M235 - G Killer?

[nohlan4]

3 hours ago, wheelman said:

I was talking with Don, Ron, and Gord when the boat was in transit and Don was saying they never ordered it and told Malibu to take it back. As the story goes he negotiated a better discount on it and ended up taking it. Don was able to negotiate much better discounts off nautiques than Malibu this year when our dollar sank. Edmonton boat show should be the true judge of things seeing as it's the only show they have nautiqe and Malibu there. 

Makes sense, I figured that nautique had to sweeten the pot alittle. But from what I saw in the booth on Saturday nautique looked to be drawing more attention.

 

1 hour ago, TallRedRider said:

I have found that dealers often call it 'dealer cost' when they get to a number that is their bottom line, not necessarily what most of us would call 'dealer cost'.  That way, we won't even try to get the price down any farther.    He probably factored in his costs on the boat acquisition and some profit as well.   I believe boat dealers routinely lie about their dealer cost.  

I am too lazy to go back 25 pages or whatever, but IIRC your cost analysis would have said a selling cost of 151K USD would be a very good deal for an M235 depending on the options and trailer chosen.  

I agree.   But I do think the G was never really the most 'blinged out' boat on the water.  I look at my rectangular seats and pretty standard stitching and the G is really sort of utilitarian.  It is very comfortable and had the first terrific rear facing seat in the industry, but does not seem to be all blinged out.  Having said that, I would probably not equate bling with fit and finish.  Nauti does an incredible job of tying up all of the loose ends and not letting stuff out of the factory that is not well made.  Based on what I can see in pictures, I would say the M235 has a lot more bling, and time will tell how the fit and finish hold up.  

 

Exactly what I was trying to say a couple posts back. I just find the G boats to be simple but functional. Where as the M is just trying to one up by adding 500 pounds of billet and lights. I just want someone to review the dang M already so we can all see what it's about!

[IXFE]

2 hours ago, DarkSide said:

I have looked at the M235 a couple times.  I agree the fit and finish is ahead of G series right now.  The thing that is great is the industry is recovering and as a result everyone is getting better.  The G turned the industry sideways, but the industry has caught up, and now surpassed the G's high water mark.  The M series is the next step up.  The boat show price for ours was ~175k the G23 ~148k.  I believe the M does provide a nicer fit finish than the G23, I also can see where that extra money went.  Billet, power bay, led lighting, etc.  These are things that may not interest all buyers, but there are enough buyers that the price will not be a huge factor. 

Apples and Oranges.  The M235 at the shows are all fully loaded... like every box checked including the supercharged motor.  The G's at that price are 450 motors, at least they have been at all three shows I've attended (Portland, Dallas, and Sacramento).  In fact, at the Sac show last week the G23 with only basic options (450, bimini, JL stereo, basic gel) was $143K.  

[IXFE]

1 hour ago, TallRedRider said:

I have found that dealers often call it 'dealer cost' when they get to a number that is their bottom line, not necessarily what most of us would call 'dealer cost'.  That way, we won't even try to get the price down any farther.    He probably factored in his costs on the boat acquisition and some profit as well.   I believe boat dealers routinely lie about their dealer cost.  

I am too lazy to go back 25 pages or whatever, but IIRC your cost analysis would have said a selling cost of 151K USD would be a very good deal for an M235 depending on the options and trailer chosen.  

I agree.   But I do think the G was never really the most 'blinged out' boat on the water.  I look at my rectangular seats and pretty standard stitching and the G is really sort of utilitarian.  It is very comfortable and had the first terrific rear facing seat in the industry, but does not seem to be all blinged out.  Having said that, I would probably not equate bling with fit and finish.  Nauti does an incredible job of tying up all of the loose ends and not letting stuff out of the factory that is not well made.  Based on what I can see in pictures, I would say the M235 has a lot more bling, and time will tell how the fit and finish hold up.  

 

 

Totally agree on "dealer cost."  That's what I was trying to say.  Show me the invoice or I don't believe it.  Talk is cheap.  

The $150K price point was my "street price" estimate of an M235 decontent, which is NOT what is being displayed at the shows.  No way you could get the fully loaded M's for that price.  Just like you'd be hard pressed to get a G with every box checked for that price.  

And I also agree that the G was probably never a "bling" boat.  That crown goes to the failed X-star.  But I don't know if I'd call a G "utilitarian."  Axis is utilitarian.  Moomba is utilitarian.  Rewind the clock a year... would anybody have ever said, "Buy a G if you want a utilitarian wake machine?"   LOL.  Not likely.  But it's easy to say that now that the M is out.  That's what Darkside is referring to... the bar just got raised again. 

I get what you mean about typing up loose ends.  Malibu's have not traditionally been very pretty underneath the seats, under the dash, in the engine bay, etc.  But the M is more than just a bunch of billet pieces.  It has a lot of the same great well thought out "user features" we find in the G.  And it's excessively "finished" in the all the hidden places.  I've said it before and I'll say it again... you really have to see this boat to appreciate it.  Not that you'll buy it (I'm not).  But pics don't do justice to the level of craftsmanship this boat exudes.  

All that said... while at the Sac show last week I spent 30 minutes sitting in a G23, talking to their really great salesman, and poking around.  I'd been inside G's before, but never with so much time to really soak in all the little things.  I gotta say, it is a damn fine boat.  Ask Fman... I said many times while sitting there, "I could rock tihs boat easily and be a very happy man."  So many nice features I hadn't noticed before.  The only thing I didn't like were the racks, the bimini, and the offcenter screen.  It did feel small compared to the M we had just spent an equal amount of time in.  Isn't that funny... a G23 feeling small.  The made the 23 LSV it was sitting next to feel like a row boat.  What has this industry done??? 

 

[ibelonginprison]

37 minutes ago, IXFE said:

Apples and Oranges.  The M235 at the shows are all fully loaded... like every box checked including the supercharged motor.  The G's at that price are 450 motors, at least they have been at all three shows I've attended (Portland, Dallas, and Sacramento).  In fact, at the Sac show last week the G23 with only basic options (450, bimini, JL stereo, basic gel) was $143K.  

Rub it in, Mr. "I've been to boat shows in three different states so far this year." 

 

[DarkSide]

I totally agree apples/oranges to the two boats at the show.  The M was full tilt optioned, the G well optioned.  

You got the point, that the M raised the bar again.  I looked at the G23, very nice boat, but just not my cup of tea. 

I got to look at a Wake Tractor also.  yes it was 39,995!  But yeah no!   

I was also invited to demo an X26, I may go but no real interest in it.  freaking huge boat though.   Even MC  guy says X23 is still thier surf boat. 

[nohlan4]

2 hours ago, IXFE said:

The $150K price point was my "street price" estimate of an M235 decontent, which is NOT what is being displayed at the shows.  No way you could get the fully loaded M's for that price.  Just like you'd be hard pressed to get a G with every box checked for that price.

The M that I saw was full load not decontent, 200k cnd takes it home so at today's exchange that is 150k usd. Someone buy it so we can all stop speculating.

[IXFE]

9 minutes ago, nohlan4 said:

The M that I saw was full load not decontent, 200k cnd takes it home so at today's exchange that is 150k usd. Someone buy it so we can all stop speculating.

 

Ahhh, yes.  Good point.  If that's true, that's the lowest reported price we've seen for a fully loaded M235.  

What was the MSRP in CAD?

[nohlan4]

23 minutes ago, IXFE said:

 

Ahhh, yes.  Good point.  If that's true, that's the lowest reported price we've seen for a fully loaded M235.  

What was the MSRP in CAD?

Not sure the buildsheets didn't have numbers on them. But show price was 230k, rep said first 200k would take it though.

[Stevo]

1 hour ago, DarkSide said:

 

I was also invited to demo an X26, I may go but no real interest in it.  freaking huge boat though.   Even MC  guy says X23 is still thier surf boat. 

My MC owner bud, was really disappointed on what MC was showing off. Maybe it's the fact that the G and the M235 are the shinny new toys and MC didn't make any #Gamechanger innovations

[DarkSide]

The mc dealer here is brand new.  The previous dealer sells mb, supreme, supra, and nautique plus cobalt and bennington pontoons.  Up until last year they sold MC also.  Now that the industry is recovering they had to choose.  They kept nautique and let MC go.  I would not be surprised to see supra splinter next.  Other dealers have no more than 2 brands.  Malibu/axis,  tige/Sanger, etc 

[wakebrdr94]

2 hours ago, nohlan4 said:

Not sure the buildsheets didn't have numbers on them. But show price was 230k, rep said first 200k would take it though.

He obviously has confidence in the product.... :tease2

[IXFE]

1 minute ago, wakebrdr94 said:

He obviously has confidence in the product.... :tease2

 

No kidding... am I the only one wondering why Malibu's #1 dealer isn't toeing the line?  

It's not like Wizard doesn't know how to sell macked out boats. 

I wonder if Malibu knew that after giving pricing concessions (if that's true), Wizard would turn around and dump the boat below market. 

[nohlan4]

31 minutes ago, IXFE said:

 

No kidding... am I the only one wondering why Malibu's #1 dealer isn't toeing the line?  

It's not like Wizard doesn't know how to sell macked out boats. 

I wonder if Malibu knew that after giving pricing concessions (if that's true), Wizard would turn around and dump the boat below market. 

Yea just brings me to second guess the M235 more. I mean if they wanted to sell them they could, but why are they choosing not to?

[wheelman]

8 minutes ago, nohlan4 said:

Yea just brings me to second guess the M235 more. I mean if they wanted to sell them they could, but why are they choosing not to?

Because they all think the g is a better boat at less money. 

[IXFE]

I wouldn't read tooooo much into it. I mean, Wizard is a big dealer but it's ONE dealer. 

Many others are seeing success with the M. 

I wonder how much the cheaper decontent M's will change things. 

[wheelman]

I wouldn't either, I think they are just very smart at what they do that's why they are #1. Why would they load up on a new boat that takes up more of their cash flow than any other boat before it has a track record. 

[TenTwentyOne]

15 hours ago, IXFE said:

 

And I also agree that the G was probably never a "bling" boat.  That crown goes to the failed X-star.  But I don't know if I'd call a G "utilitarian."  Axis is utilitarian.  Moomba is utilitarian.  Rewind the clock a year... would anybody have ever said, "Buy a G if you want a utilitarian wake machine?"   LOL.  Not likely.  But it's easy to say that now that the M is out.  That's what Darkside is referring to... the bar just got raised again. 

I get what you mean about typing up loose ends.  Malibu's have not traditionally been very pretty underneath the seats, under the dash, in the engine bay, etc.  But the M is more than just a bunch of billet pieces.  It has a lot of the same great well thought out "user features" we find in the G.  And it's excessively "finished" in the all the hidden places.  I've said it before and I'll say it again... you really have to see this boat to appreciate it.  Not that you'll buy it (I'm not).  But pics don't do justice to the level of craftsmanship this boat exudes.  

I think he was more referring to the fact that Nautique didn't go hog wild on dressing up the G beyond it's usefulness as a wakeboat. Coming from MC, that was always the first thing that popped in my head when thinking about the G...... Utilitarian. Primary focus was performance and usability. Sure, it has A very high level of attention to detail for the grade of overall fit and finish, but not going beyond what is needed for a simple, yet elegant, comprehensive finish of the interior.

"Bling" is not a measure of "fit and finish" to me. A boat can be simple, and still have the highest grade of fit and finish. Just as calling something "Utilitarian", doesn't mean that it uses lesser grade materials, less functional systems, and less engineering. It means that a greater focus was put on functionality, than looks. That is most certainly the primary focus of the G. It actually is one of the most utilitarian boats out there. The general concensus is certainly that the G is not a "pretty" boat. It is a big barge looking unit, because they put function before form. The interior is very square, and certainly not the most beautiful, or comfortable, but it provides for maximized storage, and interior space. There is no fancy trim, or billet panels. It is finished as simply as any boat out there. However, the finish work is done with excellent craftsmanship, and accuracy. It is also a very comprehensive finish. It is not shortcutted, and the materials that they do use, are of very high quality. IMO, it is certainly still one of the tops, as far as fit and finish. It is just not as blinged as the M235.

I have finally crawled through a M235. It is a pretty fancy boat. I would put the bling well above anything else out there, but the grade of fit and finish seemed like any other Bu......Which is obviously excellent, but not exceptional to the rest of the line. It was definitely more comprehensively finished. Great job on buttoning up loose ends that would normally be found in the rest of the line. The M that I was in was one of the very early ones, and I am sure there is a learning curve as more and more run down the line. Nothing major, but there was certainly a few things that I noticed on the fit and finish that would drive me mad. Most notably, the ballast vent though hulls were not in line with each other on one side. Checked the other side, and they were perfect. Im guessing they don't use a pattern plate, and one guy was much more accurate with drilling the holes. Couple other things, but I wont waste time on them. They were mostly things that an average person doesn't see, or look for anyhow....

For the record, I can admit my G wasn't perfect either, and there was a couple little things that needed to be corrected.

I certainly see your viewpoint, and could agree from some standpoints of the argument. It is just that when I hear "fit and finish", I measure from a quality/actual fit/comprehensiveness standpoint, rather than a bling/general perceived beauty, standpoint. Although, I can say, that an accurate measure of "fit and finish" should have the perfect blend of all of the above.

[IXFE]

10 hours ago, TenTwentyOne said:

I think he was more referring to the fact that Nautique didn't go hog wild on dressing up the G beyond it's usefulness as a wakeboat. Coming from MC, that was always the first thing that popped in my head when thinking about the G...... Utilitarian. Primary focus was performance and usability. Sure, it has A very high level of attention to detail for the grade of overall fit and finish, but not going beyond what is needed for a simple, yet elegant, comprehensive finish of the interior.

"Bling" is not a measure of "fit and finish" to me. A boat can be simple, and still have the highest grade of fit and finish. Just as calling something "Utilitarian", doesn't mean that it uses lesser grade materials, less functional systems, and less engineering. It means that a greater focus was put on functionality, than looks. That is most certainly the primary focus of the G. It actually is one of the most utilitarian boats out there. The general concensus is certainly that the G is not a "pretty" boat. It is a big barge looking unit, because they put function before form. The interior is very square, and certainly not the most beautiful, or comfortable, but it provides for maximized storage, and interior space. There is no fancy trim, or billet panels. It is finished as simply as any boat out there. However, the finish work is done with excellent craftsmanship, and accuracy. It is also a very comprehensive finish. It is not shortcutted, and the materials that they do use, are of very high quality. IMO, it is certainly still one of the tops, as far as fit and finish. It is just not as blinged as the M235.

I have finally crawled through a M235. It is a pretty fancy boat. I would put the bling well above anything else out there, but the grade of fit and finish seemed like any other Bu......Which is obviously excellent, but not exceptional to the rest of the line. It was definitely more comprehensively finished. Great job on buttoning up loose ends that would normally be found in the rest of the line. The M that I was in was one of the very early ones, and I am sure there is a learning curve as more and more run down the line. Nothing major, but there was certainly a few things that I noticed on the fit and finish that would drive me mad. Most notably, the ballast vent though hulls were not in line with each other on one side. Checked the other side, and they were perfect. Im guessing they don't use a pattern plate, and one guy was much more accurate with drilling the holes. Couple other things, but I wont waste time on them. They were mostly things that an average person doesn't see, or look for anyhow....

For the record, I can admit my G wasn't perfect either, and there was a couple little things that needed to be corrected.

I certainly see your viewpoint, and could agree from some standpoints of the argument. It is just that when I hear "fit and finish", I measure from a quality/actual fit/comprehensiveness standpoint, rather than a bling/general perceived beauty, standpoint. Although, I can say, that an accurate measure of "fit and finish" should have the perfect blend of all of the above.

 

Good post, 21.

I agree... I hate the term "fit and finish."  Shame on me if I used it.  Totally overused phrase and everybody thinks is means something different.  The only way to really have an intelligent conversation about "fit and finish" is to break it all down and talk about the details one-by-one.  So as George Constanza would say, "You wanna get nuts? LET'S GET NUTS!!" 

I break an interior (incl. tower) down like this:

• Design: This is just how it looks.  Highly subjective.  This is where you can argue the squared off Nautique look vs. the more rounded look of a Malibu interior.  Neither is better.  Just preference. But if a guy likes one design over another, he can convinced yourself that one is better.  Other things in this category would be stitch patterns, floor logos, vinyl textures,  tower looks, placement of cup holders (ahem... they don't belong on the floor, Tige!).  I suppose you could include "bling" in this category if it's purely decorative.  
• Functionality: Ease of raising or lowering tower, rack functionality (e.g. clamps, ease of swivel, fork width, etc.), helm controls/screen (e.g. too many menus, latency, backup switches, etc.), flip up seats, power seats, bow arm rests, storage (how much and how easy is the access), bimini (height, coverage, & deployment), cooler, battery location, perko switch location, fuse panel access, garbage can, etc.  
• Quality of materials: Thickness of the vinyl, how robust is the seat foam that's under the vinyl (this is often overlooked), heaviness of the carpet (if applicable), beefiness of hinges, handles, etc.  
• Assembly: This is the final frontier... this is what I picture when a guy says, "I crawled around the boat for 30 minutes."  This is includes two areas... 1) How well did the factory put it all together (e.g. cushions line up, screw heads are straight, flush, and not stripped), and 2) How well did they finish the hidden parts of the boat (e.g. under the swim platform, engine hatch, beneath the dash, under the cushions, etc.).  Did they leave ugly, unfinished fiberglass in these places, or was it all gelled and/or capped off?  

 

While design is subjective, I would argue that even before the M235, Malibu had one of the more pleasing, comfortable interiors in the business.  And their iconic forward swept towers are part of their allure.  I actually think interior & tower design is BIG part of why Malibu has such strong market share (notice I didn't say #1 because without Axis you can't really make that claim).  The extra bling in the M just adds to the design, imho.  Some like it, some don't.  It should not be confused with the other categories.  When guys like me and Darkside say the gap has narrowed, we're not talking about billet pieces... at least I'm not.  Keep reading...

I think the G boat redefined the industry when it comes to functionality.  This is what I think you guys are calling "utility."  I remember the first time I "crawled through one" I was amazed at little things like access to the perko switch, trash can, cooler, etc.  Even the tower handles... brilliant!  Nautique was really the first to perfect the rear facing seats.  Again, great utility.  Now everybody has it.  But functionality or utility is the category where the M catches up.  The G4 tower is as good or better (raising and lowering), the new fuse panel/battery switch location, access to trash can, storage (size and access), heater locations, etc.  I only have two knocks against the M's functionality: the small locker openings.  It's a trade off for the rear access, I guess.  But I prefer the massive doors of the G23 locker.  Also the fact that I still have to remove two cushions to access behind the observer seat. I prefer the "gullwing" style opening you see on the G and MC.  The biggest lapse in G functionality is the bimini.  It feels to me like maybe it was designed to look cool, like the brim on a baseball cap, but it's always partially deployed and I'm only 5'10" and I can't walk under it. That's my only real knock on the G's utility.  Well, that and the lack of rack options (both quad and clamping).  Oh, and it's hard to hard to lower the wakeview seats on the G.  I also give Malibu the nod on helm screen... for now it's simply the best in the industry.  But I loved the big armrest on the G23 (where the i-drive control rests).  See, I'm nit picking (both boats).  

I don't think the G boat is superior when it comes to quality of materials.  At best it's a tie.  Malibu and MC vinyl feels a little thicker to me, but I'm splitting hairs.  To be honest, MB kinda rules this category, IMHO.  I know I'll get killed for saying that.  They are least in the discussion.  Excluding MB, I believe the Big 3+1 all use top grade materials these days.  Nobody is cutting corners here anymore.  Shout out here to Malibu's new windshield.  That is one BEEFY piece of hardware. 

CC's calling card (even before the G) has always been assembly, and rightfully so. I think the M235 narrows the gap here as well.  My evidence is there are no more unfinished areas of the boat (i.e. under the helm, the engine hatch, underside of the platform, etc.).  Everything is glassed, gelled, and polished to a mirror finish.  I couldn't find any unfinished fiberglass anywhere.  And the manufacturing tolerances seemed tighter to me in all three M's I've been in.  

Anyway, I guess what I'm really saying is (for those of you still reading), if you think the M235 is just like every other Malibu interior with a bunch of billet sprinkled on top, you aren't looking close enough.  It has definitely become more G-like, which was obviously Malibu's goal.  

Okay, that's enough for now.  Honestly guys, I would own either boat.  In.a.hearbeat! 

Edited March 16, 2016 by IXFE

[TenTwentyOne]

^ Well said.

And yes, what you would call "functionality" is what we are reffering to as "utilitarian". It is easy to blur the lines of those two, "functional" is a synonym of utilitarian. I think utilitarian just means that a greater design focus was placed on functionality rather than attractiveness.

I definitely agree with your gripes on the original G Bimini. Although, I think the new Sewlong Bimini solves for those shortcomings. 

[pauley71]

On 3/15/2016 at 8:00 PM, DarkSide said:

  I was also invited to demo an X26, I may go but no real interest in it.  freaking huge boat though.   Even MC  guy says X23 is still thier surf boat. 

They are challenging the M prices.  We all know the % off MC isn't as strong as Malibu so I would say the X26 is the 'street price' king (ie, highest).

http://www.onlyinboards.com/2016-MasterCraft-X26-for-sale-Sacramento-California-55573.aspx

 

[ahopkins22LSV]

I proved to my friend at the Detroit show that a human could fit in the port side seat storage by getting in it myself. And I can confirm that the fit and finish, assembly, quality, or whatever the hell we want to call it in the compartments of the M is extremely nice well done! Better then any Malibu I have seen.

 

To be fair, I did not submerse myself in a compartment in a G though, so maybe that isn't a fair comparison

Very nice post though IXFE!

[bamabonners]

On 3/14/2016 at 5:16 PM, ibelonginprison said:

Rub it in, Mr. "I've been to boat shows in three different states so far this year." 

 

That's funny!  You just won the internet.

[Fman]

On March 14, 2016 at 2:55 PM, IXFE said:

 

Totally agree on "dealer cost."  That's what I was trying to say.  Show me the invoice or I don't believe it.  Talk is cheap.  

The $150K price point was my "street price" estimate of an M235 decontent, which is NOT what is being displayed at the shows.  No way you could get the fully loaded M's for that price.  Just like you'd be hard pressed to get a G with every box checked for that price.  

And I also agree that the G was probably never a "bling" boat.  That crown goes to the failed X-star.  But I don't know if I'd call a G "utilitarian."  Axis is utilitarian.  Moomba is utilitarian.  Rewind the clock a year... would anybody have ever said, "Buy a G if you want a utilitarian wake machine?"   LOL.  Not likely.  But it's easy to say that now that the M is out.  That's what Darkside is referring to... the bar just got raised again. 

I get what you mean about typing up loose ends.  Malibu's have not traditionally been very pretty underneath the seats, under the dash, in the engine bay, etc.  But the M is more than just a bunch of billet pieces.  It has a lot of the same great well thought out "user features" we find in the G.  And it's excessively "finished" in the all the hidden places.  I've said it before and I'll say it again... you really have to see this boat to appreciate it.  Not that you'll buy it (I'm not).  But pics don't do justice to the level of craftsmanship this boat exudes.  

All that said... while at the Sac show last week I spent 30 minutes sitting in a G23, talking to their really great salesman, and poking around.  I'd been inside G's before, but never with so much time to really soak in all the little things.  I gotta say, it is a damn fine boat.  Ask Fman... I said many times while sitting there, "I could rock tihs boat easily and be a very happy man."  So many nice features I hadn't noticed before.  The only thing I didn't like were the racks, the bimini, and the offcenter screen.  It did feel small compared to the M we had just spent an equal amount of time in.  Isn't that funny... a G23 feeling small.  The made the 23 LSV it was sitting next to feel like a row boat.  What has this industry done??? 

 

 

No, my wittle VLX felt crazy small! the sales "dude" Nautique had was entertaining, very nice kid and we did explain to him what a chine was under the boat... so he learned a few things from us!  and maybe he should practice getting that bimini cover off, he made the Malibu G3.2 bimini look simple... ahhhh.... attention to detail youngster!

Edited March 16, 2016 by Fman

[IXFE]

10 hours ago, Fman said:

 

No, my wittle VLX felt crazy small! the sales "dude" Nautique had was entertaining, very nice kid and we did explain to him what a chine was under the boat... so he learned a few things from us!  and maybe he should practice getting that bimini cover off, he made the Malibu G3.2 bimini look simple... ahhhh.... attention to detail youngster!

Haha... Yeah that kid was funny. But there were definitely some gaps in his knowledge. 

I have to admit, the Bimini episode was kinda funny. He was like, "The Bimini is easy, let me show you.... (struggles with the cover for 30 seconds)... uh, never mind." 

[bamabonners]

Every boat I've owned has had struggles with the bimini.  It is like the engineers don't pay attention to that feature.  At the end of a long hot day, the last thing I want to do is mess with the torture device known as the bimini and bimini cover.  I went with the Z5 this time.  I'm lucky - I never had the need to take it down.  It was work the 2k I spent on it.