Will/How/when/should/could/want Yamaha strike back to the STXR/new SXI offensive?
11

[ 06-20-2002: Message edited by: 11 ]

They need to be able to beat the STXR and do it with a 2 seater 4 stroke!

I think that it is time to bump the GPR to 170 or 180 HP. Maybe they could take away some of the out of the box issues that the boat has as well. This way they would be better off in some of the tests where boats are taken off the showroom floor.

-GT

You guys need to remember that Yamaha has an agreement with the coast guard/ gov. entity to keep the speeds at or below the 65mph limit as requested. Now once we get them in our hands, we can do what we want to make them go fast for now. But it probably won't be long before they start trying to control that also. Here on our local lakes they ( the gov. entities ) have just set a noise limit and were talking about a speed limit. So try to consider that there are other forces at work here and are probably having some bearing on some of this. Call you Congressman and ***** ! We need to start a group and hire lobbyist for our cause and sport. But first you have to have a catchy name. rp

11: don't you read all of the other boards, every stock ski does over 65. Just look at the speedometer.

I had forgotten about the under 65 agreement. My GPR is proof to that. 100% stock it was at 64.7. Another .3 mph and I would just be a violation

-GT

HEHE,
I'm Riva member #2342, 2+3+4+2=11, if I start having a meaningfull nick, people will start using it against me
And some people start calling me "the infamous 11", so maybe one day it will be meaningfull ...

About beating the STXR, top speed isn't the concern, hook up, holeshot and midrange are much more meaningfull, and so far the stock stxr isn't the fastest, what makes it the best is its holeshot and handling.
German cars are limited to 250mph to keep the autobahns "full speed" but the car manufacturers have so much more important to work on, like handling and acceleration.....
65mph is enough to make good skis, it will just make the manufacturers focus on something else than top speed, when everyone will be at 65, they'll start considering low end I hope.
And so far no stock ski reaches 65 (and NO, the RXX isn't a stock ski)
11

Actually Yamaha has no such agreement. Formal agreements were reached by the two North American manufacturers, but not by the Japanese. The first year of the so called "agreement" Kawasaki introduced the Ultra 150 which was tuned down the following year due to reliability issues rather than "agreements" with the Coast Guard.
I for one "agree" with 11 that the issue with the GPR is under the hull rather than in it, in fact the hook up problems for the most part can be traced to weight issues more than anything else, but the pump placement and design leave a bit to be desired. I would say, same hull, redesigned pump cavity and less weight would make for an unbeatable combination.

[ 06-20-2002: Message edited by: gp12trpl ]

When you watch a GPR in the water, it's really "nose up". I think it's due to a very deep keel, which induces propoising and somewhat disturbs the pump area, hence the cavitation.
The STXR is very flat on the water as its keel is not as deep as the GPR's (the "cab forward" design helps too) so it stays hooked inspite of its old ZXI pump.
Actually I think the weight of the GPR is an help, as a full carbon GPR is said to porpoise like **** .
A new lower hull would make the GPR a killer, before reducing its weight.
11

BUT, that super deep keel is what helps the ski get so much top end. If you flatten the keel, you have less lift, which means more heavy gpr in the water which means less speed. And I know, that most of the guys on this forum would not want to give up a few mph to get better acceleration. Porpoising is easily fixed on the GPR. I talked with Rusty Geweke at the Nationals last year and I asked him why Yamaha would make there race ski so **** heavy and slow off the line. He laughed, said Yamaha doesn't give a rats a$$ about how the ski runs in race form. They only care about the general public. There are so few people who actually race, they could care less. And if you think about it, they are right. The problems with the GPR have not slowed sales at all. It remains the most popular "musclecraft" available today.

Scottie Mac

You are absolutely right Scottie in all accounts, that's why if you lower the weight of the hull you can keep the handling character without compromising the bottom end. The carbon hull I know made to date (RPot) was not using he same hull components as the OEM or any of the existing commercially available parts, but some very controversial (in my opinion) esoteric trim and rideplate systems. I believe the motor was also repositioned and I don't believe it can be used as a proper example or comparison in this instance as it really has little to do with the OEM hull at that point.

i personally think the only problem with the GPR is the pump, if they sorted that then i reckon you would have a great stock ski you got to remmember it has 155 hp so plenty of power and i did hear a rumour they were changing the pump for 2003 the fx140 pump is surposed to be great

It's more than just the pump, though. To get the GPR to stop cavitating you are going to have to redesign the pump intake track as well as put it on a diet like Mario said. Racers who went to the 158mm pump saw no real gains in performance, bottom or top end on the GPR.

Scottie Mac

I am responsible for the re-designed pump rumor, and yes the main part of the redesign is in the shape and positioning of the intake tract using technology learned on the FX140. I just think that the weight factor is a major hinderance in the performance of the GPR and really don't think this pump work will make it a rocket out of the hole anyway.

Well, about the weight issue, I hate to say it, but the difference with the STXR isn't that bad, and if the GPR rider eats bio when the Kawi rider is a FatBurger addict, then it cancels the weight difference, as well as a full vs empty tank does.
The STXR still pulls away, with a full tank and a big baby on it.
The shape of the hull and its water routing to a newer pump is more crucial IMO.
And a hull can be a Deep V without such a deep keel, just start the V a little higher.
11

[ 06-20-2002: Message edited by: 11 ]

What you are saying in not so many words 11 is that the GPR hull sucks But I tend to disagree, the re-design of the pump area in my opinion is NOT suficient without a weight reduction. You think people would spend $3000 to gt 10 pounds off a boat if it didn't make a difference? Remember Nicola's boat Havasu 2000, I'm not saying the reduction was just 10 lbs, but one of the most crucila components in that boat's success was weight reduction in addition to a handling package to match the reduction. It did NOT have a redesigned intake tract.

I see your point Mario, but I never said the GPR's hull sucked, for me it's a great off shore boat and back in 2000, it was the best. And I still cosider those Big Bore as an option, if I thought this hull sucked, I wouldn't even think about it.
BUT
I know, with me there's always a "but"
It's the year Rius worked with R&D before this guy who makes me ashamed of my coutry ****** him so much they split...
Chapin + Rius
against
Mac - Hedlund (gone to start SpeedWerx)
=
Yami World title
Mac took the tour on his old STX, though...
11

[ 06-21-2002: Message edited by: 11 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 11:
German cars are limited to 250mph to keep the autobahns "full speed" but the car manufacturers have so much more important to work on, like handling and acceleration.....

---

Actually only 3 German car companies have made the agreement you are referring to. BMW, Mercedes and Audi have all agreed to speed limit all of their mass producded cars to 155mph. No production car is capable of 250! lol Sorry, I am sure it was a typo but wanted to point it out and let you know what it really was.

Now for the topic at hand, I don't think the top speed is the main selling point for the majority of the PWC purchasers. They want a comfortable ski, good fuel economy and the chance to race their friends. 9 out of 10 races amongst friends are won or lost with the hole shot, how long will most people be willing to keep the thtottle nailed anyway? I have tons of room to ride in the ocean, but lakes are not that big generally speaking.

To me I would much rather have low end torque over top end hp.

OOOOPS

My bad, I'm French, but live in USA now, and I still commonly mix that up. I wrote 250mph, thinking of 250kmh or 155mph.I used to work for BMW France, which makes my mistake even more unforgivable.....
And I didn't mention Porsche, Schnitzer, Hartge, Alpina or Carlsson, only the significant magnufacturers.
About the reasons of this law, it was because in the 80's, local tree huggers were pretty powerfull (around 25% of the German parliament!!!) and were about to have a law voted about limiting speed on German freeways, the manufacturers negociated this agreement in exchange. If it has happened later, Porsche would have been included, as they now produce many more cars than in the 80s. Good for us, we had the AUDI Porsche RS2 and some gusty AMGs. But now it's owned by Daimler Benz, the 155 "law" is applicated on AMG, with NO exception (I can tell you!).
But I'm happy to see I have a fellow ocean rider not focussed on top speed on glass water, which is soooo boring to me .
11

[ 06-22-2002: Message edited by: 11 ]

Forgot to mention:

METRIC SYSTEM RULES!!!!!



11

All above in consideration, the fact that the STXR is a bit longer than the GPR can't hurt especially in the rough stuff.

But personally I think the boats are getting too big. I wish Yamaha could come up with something no bigger than the old GP but handled just as good as the GPR in the nasty stuff. Kind of contradictory I guess.

For me I'd rather see better holshots and a slimming down than more top end. But I'm just wierd I guess.

Riding a Yamaha (reliable) GP (light) with FPPs (powerfull) and a Skat Pump (hooked), I couldn't agree more, but this kind of boats isn't in the trend right now.
But no one says you have to follow the trend.....
11