Dano

I use radar screws, they still come loose. typically the 2 rear most screws on the front binding and the 2 forward most screws on the rear. I ski 2 sets in a morning session. I check them before I leave the house every time. Not a big deal. On the plus side it's an opportunity to check over your equipment before every set. I think that's good practice.

My understanding is that it operates on a sine wave. So if the response is stronger for longer it’s because it has allowed the boat spend more time below the set speed. Which would give it the ability to respond stronger for longer and still keep times.

I’m using an HRT. I never think about it, how it fits, or how it performs. I think that means it’s pretty good. Comfortable, secure, yet does not limit movement. 3 seasons on it now, the only change i plan to make is to mount it up behind a Tfactor.

Test to see if there is an amp draw. Here is how to do it. If there is no draw your battery is likely toast. http://testmeterpro.com/parasitic-draw-test-with-a-multimeter/

Thanks @Windsurfnut I'll give that try. I was thinking similar, but was going to try a lowering ball 1 setting a little to see if that will bring the 0 time segment to .00. I expect to have to then raise B3 slightly. Overall I think it's getting very close Just a little more tuning and I should have it locked in. If anybody is still following this thread my boat is an 89 falcon 351w carbed. OJ CNC prop which was a huge performance gain, electronic ignition and stainless exhaust pipes (I was surprised at the performance gain of the pipes). It runs really good for what it is. KX is set to ++ and i'm running a pretty high Zbox setting of 17. Short set ups don't seem to be an issue, locks onto set speed and settles in right away. It's not ZO but I mean it's a pretty good pull with this setup. I did notice that using B2+ has different background settings and it did run pretty decent ball times right out of the box with no runaway thru the middle of the course. So if you don't want to mess with tuning you can always give that a try. I opted to tune because I wanted a stronger response from Zbox to see if I could get it feeling closer to ZO, and because I just can't seem to leave "good enough" alone.

I’m getting pretty decent ball times but overall is a little slow. I think it’s slowing ball 6 to gates a little too much?

If I could somehow have the speed of the 2015 vapor, the consistency of the R2, and the “insane fun factor” of the c65. That may be my perfect mix of ski traits. “Insane fun factor” of the c65 is referring to the fact that on that ski I could get all out of shape, still round all six, and still have no idea what just happened. It was both fun, and frightening.

I think I have a good understanding of perfect pass and how it works/responds. I am not at all familiar with ZO aside from the fact that i have to ski it at tournaments. PP seams to assume that there will be some speed variation and takes inputs from a GPS, accelerometer, RPM, and individual ball timing, to respond to skier inputs. In doing so it seems like it produces a pull that is more forgiving as it's response may not be as immediate. first skier acts, PP responds, and may look to correct further if the timing segment was slow or fast essentially spreading out the response time. This system may be easier for a skier to work with than how ZO responds. I'm not sure if PP is more intuitive as to where the skier is in the course and when it can throttle without punishing the skier or if that is just a function of it's ability to respond quickly. Am I right in that ZO simply reacts very quickly to any speed variation. So if a skier slows the boat at all ZO will respond aggressively to not only get back to set speed but also to make up for the lost time ASAP, maybe at all costs regardless of where skier may be in the course? I know from experience that once one falls out of rythm with ZO It's like being in the ring with Mike Tyson. Does ZO give individual ball times like PP. or does it just show overall? For the record I ski PP on an old boat. When I ski tournaments i generally run the same ball count. The difference is that with PP I can get out of shape and fight and pull and lean and get out the gates. With ZO if it gets scrappy it gets real ugly. I fully regret arguing with ZO every time it happens.

@Drago ya both of those are intriguing too along with sanger, Supra, American skier . My point was some of the 90's boats were super cool but it was the 90's and they were built on the cheap and they really didn't differentiate much as far as power plants go. Maybe with some current technology and some upgrades to props and tracking fins etc...those hulls could be really cool.

I know this idea won't get a lot of love. If he's looking for different. I'd love to see a repower of mid 90's Tige, Brendella, Centurion, or other.... really any boat that skied well. I know how one of those boats skied, I know the motor wasn't super powered, the tracking wasn't great, the spray seems fine at least to -38, and I know the wakes are just fine. A few years back MC seemingly just added some additional tracking fins to help their tracking, maybe doing the same could help some of these older boats? I know thats overly simplified explanation of what MC did..... it's just an idea. We all know how much love the SN196 has. It was a good boat new, it's a good boat repowered, it's been done before multiple times.

@Horton If you are referring to older versions of PP on boats that are not running well, or propped well. I would agree with you. But the latest DBW versions of PP on a good running boat are very good. It’s not ZO but it’s very close. Even boats using the servo throttle control can be tuned to work quite well. I do ski tournaments, I run the same buoys behind ZO as I do behind my old 89 Centurion with stargazer zbox. Maybe it’s different for guys running -38 or shorter but for me PP is an acceptable practice boat. For a project like this one here I think PP might be his best option when trying to make it work with an aftermarket EFI system.

DBW upgrade kits are listed on their website.

Hopefully insurance covers it. It’s probably fixable by any autobody shop that has a frame machine. That will get the frame rails straight again. Then just make sure that messing with the frame hasn’t changed your axle alignment and it should be good to go.

Pretty sure PP has a DBW option as well. If you know what EFI system you are going to install and understand how the parts and programming work. I’d think it would be possible. You might have to talk to PP directly to work it out. They are very knowledgeable and helpful. I have several friends using PP dbw systems and they work very well. In my opinion they are very close to zo.

I think the OP's original post was just pointing out that it was super cool to see a brand new DD being offered at nearly half the price of others. Proving a boat can be brought to market at that price point. The post was not about the hull design, or weather or not the boat can compete with MC or Nautique. Simply that the boat has all the basics of a new tournament boat as far as Engine and ZO goes so what exactly is costing the additional 75k for a new tournament boat? Jody Seal has already pointed out some of the hidden costs and that is fair. I'm not trying to take anything away from the current manufacturers. The big 3 have established themselves as the pemium ski boats, the best of the best. They deserve their dollars. But just as Ferrari can exist, so can a corvette.

@dave2ball you missed the point entirely. We can choose to disagree. I'm good with that.

@dave2ball Selling out of limited production is not the same as high demand. By the way nobody is suggesting MC or Nautique should change their price or business model. it works for them. The fact that this topic exists and pops up on an annual basis suggests there is a desire for something different that has not been marketed before in a meaningful way (as noted in previous posts). The Sanger price point is certainly proving it can be built. I think that is good for the market as a whole. I fully encourage you to shell out your cash for the current offerings, the market needs people like you too.

@dave2ball From a business point perhaps creating a cheaper boat to sell more numbers is just working harder to earn the same profits. I get it, It's probably not in their best interests. I'm suggesting that without a legitimate alternative in the market place there is no anchor to keep the competition honest. Google says prices in 2016, base price of a CP was $49,000. A prostar was roughly $58,800 a 2023 prostar base price is $95,000.00. That's a 63% price increase in 7 years for what is essentially the same hull. As a consumer I feel like that's price gouging. It's no coincidence that prices increased significantly with the death of the CP. Covid and supply chains played a roll i'm sure but not the tune of 63%. A healthy market has more than 2 or 3 players especially when all 3 are playing the same game. It doesn't create healthy competition, it creates inflated used boat prices as well. For that reason I would welcome any manufacturer that can create a truly affordable option and be the outlier. The CP being 10k cheaper than the pro star was not a serious shot at selling a bare bones stripped down affordable boat for the reasons @swc5150 has already noted.

@Broussard Malibu is not MC or Nautique. Nothing against Malibu but they do not have the same following. The 90’s were a time when boats were reasonably priced to start with and the top of the line boats were already providing minimal luxuries, I wouldn’t think a stripped down version of those would sell. I get the point you are making but to date I don’t think there has been any effort by the big 2 to create such an offering. It goes against their business profiles of being the builders of the best boats in the industry. The CP was a really good offering but it was built by the wrong brand to gain serious traction. @dave2ball if MC or Nautique offered the exact same hulls without the fluff and extras, at significantly reduced cost. You think those wouldn’t sell? I guess that’s what the used market is for. But still it’s never been tried.

@Horton. I would be willing to bet if MC, or Nautique put a stripped down bare bones boat out at a significantly reduced price they will sell a lot more boats. It seems the consumer in this industry is brand loyal to the extremes. So any brand outside of those 2 really is not given much of a chance for success. the Sanger likely is never used in a tournament or as a club boat simply because it’s not made by the noted manufacturers. Doesn’t matter how good it performs.

My x series has been my favourite rope. It just feels good right out of the box. I’ve got a full season on it and it still feels and looks great. My slines handle is fantastic too. Customer service at Slines is top notch as well. I know where my next rope and handle is coming from already. Syndicates ropes and handles are a good quality at a value price. If you like black ropes with little stretch they are a great option. ML’s price point is beyond what I’m willing to pay. Can’t complain about their quality though.

@Jibbo thanks. I did not know that was an option and it does work

I have wakeye and my camera mount all set up and working quite well. I have to use the Selfie camera on the iphone because of vibration on the other lense. Problem is that the image appears mirrored when using the wakeye app. If a take a video in the native camera app the videos are normal like they are suppose to be. Does anybody have a solution for this?

Both A PB is a PB, state your best score. if you ski tournaments, a tournament PB may hold more meaning to you as that is where you have set the goal posts. Not everybody skis tournaments so practice PB's are their standard. I don't really get the concern of it being tournament PB or practice PB. It's just an indication of what your hardest pass is. If you can do it in practice it's just a matter of time before you do it in a tournament. Personally I think all skiers at all levels are awesome.

You may have to do some measuring. Ski Boat parts online shows several Tige struts. with a little measuring you should be able to determine which one you need. Take your old strut off mock up your propshaft to be the correct position with prop on. take some measurements from hull to shaft. keep in mind the end of the strut should leave roughly 3/4" gap between prop hub and the end of the strut. With a little measuring you should be able to determine the proper angle you need and match the dimensions to what is available. https://skiboatpartsonline.com/index.php?route=product/search&search=strut