jpwhit

One possible cause is the ECM firmware in your PCM EX343 isn't the correct version needed by your Zero Off.

I would happily buy my club's boat if it fit a personal need. Our club knows that we all depend on the reliability of the club boat and we're highly motivated to maintain it meticulously. It gets it oil changes right on the 50 hr mark w/o exception and any other small issues are taken care of quickly so they don't turn into bigger issues. For example, it started to show some issues with the original 40a transmission 2 seasons ago. Within 5 days, it had a brand new upgraded 80a trans installed w/ new damper plate and larger upgraded trans cooler.

Wow, if folks would put as much effort into solving whatever issues are limiting their skiing situation as complaining on threads like this every year.... The sport isn't dying, it's just changing. Boat prices aren't the primary cause of any significant issue with the sport. It's clear now ZO is a net benefit to the sport overall, but yes we had to get through a rough transition period.... My personal philosophy, stop looking backwards at excuses for how you ended up in a less desirable circumstance than you desire. Put your efforts towards working towards the situation you desire for your skiing and life in general. The only thing you can truly control 100% is your own thoughts and actions. Now time to slip on my Kevlar suit. And like virtually anything posted on a public forum, this is just my opinion.

@XH2Oskier thanks for the useful info. Like I said no personal experience and I know there is always a lot of info floating around the web that is less than accurate.

No personal experience with Optima, but the word on the street is that their good reputation was built by the original company. Now that Optima has been acquired by Johnson Controls, the reputation is no longer justified...

I think I recall seeing total power as calculated by the ECM in DIACOM. But if your point is do we really need the power of the larger engine options, I think it's less about absolute max power as opposed to how quickly the larger engines can respond to changes in demand almost instantly. So at any particular RPM, the more torque that can applied almost instantly is what really matters. So maybe what's most interesting is the largest throttle body open percentage during various skiing related activities. I would suspect that would be with Jump. And I seriously doubt it'll ever be 100% for the simple fact that it takes time to open the actuator. But 70% open on a smaller engine will generate less torque than 70% open on a larger engine. And just because you open the throttle body quickly, doesn't mean there isn't time involved in the airflow ramping up....

That definition would apply to ski boats with a balance or trick water tank such as the latest Nautique and ProStar.

@h2onhk you are correct. The EX series PCM engines self adjust the timing. But the CAM Retard has to be in the correct range and that has to be set using DIACOM. @MDB1056 our club's 196 developed the same slow out of the hole issue years ago. It ran great otherwise. Turned out to be a faulty knock sensor. Hole shot was night and day different before and after the repair.

As with any boat issue, you can go about it in two ways. You can guess and start throwing parts at the problem. The other approach is to systematically debug the problem and then replace what is proven to be broken. I'm not passing judgement on which approach, and sometimes it makes sense to do some amount of replacing parts and then switch to systematic diagnosis. If things like rotor, cap, plug wires, plugs, and inline fuel filter are due anyway you may as well do that as a first step. Personally, I wouldn't go beyond that on the swapping parts approach because it's slippery slope and next thing you know you've spent a lot of time and money and it would have been cheaper to pay a good shop to find and fix the problem. You can do some of that systematic diagnosis with reasonably priced specialized tools such as fuel pressure gauge and compression tester. To really do a full systematic approach for a problem like this, you need some form of marine diagnostics software. Rhinda Technologies DIACOM or TechMate is the only fully turnkey solution for boats. Boats use the same J1939 diagnostics protocol as commercial Trucks and heavy equipment. You can get some much cheaper code readers intended for heavy equipment, but to make that work you have to wire up your own connectors. And the number of capabilities varies a lot between those solutions. Some just read fault codes and others can do more advanced capabilities like show live data from the engine. The number of things that can cause slow hole shot is quite long. Besides the things mentioned here, you have knock sensors, temp sensors, timing, injector flow rates, etc ......

Like @blagrata, one of my daughters talked to her eye doctor about the issue she was having with her contact getting washed out or knock out of place while skiing. I don't know the details but they suggested and helped her get a special version that's suppose to resist being washed out. She's had very good luck with them and hardly ever has an issue anymore.

We just had them stocked in our ski lake to control hydrilla. I can let you know in about 6 months......

Where did the wave heights come from? Did you make some measurement? They don't seem to match my impression of the various wave heights I see at my dock.

The "Why?" IMO is Momentum. The momentum needed to move the pendulum to the point where the skier is advancing on the boat.

@Horton is there a purpose behind these polls on the amount of money spent on Docks and Boating accessories other than it's just a winter distraction? Is this perhaps related to justifying the market for advertising on the site? Or is this data that can be sold to help fund the site?

In simple terms, there are a lot of factors that contribute to GPS error and therefore limit accuracy, but the errors tend to be consistent over a fairly small geographic area. The purpose of the base station is to essentially create a real time way to measure these inaccuracies. That's accomplished because the base station must be stationary at a known set of coordinates. You simply compare the coordinates being reported by a GPS receiver at the base station location with the known position of the base station and you get a reading of the error at that exact point of time at that exact location. By sending these real time measurements of the errors from the base station to the rover, and making the assumption that the error at the rover location will be exactly the same as at the base station, you can use the data from the rover to "correct" the errors at the rover. This results in a highly accurate position reading calculated by the system at the rover. The further the rover is from the base station, the less true the assumption that the error at the base and rover are exactly the same becomes. Hence, the accuracy of the position computed at the rover decreases by an equal amount. So, when someone says a base station within 25 miles is good enough, they are assuming a certain accuracy for "typical applications" is good enough. What really matters in this case is precisely how much accuracy is required by Sure Path to be useful. And that in itself may be a somewhat subjective question. Of course, the more accurate the better. Another way to think about it, when Sure Path says you deviated off the centerline by x amount. Some of x is how much you were actually off, and some amount is GPS inaccuracy.

I think you missed what is likely the most important suggestion. Which is to get as much weight out of the boat as possible. Especially weight in the back. For example, if you have people riding in the boat, it would be much better to have them move to the bow than to add additional weight to the bow while you are skiing. Assuming the fuel tank is in the back, don't carry more fuel than you need. This may not be a very practical suggestion, but if you don't need the tower, and it is removable, take it off.

I can certainly understand the technical challenges with course width. Small changes in the angle of the launcher will have a pretty significant effect on course width. I assume this will mean you'll have to do a calibration pretty much any time you start a session when there is any change in the distribution of weight in the boat. I'm also assuming that changes in wind direction and speed will change the course width as well. Having the option to do six pass set without reloading would be pretty important for me. But I think I'd need a solution that works with a bimini. At the moment, I ski at a private ski lake more than half the time. And I sink and float a ski course at my lake house. My interest would be for an easier solution at the lake house. But since I ski at a nice permanent course on a private lake, I think my standards are likely on the high side for the intentions of this product. And when I factor in the reloading and having to do a lot of width calibration, its not clear this will end up being less work. Maybe the reality is I'm not the target user for this product. I guess that's really been stated already. The target user is a more casual skier that has no access to a traditional course.

How often do the 12g CO2 cartridges need to be replaced? How many balls does it hold? Can you complete a standard set of 6 passes without having to replenish co2 or balls?

Thanks for the answers, just what I needed.

I understand the Titanium Pro is the higher end wetsuit and offers the maximum flexibility and very good warmth. But I get the impression that the Blacktec 2.0 is actually the warmer of the two at the tradeoff of flexibility. Is that correct? Which is the warmest?

The metal hub molded into the impeller doesn't go all the way to the front and back of the impeller. This is what I use. If you put it all the way in and clamp the jaws down really tight, the jaws will push through the rubber and grab onto the hub.

Seems like @Horton started this thread so folks would think about the business realities of why you're not likely to see skiing on ESPN. But if feels like there are two completely different topics at play here that are being intermingled. If the skiing community wants access to be able to see the events for their own personal enjoyment, then I think streaming is the clear answer. If the skiing community wants to see skiing events on mainstream media for the purpose of promoting and growing the sport, then I personally think this is pragmatically an unrealistic way to promote the sport in this day and age. Myself, I put my energies into teaching young people to ski the course this year. Some friends and I got a course setup on a large public lake this year. Anytime a boat came by and watched or looked like they had interest in the course we'd drive over and talk to them. Over the course of the summer, we ended up getting 7 different teenage kids to start coming out to join us and to start learning to ski the course. 4 of them had never even slalomed before this summer and 3 of the 4 are already running the mini course. We have 1 family that has sold their wake/surf boat and bought a ski boat instead. And there are 2 other families looking to do the same.... I still really enjoy skiing at my private ski club lake, but I now equally enjoy being out on the public lake teaching new people to ski the course.

I suspect you just needed a better quality puller that grabbed the hub instead of the rubber part of the impeller. Which puller do you have?

I can see that there are ad agencies and businesses that would be willing to buy ads during Cornhole broadcasts. Part of what creates demands for business to buy ads, is being about to get their heads around the demographics of who would be watching the broadcasting. I bet Ad agencies can get their heads around the demographics of the viewers of Cornhole. I bet similarly, they have no idea for competitive water skiing.

The idea of having a section floating off the bottom may work well at some lakes, but at our lake we have to keep the course sunk completely to the bottom to keep the course from being snagged and subsequently damaged by fishermen. We actually had to add additional weights to the mainline in places to keep it all the way on the bottom. Before we did that, we'd come out much too often and find the course either cut or damaged by fishermen. I don't think the fishermen are doing it out of malice, they just simply don't understand that when they snag a rope laying in the lake, that it's not just junk in the lake that fine to cut to untangle their gear from. Just sharing my experience, if your lake doesn't have an active fishing community, then this may work quite well. Our course is in a cove, so we just use a couple of pieces vinyl coated SS cables going from the pre-gate diamonds to a tree on shore at each end of the course. The SS cable is good because it self-sinks and it isn't very visible. We actually have 2 courses in different locations that we use based on water level. One course is all SS and the other has a poly mainline. I also ski at a private lake / club when I'm at my main house. Makes you really appreciate being able to just show up and ski. At the Lake House, a group of us use the sunken course, but it's really not bad at all once you get a good system figured out.... And now that we've realized we have to keep it completely on the bottom, we rarely have to deal with damage to the course.