems like it could open the door.

 

 

[jpwhit]

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?

[spud]

Econtrols almost impossible to deal with / get any answers help from....

PerfectPass cant help customers enough and willing to spend time working out skiers issues.

[morfoot]

On 3/1/2024 at 2:20 PM, Horton said:

 

How many Ballers have ever sent an old boat to a junk yard? 

No, but I did repurpose one!!

 

 

[ReallyGottaSki]

One consideration in the future that  i don't see a good solution to is, no matter how complete, functional and aesthetic a refurb or restoration is , and these later models age, if the boat has a glass cockpit with a system that is nla or 10 thousand+ to replace, very few buyers will take on that liability without a deep warrantee for something so fragile and too quickly unsupported by factory

The result could be discounting the boat and quickly finding the refurb business model unviable.

[On_edge]

My understanding of the legal agreement was PerfectPass would not sell to new boats with an Econtrols ECM. The PerfectPass DBW system works with GM Delco MEFI4 ECMs, pre 2009 Econtrol ECMs and any ECM that accepts an analog control input including Yamaha jet boats and some Yamaha outboards. A responsive boat with PP and the Zbox perhaps could be as close to a 2024 ProStar as a 2024 SN 200 is.

[S1Pitts]

7 hours ago, spud said:

Econtrols almost impossible to deal with / get any answers help from....

PerfectPass cant help customers enough and willing to spend time working out skiers issues.

@spud nailed it. I have had PP send me mechanical parts N/C to help me keep my SG/Zbox install running at a level I am happy with. Their customer service is second to none. Perhaps they are building a loyal customer base for something coming down the road? Who knows.

2 hours ago, ReallyGottaSki said:

One consideration in the future that  i don't see a good solution to is, no matter how complete, functional and aesthetic a refurb or restoration is , and these later models age, if the boat has a glass cockpit with a system that is nla or 10 thousand+ to replace, very few buyers will take on that liability without a deep warrantee for something so fragile and too quickly unsupported by factory

The result could be discounting the boat and quickly finding the refurb business model unviable.

 @ReallyGottaSki has a solid point.  I will keep investing in my 97 BB as my main tug because for now I need a boat and if I am being honest, I would not ski any better behind a newer hull.

I can get a lot of maintenance/updates/refurbishing done to the 97 for a fraction of the cost of upgrading to a new hull.  The "glass dash" is my primary reason for not even considering it. There is virtually not one part of the 97 I cannot service/repair or update myself.