buechsr

It can take many key up cycles to reprime the whole fuel system. Did you test the pressure on the fuel rail on key up? I have a diacom (the handheld version) I could send you to use. I have no experience with Ilmor, but would assume that diacom is the requisite diagnostic language. I don't know if I have an Ilmor harness. If you want to ask your PCM tech friend which one it requires or take a picture I'll see if I have it or not.

@aupatking I’d disagree that Response LXs were designed to break world records. They were designed to be sold, and their ability to be sold relied on their ability to break world records, or at least perform like their world breaking brother with a closed bow that WAS designed to break world records. Big difference in paradigm, especially when the open bow does not contribute to “breaking world records”, the bow was cut out simply to sell more boats, as confirmed by Bob Alkema. No reasonable person would assume that a Malibu Response was intended as an off shore fishing boat, just like no reasonable person would have the expectation that an off shore boat should draft 4 inches of water and get into creeks like a flats boat. However, a reasonable person could easily expect that because there are seats in the bow of a response LX, that they can be used by kids while they toodle around at around 10mph. At a minimum…it’s reasonable for someone to expect a warning if there is a weight limit or speed window to avoid.

@swbca I understand that. But a lot is being conflated between the news stories and the posts herein, some of which are seemingly just flat incorrect (if the reporting is accurate). But I can’t keep from responding since I’m a former Response LX owner and interested in some of these issues. Your Prostar is similar of course, but still not quite the same as a Response LX. Unless I’m forgetting about a prostar era, the Response LX is unique in that in a bow swamp, water can’t move (quickly) to the stern because there is no walk-through. Nonetheless, you’re aware of how your boat drives, its limitations, and its dangers. MOST owners (or drivers) are. I still own a Response built in the era of the boat involved (closed bow now though :) ). The DISTINCTION IS: you, I, and many with years of experience appreciate those dangers. That was not the case here, which is precisely why there are duties to warn people who have no other way of knowing. While the verdict would have likely been much different if one of “us” were driving, ask yourself, is it really that unreasonable for a sober adult to have 3 very young kids in a bowrider and (reportedly) cross your own wake at 10 mph? We as a group might have handled things different, but it’s not like the description of what took place was in any way reckless or egregious, or for that matter in any way not totally predictable use by an owner or renter. And yet, here we are, unfortunately. I’m sure the boy’s parents would rather just have him back. As to your Audi analogy, if Audi’s engineers were deposed about an RS7’s top speeds, rest assured they’d have answers about their testing and why the limits are what they were. Product liability does not arise simply because a product can be dangerous. However, the more appropriate analogy would be a 7 year old boy killed by a an RS7 towing a trailer using a factory available hitch at the speed limit if Audi had not provided information from which owners can appreciate that which Audi engineers think they can safely tow. The paradigm is a little different there, isn’t it?

@unksskis Probably first looking at the statutes of repose state by state. Interestingly, the internet says 75% of punitive damage awards in Georgia GO TO THE STATE! See at the bottom: https://www.haddenfirm.com/Georgia-Defective-Products-Damages-Time-Limits So, Georgia is actually going to get more than the parents.

@swbca Cars are built to mitigate injuries in the foreseeable collisions that will occur, or at least not be excessively dangerous. Bikes are built with appropriate components for their foreseeable use. Bob Alkema testified that they cut a hole in the bow to sell more boats and (as it's reported anyway) did no testing, could produce no records that they did, nor provide a warning on the limitations for using the bow. Was it totally foreseeable that owners (and renters) would put people on the bow? Obviously. Is it totally foreseeable that with a sufficient amount of weight a swamp condition is a matter of time? Obviously. Is it totally foreseeable that if that occurs, people fall out? Of course. No one, not even the jury, said the driver was without fault. But I don't know that I can criticize a jury after they heard what they did and conclude he is ONLY one at fault. I'm a many time and current Malibu owner btw. I assume you appreciate that if Malibu had shown some interest in testing it, put a sticker on the windshield that limited bow occupants or weight, this would be a much different issue for Malibu, right?

Come to right place! I'd recommend a Radar Union, Katana, or Butterknife. A year ago my wife got a Butterknife to keep boat speed lower since she now skis less and isn't chasing buoys. It's much wider and softer than most traditional skis which helps on starts but will also flex in the turn without feeling like a plank. I think there is a video of this site's owner on a Katana which is almost as wide as a butterknife getting up the rope pretty good. Hard to go wrong with the current skis available.

Here's what we know from reporting: Former CEO Alkema testified that the design of the boat was not changed to accommodate bow-riding passengers or weight, no seaworthiness testing done to take into account or limit or recommend what a reasonable bow capacity should be, apparently no warnings provided, another Malibu executive testified that no such testing was done until 2011 (for new boats), and that was for purposes of liability mitigation as a result of a case against Mastercraft...with no mention (as reported) that it was motivated by actually giving consideration for the safety of their users. Some of you might not know that the open bow of an LX is not part of the main cabin like in walk through designs. It is its own "bowl". I've owned one, and when I did, even I questioned the safety of its design. We also know: a boat with a hole cut in the bow (again, with no objective testing or warning) took on so much water that it was close to total swamp, driver makes a reasonable attempt to save it, yet a 7 year old gets so badly entangled in the prop that a crane was needed to recover the boat and remove his body. His parents, who were not on the boat and not driving (unlike what has been said in this thread), are obviously overcome with emotion and anger and want to understand how that could have happened, which doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure it out. The law provides them recourse, they pursued it (understandably), the jury was so overcome that it concluded that it was so egregious for there to have been no testing nor recommendations that it said Malibu should be assessed significant punitive damages. System worked exactly as intended. Just like in Pinto litigation, Firestone, breast implants, etc. If you don't like the result, run for office and change the law. Until then, it's not fair to shoot messengers who did exactly what this boy's parents hired them to do. It's surprising (or maybe not) that I haven't heard anyone yet acknowledge it's pretty stupid to cut a hole in the bow of a boat with just a few inches of bow freeboard and then not provide people a bow capacity. I digress.

@lakeaustinskier Keep in mind the operator wasn't the owner. It was a rented boat. I have no issue with states starting to require some mandatory boat training. Of course, I'm in the minority being OK with safesport being required, too. I'm definitely OK with RENTERS having to take a safety video!

To a layperson (juror), this does not sound good: from one of the articles linked: "But, the reality, as described in a deposition by Robert Alkema, one of Malibu’s original founders and former CEO, is: despite its outsized footprint in the world of towboats, Malibu’s design process was more relaxed. Alkema testified that the company created the step-over bow used in the Batchelder’s Bowrider LX in 1996, by simply cutting a hole in the deck of another model, called the Response, in their shop, and added some seats to the bow area. Alkema testified that the impetus for the design was market share: “It was a belief on our part that we could sell – or would – there would be a bigger market for a boat that had more seating. And that’s proven by other specific open bow models. So the walkover was a thought to be a more novel way to maintain the skiability and the two rearward facing passengers, and have the seating in the front.” Alkema testified that no engineering adjustments were made, despite the fact that the design would have added more weight to the bow of a boat that had originally been designed to have no weight in the bow. Nor did Malibu give any consideration to making a bow capacity weight limit for the Response LX. Alkema also testified that it would be up to the customer’s reasonable judgement to decide how many occupants could safely fit in the bow of the boat, and that the company had no testing protocol nor did any testing to determine safe weight capacity." Now, we here all knew this of course, but if you're a juror, and you've seen enough pictures of a dismembered child, I can wrap my head around how they concluded this was a poorly executed design.

Sounds like the bow swamped, boat can't go forward or will scoop more, so driver reverses. In the swamp video above the engine obviously died but it's easily forseeable that a driver would instinctively reverse to counteract a heavy water intrusion from the bow. Anyone that has ever owned or operated a first gen (03-06) Rlxi knows that you can swamp the bow EASILY, several have sunk. Folks that live on ski canals might not understand, but swamping an open bow is not always driver error. Tragic situation but Malibu has product liability insurance according to one of the articles. Interesting, however, that the majority of the verdict was for punitives and might call that coverage into question. As the vast majority of the verdict was for punitive damages, unless there was compelling evidence of Malibu's knowledge and failure to remedy or warn, one would suspect that will be an issue on appeal. If there was such evidence, and it would appear there was, I'd suspect Malibu will be sending out some new bow capacity stickers. As I recall, after the Mastercraft lawsuit with similar issues, is when Malibu started putting capacity stickers on the windshield for the bow from the factory. And for clarity and accuracy, the verdict against Malibu is $140M, not 200. Also, no one ran over "their own child". Parents weren't on the boat.

Great recs already but I'd add Jack Travers as well. Essentially Orlando.

dbski, just curious, are you running ppass or zero off? My 08 ECM got reflashed for zero off, and my gauge reads correctly (over 1000 hours). Standard Faria.

MS, I acknowledged that. I said: "Not that a handle guard was really the issue". In any event, a rope, wrapped around a neck, with the handle 3 inches from going around her neck, which thank God it didn't, was scary to watch.

Handle situation with Julie Faye (sp?) today was super scary...Glad she appears OK. Putting handle guards on everyone's handle in my house ASAP. Not that a handle guard was really the issue but her situation was just a reminder that crazy things can happen quickly.

Kidder Redline Barefoot Nautique

A famous skier 2 weeks ago told me his parents' rule was he had to start 10 passes below his average in every tournament. Seemed to have worked out OK for him. No one is coming to watch an average tournament. Catering to make it more "viewable", ie speed it up, is futile. I don't have a problem with Horton's idea, but is it needed in light of Bruce's citation of the current rule? (which I frankly did not know). Actually, upon re-reading it maybe that was just his draft rule...Average time is what, 4 minutes per skier? An extra 25 rides doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me.

Posts from presumable adults, complaining that they’re asked to act like adults by complying with such burdensome requirements like watch an hour long video, is…ironic. The wakesurfers will give less pushback. Actually, the people upon whom the irony should be evident, likely won’t get it. Instead, I’d suspect they will continue to bark about the good ol’ days when they wielded leadership in USAWS.

There was a bad batch of caps a couple years ago, even PCMs. The casing was allowing current to spread to other cylinders. Sometimes it was showing up right away, sometimes not. I did a long block swap on a 196 and it sounded like Normandy at first, until we figured it out. Andre, might want to tell your friend that caps and rotors are "maintenance" items not "repair" items! I assume its an excalibur and I don't recall perfectly, but I think they should be replaced biannually or 200 hours. Nonetheless, he should do it more frequently than 17 years!

Without hindsight being 20-20, who would have thought that the Boy Scouts would miss the number of predators they did? Yet, 82,000....think about that...82,000 sexual abuse claims were filed in the bankruptcy proceedings as of last year, and the majority occurred long ago. There are many great men who devoted themselves to Scouts and its leadership. They weren't complicit. They're sickened by what took place. Yet an entire football stadium slipped past the vast majority of good-intentioned yet naive volunteers....not to mention, parents! Were the parents of those 82,000 failures? How could that be? Reading myriad posts in this thread, parenting was better "back then" and this current push for awareness is a result of lazy ill-equipped millenials to parent. BS. It's not millenial parents being lazy, it's the opposite. Some of you won't be able to accept that paradigm, but it's the truth. This isn't some new issue, like a fly on your burger to be swatted away with arrogance that "I know what to look for" as has been expressed in this thread. This has been a pervasive issue for decades. Society and especially sports have repeatedly failed to shine a sufficiently bright light on this out of embarrassment and cowardice. And some of "us" are not just internally or privately, but publicly pushing back on our governing body for their requirement that we spend 60-90 minutes understanding how it works and to (hopefully, God-forbid) stymie a life-changing event for a kid? It's really surprising to see the pushback, and it seems obvious that those talking the loudest haven't even watched the course. Is it riveting? No. Is it revolutionary? Not really. But, it's a start. It's one step to be part of a group that can collectively commit to awareness which will hopefully contribute in some small (or large) way in the prevention of a potentially illegal, immoral, and disgusting situation in our sport or another. It probably takes some of you longer to put the boat away than do this. Spare the excuse that this is just the last straw in the way USAWS has forced things, not listened to members, etc. This is an issue unto itself, and way more important than any discussion that may not have gone someone's way at a regional meeting. These issues ruin lives. Officer elections and USAWS politics don't. We cannot let shoulder chips and pride outweigh the very important calling to at least in some small way help protect our next generation. Kennedy was before my time, but his words on what we can do for our country, and not its inverse, remain valid. Insert USAWS for country and it's no less true, no matter how long your volunteer and skiing resume may be. I'd ask anyone legitimately thinking about quitting USAWS to reconsider. Let's be on the right side of this issue for the next generation of skiers.

Wind has laid down a ton, great looking conditions now!

Lp, I never said anything to the contrary, but Hopefully no more portopotties get blown over today! From the looks of the flags now it’s debatable. Lol. Probably not fun for the vacuum crew yesterday ? Everyone up here has been great. Props to everyone busting their tails.

Storming now. Rain isn’t that heavy but the wind is howling!

Irony on full display. Some voices in opposition who haven't even watched the video blame a younger generation, think the program and the issues raised therein are purely common sense, and that they can spot a "perv" trying to make a move. Between the Boy Scouts, the Catholic Church, Nasser, and Sandusky, I would have thought rational people could all agree that if it's possible for those thousands of examples to go undetected, that there's more to learn about how this works than spotting a 60 year old chatting up a 17 year old girl in a bikini out in the open. But, I'd be sadly wrong. If it has to be made about defending lawsuits, if there's no lawsuits to defend because inappropriateness (or worse) was prevented, the mission was accomplished. Keith, I applaud your post and restraint. USAWS cannot (and should not) rest on its laurels on this issue. Those so vociferously opposed are on the wrong side of this, long lineage with USAWS or not. If a poster in this thread drops their membership as a result of USAWS's requirement and you're made aware of it Keith, contact me. I'll pay for up to 5 dropped memberships for a year. Personally, I find it shocking to see some of the posts herein. Proudly signed, Sheep

Travers has done their Grand Prix for a few years, which is not only a team event, it also incorporates some non-skiing events. Seems like a super fun idea. My club had a pro am a few years back where everyone skied against their average, which, while not a new concept, would be easy to convert to a team format, either random or planned, as suggested by OP. That seems like a great start to team grouping. You could also ski one round as a seeding round, and then do a team buoy count total for subsequent rounds depending on how many teams were wanted. Heck, even just two teams could spice up an average class C. Although my college was rarely (never) in the running for winning anything, it was fun to pull for your teammates. I hope this is a thought-provoking thread!

Fellas, This thread isn't about any other past proposal, bureaucracy, or frustrations. It's about a one hour video to help recognize and prevent situations that "could" help protect our most vulnerable. I'm surprised that it's endured 8 pages, let alone 2.