elr

I think the 10k+ difference between the alternative is whats key in the ZO 196 market. Additionally, I think that 30k including taxes, delivery, etc. is a hard point with alot of buyers.

Roger, I'm sure you optimized your intrinsic value, warranty does play a role and folks value it differently. A new boat w/ full warranty implies a different value calculus and would compete against different offerings e.g. zero hour 197's and RXLi's where the difference in price v value of functionality may be greater.

You pay the difference when when you value open bow, tower, 2 years of trick characteristics, and resale value more than the difference in initial price. Â Why would you pay more for 09 ZO 196 than an 07 ZO 196Â with equal hours and condition?Â

From a buyers perpective: 06 196 w/ ZO through 09 196 are functionally equivalent so year does not matter, all that matters are price, hours and condition; > 500 hours is the new > 1000 hours; 30k is alot to pay for a boat you will not see in tournaments, and not enough different than a ZO MC 197 for mid - high 30s who's hull you will see in tournaments - especially important are the trick wake/table.  Just a different perspective . . .

A little more information. Skier is B2 running into -22/34MPH. LFF and his pull out has him 1/2 way between the back of the motor box and pylon.  Photos show him on the proper edge but pulled out in all phases. I'm most concerned about 2nd wake to buoy line but maybe he's not getting enough leverage behind the boat.   Starting our out of course work now.  Thanks for everything so far.Â

Does anyone have tips/drills for decreasing the handle to hip gap (hook-up, through the wakes, preturn) that work for junior skiers.  I noticed that Lucky Lowe had his son two handing his turns at nationals - maybe thats how its taught.Â

Wadsworth Photographers - should be posted to the internet in about 2 weeks. USA Waterski will have a link.

66" ski is a wide ride I would guess.

"what's required for a class c tournament could be greatly improved upon" For a Class C all that should be required is a boat judge (not clearly out = good) -- and maybe a pervasive "call it on yourself" etiquette.

I had similar symtoms with a ruptured disc, the loss of strength was what was worrysome to my physician. I'd have it checked out quickly.

Well, as a private lake lot owner, and father of an up and coming junior, a new or recent promo 196 has become far less attractive to me assuming the 200 becomes the primary CC tourny mule. In fact the bigger the difference between the 196 and 200 (better or worse) the less attractive the 196 becomes. Glad I've held off.ÂÂ

So what is speed control programming logic driven by? Certainly not the rule, as it is currently not rule compliant for slalom. Scores are down because the current ZO pull is different than what it has been before, and that frustrates people. But tighter speed swing tolerances are, I believe, more technically attainable then ever before. The tighter the speed swing tolerances, the more consistent the pull boat to boat and year to year -- so you'll be able to practice more competently than with the 56 different non-compliant pulls now available only on new DBW boats . Scores will go down initially but as more people practice with a tighter tolerance "tournament pull" they will go back up.ÂÂ

So what is so tough . . . There are only: 2 different CC 196’s (5.7L & 6.0L) 2 different Bu LXi’s (5.7L & 6.2L) 3 different MC PS’s (190 6.0L, 197 5.7L & 6.0L) So 7 different boats you might draw for your tournament ride. Then there are: 9 different ZO settings for each boat (ignoring the fact that both versions of PP are still approved for the Bu’s.) That’s only 56 boat/speed control combinations (ignoring PP). And if you happen to set a record – it’s not compliant with Rule 8.05 – "All speeds are “speeds over the bottomâ€Â; compensate in all cases where a current exists. The boat path in all events is intended to be a straight line, run at a constant speed. Variation in speed during any pass may not exceed ± .8 kph (.5 mph) . . ."  The programming and logic of both ZO and PP do not “intend†to maintain constant speed but rather to achieve a perfect average speed or time through the course regardless of speed swing.  ZO the boat comes into the course .7 MPH hot and you are more than likely to pull the boat down more than .5 MPH somewhere in the course. The speed control programming logic is market driven with ZO and PP attempting to give the skiers a “pull†they like – but not all skiers like the same pull. What happens if AWSA mandates (e.g. acts like the USGA when it sets up US Open golf courses) that speed swings be limited to the greatest extent technically possible (e.g. tightens the speed swing rule)? The bad – near term nobody will like the “pull†and scores will go down for a while. The good – 1) records will be rule compliant, 2) smaller speed swings will make the “pull†seem more consistent boat to boat (e.g. a smaller variation in “pulls†boat to boat, and year to year), 3) scores will eventually surpass current levels because of the more consistent pull.

Contact Info ? Thanks Ed