buechsr

I’ll soon be listing my 2008 196.  230 hours on new 5.7 (w/ new manifolds).  1230 on hull.  Prior engine expired due to previous (original) owner’s overheat.  2 owner boat.  Zero off Rev S.  I can almost guarantee that it is the most outstanding gel on a 15-year-old boat in the country. Previous owner used a touchless cover, and I have always used a waterline cover from Skip Dunlap. Interior is a 7.5-8/10.  Needle gauges.  Brand new boat mate trailer (less than a year old), which was $8,000.  

Will post link once I snap some pics.  Interest in meantime, PM me.  Black main, blue accent.  Beautiful boat.  Selling to move into a new SN.

1 hour ago, BraceMaker said:

Molds for these hulls don't just last for ever there they require upkeep, service, repair, and replacement.  So even if someone had the mold you're going to need to make new molds every so often so even if the first mold was free it won't be for long.

@buechsr the funny thing is a TON of people buy stripped down boats they just don't buy them from Mastercraft, or Nautique, or even sanger.

The seadoo switch pontoon comes in with the 2.3L turbo indmar ecoboost at 45K.

Start ignoring "pretending" that the boat is a stripped down ski boat and make it a budget conscious multisport boat with that engine and you sell them though a brand like seadoo and you sell 10,000 of them a year and that's how you make a stripped down ski boat and reach the intended audience and then if that boat happens to be good enough for a few people here?  Maybe a handful don't buy the used ski boat.

10,000 a year?  Where are you getting your information that seadoo sold (or could) a bunch of switches?  My large public lake has seen 1 and that person sold it with 2 months.  Local Sea doo dealer can't move them.  In the same time that lake saw 2 new prostars and a new txi (in addition to scores of new V drives).  My local "Ski boat" dealer also sells multiple off shore/center console lines.  None of those ordered for inventory are ever stripped.  They're actually loaded up with tens of thousands of upgrades, even though most upgrades can be done at the dealer level (helm master, multiple chartplotters, radar, etc.).  Who is running the show in the pontoon market?  Bass Tracker or Bennington?  Four Winns or Cobalt?  People buy premium boats.   Not entry level cost-cutting exemplars.  It is what it is.  Has anyone actually seen a Heyday in the wild?  I sure haven't.  And yet they're 1/4 to 1/2 the price of a typical big 3 V drive.  People just don't buy stripped down boats.  They just... don't.  Again, see Axis as a case study on this exact phenomenon.

Just now, chrislandy said:

But that's the point, if there is someone wants to order one, and they can also say "look, we do a stripped out slalom tug that's really good value" 

How many people buy a base model car with no extras? Not many, and the dealers certainly don't have them on the showroom floor. If someone wants that particular car/boat whatever at a much lower price then they special order it.

It would put to bed all the naysayers and cryers about boat prices, they could even price it at or below zero profit within reason and they still probably wouldn't sell any or many. The problem is a boat slot is a boat slot, and our as you say little niche ski boat is a lot less profitable than a larger wake/surf boat so the bean counters will nix it in a heartbeat (even if it's extremely low risk)

I can't tell whether we are saying the same thing or not.  It's NOT a good value to save whatever, $20,000-$30,000 to have a bathtub with an engine.  See the numerous people in this thread who have said they'd rather have a 5 year old boat than a new econobox.  Again, anyone, right now, can order a stripped down tractor.  No one does.  I'm in the market for a late model SN right now.  I have come across exactly zero that are not optioned to the max.  And I am personally fine with that.  My criteria is not everyone's, but I'd much rather pay for a 4 year old SN loaded up than a stripped down tractor, even if it saved, whatever, 20%.

I totally disagree that a bathtub option is "extremely low risk".  It's a low margin, low volume entry that the market has demonstrated repeatedly, people don't want!  R&D is not cheap.  New molds are not cheap.  Tooling for a low volume model with extremely limited profit potential is dumb.  Even before Centurion did the CP, they built years of Tru Tracs, etc.  Same for Gecko, Supra, Tige, Sanger, Infinity, Svfara, Toyota, Hydrodyne, Calabria, MB sports, etc.  All sold at a significant discount to the big 3 (particularly MC and CC).  All those brands went away except for those who went all in on the wakesurf market.  Then Centurion designed and released the CP to much fanfare and appreciation, priced well below the big 3, and in a few years, poof. 

There is not a market demand for stripped down cheap (er) ski tractors.  There's just not.  Clearly demonstrable by the lack of big 3 ski boats in the wild that are remotely lightly optioned.  

Axis wakeboats are a good example IMO.  They started out basically a decade ago, with cheaper engines, archaic ballast, limited options, priced under $40,000.  In 10 years the market DEMANDED that it now provide touchscreens, sport dash, surf gate, power wedge 3 (same as Malibu) and now priced for most models, well in excess of $120,000.  The people buying watersports boats simply don't want stripped down stuff to save money.  That doesn't mean that there's not a place for the NXT line, GS line, or Axis, but people do not want a $75,000 NXT wherein they have to drop pumps over the sides and use a carbed  5.7.

4 hours ago, chrislandy said:

I think the issue is that there is no option, even if nobody buys one. Look at BMW and Merc, each of their models has a low priced stripped, no features base at the same price you could by a top all optioned Ford of similar size. They probably only sell a few of the base models each year, but the option is there if someone really wants one. 

Same should be for MC/Nautique/Malibu, the base model should ideally be stripped of features i.e. no bow seats, no interior lighting, minimal seadeck, basic gel patterns/colours, basic screen with ZO, lower spec motor etc similar to when they first released the 2014 Prostar. Each boat is built to order so it's not like they'll have 50 unsold base spec models hanging around, all it takes up is a double page spread in the brochure.

There's nothing stopping anyone from ordering a closed bow txi exactly like that.  But people don't.  It doesn't save nearly as much as you'd think.  And very few dealers are willing to floor model a ski boat, particularly one w no options to save a relatively small %. 

I think "we" greatly overthink our importance to cater to.  Malibu is a billion dollar company.  Packaging a stripped down ski boat for 50 sales a year (at best) and 30,000 GP per unit, is a lot of effort to make $1.5M.  Good for Sanger, but its laughable to think our microcosm would ever justify a cheap boat from the big 3.

4 hours ago, igkya said:

Problem resolved.

There isn't an in-line or pre-filter just before the low pressure pump on this boat.  We took the pump out and looked inside.  There's a micro mesh/screen that was 95%+ blocked.  Simple cleaning, put back together and boat is strong like bull again.

 

Thanks for the input.

Have you exhaustively looked for an in line filter all the way back to the tank?  I'm going to be very surprised if you don't hit one.  It may require removal of rear seat or trunk basement panel to confirm.  If you in fact can't find one after exhaustive looking, I'd suggest adding one.  Either case, glad you're purring.

9 hours ago, MDB1056 said:

Yes avoid magic eraser. It’s an abrasive 

Of course its an abrasive.  Hence use it gently and only if not grained.  OP can do what he likes.  There's a balance to steps needed to remove mildew and potential damage, before vinyl is permanently stained.  Everyone can do what they will.

2 hours ago, Rednucleus said:

I have read many times on the Malibucrew that magic eraser will damage vinyl

Yes you have, and it will, hence gently, and only if not grained, which most Malibu vinyl is.

1) sunlight

2) Grained or not?  Ungrained try a magic eraser, gently.  Grained try a power washer.  

Unfortunately there's a difference between mildew and a true mildew stain.

13 hours ago, VONMAN said:

Well not to many skiers have had the opportunity to make a play at 43off so getting back to the buoy line is the rule to score 1 ball. We really didn't know a ski ramp would be in the way. Like its been said the course had been homologated. But how old is the standard. Was it standardized back in the 38, 39.5 or 41 era? So knowing what we know now, do we make a change or wait till someone gets hurt. I'm going take a guess that 70 to 80 percent of course skiers don't have a jump next to the slalom course when training. I mean no one else had any problems with the ramp being there. Not even Freddy, after he saw what happened to Nate. Nate should have got a re-ride offered and if he turned it down so be it. So what do we do in the future???.......It's OK, it's fine. I'm sure it will be fine.      Until the next time, stay tune.

Is 3 feet of rope the distinction?  Was Nate really going that much faster than Andy 20 years ago?  Point being, is there really a difference turning 1 ball at 43 than 41, from a jump location perspective at a hypothetical (right sided) #2?  Until we use a radar gun from shore, I really can't see it being that big of a delta.

 I kind of have to disagree as to the latter highlighted sentence.  When you think about where everybody skis, there's a lot of jumps around...even on Nate's lake.  A plurality of the finalists train or have trained significantly at Travers.  This setup was not an anomaly, nor something they weren't used to seeing even for those who don't ski at Travers regularly, particularly after Mastercraft at Fluid, and Malibu at Lymanland.  

12 minutes ago, ScottScott said:

It amazes me the people that think its ok for a structure to be within a potential skier path on a slalom course, and since "everyone knows its there," or "its there for everyone" or "its like that at other places" everything is OK. How many close calls before a serious injury. IF it interfered with Smith making a perfectly legit S turn and making a score of 1 full buoy, then its a problem. However, he should still have just as much right to TRY everything he can to S turn and score that buoy (even if he fails) without worrying about running into a structure at 36mph. 

Yes, exactly. 

Maybe that shouldn't be the loook they'll get at worlds. I think its time to re-think the standards here BEFORE there is a serious inury, and Worlds is the perfect place to start. On lakes that are too narrow for the boat path to be on the jump side of the slalom course (locating the jump more outside the slalom course), move it for slalom. That may mean moving it for slalom classes and putting it back for jump in a 3 event. It will be a pain in the butt, but does that mean it shouldn't be done? OR at a site like travers, they have more than 1 lake.....

Do you advocate removal of all turn islands?  rip rap?  Docks?  Excess buoys?  Or to widen the shoreline?  Because all of those are hypothetically in the skier's path, too.  

Look no one wants to see anyone hit a ramp, but it's not as if the jump was obstructing "where competitors may ski to score points in a slalom event".  Look at Lymanland's set up for Malibu, or Fluid for Mastercraft.  In looking at Lymanland's setup, I'd concede it appears the jump is slightly wider from some shots, but actually closer to 4 ball than travers was to 1 ball.  At fluid, if someone had a very hot 6, the jump is basically at the gates.  I'd concede a one ball at 43/36 is something I have zero experience with, but these skiers know where stuff is, they've skied around jumps in similar places for decades, they also know what is and is not feasible to score if they're so out of position that a jump is an obstruction.  

All that said, if a site can easily move a jump for slalom, sure, why not do it.  On the other hand, as to last weekend, thats the precise look they'll be getting during worlds, and I bet most would say they're glad to have skied a replica of the set up in 2 weeks.

As has been suggested by multiple people multiple times, change the cap and rotor.  These backfiring symptoms make that even more likely the culprit.   

JT is a respected TC.  IF there’s a place that’s dead on, I’d take his backyard in prep for Worlds.  

Main lake at Travers has not 1 but 2 jumps deployed virtually all the time (as it has for decades), as it did this weekend, in the same positions.  Would also strongly suspect the setup will be the precise same in 2 weeks.  If for nothing else, I'd bet they wanted to create the precise same sightlines for Worlds.  It is not an uncommon set up.  The set up is such that the far side boat guides (from jump) is the inside jump course buoys.  Absent that setup, that lake would be chock full of buoys, and trust me, it's got a lot going on already, and no more width to move it out.  Nate turned a fast (bad) 1 and couldn't get back to boat guides.  Jump is virtually where a right sided 2 ball would have been.  He just didn't make it to the wakes.  While it may have caused a distraction for him yesterday, it was a bad one ball.  Given the number of pros who ski this site daily, if there were complaints/safety issue, it would have looked a lot different there than what it has for years.  

47 minutes ago, Kswap said:

I have reached out to skidim and marine hardware and no one has specs for my boat. I did get specs for a 1992 but no guarentee it’s the same

Can they not match strut specs  from another OEM?  ie, if you need a 16 degree 1", is there no other brand with those specs?  That'd surprise me but sounds like you're on it.  

3 words:

Discount inboard marine (skidim.com).  I bet Vince can steer you right.  

22 minutes ago, Broussard said:

@Daryn_Dean Encourage your neighbors to get their Assistant Judge rating so neighborhoods like yours can more easily run Class C tournaments 

Andre, totally agree, but in the absence of regular judges, you can't have events, and in the absence of events, you can't can't get your asst.  

2 minutes ago, Andre said:

What do you plug at the other end of that adapter ?  Laptop with a program  ?

yes, or a handheld unit.  software is diacom.  I have no idea what information could be garnered from an automobile OBD reader.

https://www.rinda.com/marine/diacommarine.htm

@Jordan

@Horton

And has a "real" job.

Given your year, I would think it'd be a plug shaped like this:

https://www.rinda.com/rindashop/shop/adapter/94005

I don't think an auto OBD would be much help.

If you've not done the cap and rotor yet, it needs to be done.  If you haven't changed both fuel filters, that needs to be done.  I'd change plugs as well.  If after all that you have same issue, then hook up a fuel pressure gauge.  Everything above are standard maintenance items that in light of the FCC filter findings, suggest to me your boat needs some service TLC before even chasing this problem further.  

If all the above don't fix, I'm still in crank position sensor camp.  

Despite filters being suggested earlier, and which are fine suggestions, if the cap and rotor have not been changed to solve this, absolutely put a new one on.  They're like $50-75.  I was including those in my simple things description but should have been more clear.  

18 minutes ago, jercrane said:

So 1:1 gear ratio means some people might prefer an earlier hookup that a letter bump would provide? ie moving from say A2 to B2? Is that the take away here?  

So some pros perhaps ski behind the Malibu and feel the pull is coming on later than it does with MC and SN so they bump up?

I'm less interested in bashing Malibu and more interested in the goal and factors going into the decision-making process.  For what its worth I skied my last PB behind the Malibu so for a sub par mediocre skier like me it seems to work great. 

The point is, with it, being a one to one transmission, RPMs are slightly lower and slightly lower on the torque curve, unlike the Mastercraft and nautique which are higher in the torque curve. Therefore, it could give the perception that it is a slightly softer pull, hence a move up to the Bs.  

But it’s hardly “soft” or underpowered, just a different feel for them.  

It’s not a deficiency necessarily that Malibu doesn’t use a reduction transmission. They never have, even when, for example, the power slot begin usage for Mastercraft long ago.  Malibu was able to save weight and generally run a few miles an hour faster than MC and cc, and hence was the preferred inboard barefoot boat for a long time, save for the specialists like Sanger.  

The real difference will be in jump.

4 minutes ago, Sethro said:

It looked to me like there was possibly an issue with the weeds from moving the jump causing a delay.  

Seems I'm seeing more nautique footage than Mastercraft today, lol.

41 minutes ago, lpskier said:

It would be a lot better if they had a better produced training that was interesting and maybe even entertaining. 

Maybe, lets face it though it could have been more entertaining than Top Gun and the fact it was "pushed" on "us" would have yielded the same complaints. 

Just now, The_MS said:

I have no plans on starting it up, organizing or dealing with it. However, if there is a group out there willing,  I would be happy to be a member and contribute the 2-3k per year that I was spending prior to this debacle. If not, I am very happy on the sidelines and spending my money on skis and other stuff. 

I understand you're willing to lob an alternative idea, which is to be applauded.  I'm just pointing out that it's not just about USOC requirements.