Jump to content

 

Welcome to TheMalibuCrew!

As a guest, you are welcome to poke around and view the majority of the content that we have to offer, but in order to post, search, contact members, and get full use out of the website you will need to Register for an Account. It's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the TheMalibuCrew Family today!

Sign in to follow this  
LXIONE

Family ski boat: SS Xti/Lxi, MC209 or CC216

Recommended Posts

LXIONE

Because I will have little change to test these boats over here, I will need your opinion.

We now own a Response Lxi. Great boat, But one downside: It's a SUB.

And a downside from the engine (HH 380) is a lot of noise at 1350 rpm to 1850 rpm. Could this be of the fiberglass platform?

My wife likes the SS Xti. I am worried about the weight figure of this boat.

Engine of choice would be the Monsoon. Will this be enough to pull 2 barefooters?

Will I have a reasonable slalom wake? What about fuel consumption?

Or should I go for a lighter MC209 with a MCX or CC219 with the PCM330hp?

Will Malibu have a solution for 2006?

They should bring out a solution for the old SS Lxi owners!!!

I wich I bought that boat!!

Edited by LXIONE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnDoe

First, what do you mean by SUB?

Second, do you mean the 21 foot or 23 foot Xti?

In either event, I'd stick with the Malibu no matter what. If you're a barefooter, you know how atrocious the CC barefoot wake is, so scratch that right now!

As far as the MC, it's just not worth it. Plus, with the MCX you'll have the reduction, so there's not much top end there for high end footing.

In our old response with a monsoon 320, we pulled up 4 barefooters from deep. It would run about 42 with all of them back there. So, the newer monsoon, I think, will be fine. BUT, if you're looking at the 23 footer xti, get a different prop. The stock prop will be too slow in my opinion (you'll be running wide open with 2 footers going 40 when the motor probably has the power to be propped up some more).

About the slalom wake. It won't be as good as the 209, but it's not bad. Fuel consumption will be the best with the malibu with a steeper prop. The MC turns a lot with the powerslot and the CC...well that should be out. I forgot to mention that the excalibur in that boat is like bringing a donkey to the KY derby. SLOW, SLOW, and SLOW. Not the engine's fault, it's the hull.

Edited by WakeGirl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LXIONE
First, what do you mean by SUB?

Second, do you mean the 21 foot or 23 foot Xti?

SUB= submarine= It takes very easely water in.

Sunsetter 21xti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnDoe

Sounds like an awesome pick to me! Why not the sunsetter lxi? It's the same hull, skis darn good, and a heckuva lot cheaper than the xti. Plus faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tvano

the mc bf wakes leave much to be desired, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimmy Buffett

The new SS LXi is a bit bigger than the old model, so maybe he thinks it won't be as good for footing? Anybody foot behind the new '05 SS LXi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnDoe

Yes, but it's the same hull as the xti and less weight. The last new lxi that got sold at our dealer ran 48. Not bad for a fairly heavy boat.

the mc bf wakes leave much to be desired, too.

Very true as well.

Edited by WakeGirl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimmy Buffett

Does the XTi run level in the water (side to side)? Seems like the extra fiberglass on the right, plus the driver over there, would make it constantly lean to the right. Maybe its counterbalanced somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimmy Buffett

That would annoy the crap outta me. Needs a port side ballast to balance it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lakenut

Go look at the CC. It is way smaller than my SLXi. Not near as much room or storage. The MC seems to have a bit more space and is about the same size as SLXi. (Talking about the pre 05 SLXi)

Don't know about the ski wakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnDoe

I actually really like the 209, but it doesn't sound liek it would have the top end needed, especially after the power slot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AirChair1
It's a leaner.

We have a 23 ft Sunsetter XTI and I haven't noticed the lean. However, I previously had a 21 ft Sea Ray I/O that leaned quite a bit so I might have a bad frame of reference.....

Jeff/AirChair1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnDoe

the 21 footer will lean more than the 23 footer, and you will only notice it when it's just the driver. Take it to a mastercraft dealership and have them install a mts tank and gauge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WakeGirl

Powerslot or gear reduction won't have an effect on top speed, MC hull design does. It's a fact that the hull design of MC boats is what causes them to be slower on the top end. Aside from the wake quality, that's a big reason that 'footers don't tend to like them, power slot or no. Read this thread on gear reduction for more info on how it works & why it's the cat's meow:

http://www.themalibucrew.com/forums/index....3&hl=power+slot

LXIONE,

The noise from the HH is because it's cammed up, the fiberglass platform probably has very little if any effect. For noise the Nautique is going to be the best by a good margin, even if you outfit a Malibu with every sound deadening option available & go with the least amount of engine. CC has really got that knocked.

Have you looked at the 21XTI? People either seem to either love it or hate it. The rear area (IMO) is really cramped & you give up a lot of storage over an LXI. Plus if you're using the pylon then nobody can sit in the rear, whereas on a standard layout you can get the jump seats next to the engine compartment. The other thing is that on the XTI layout the driver is really isolated from the rest so you need to decide if you like that or not, again people either love that or hate it. Not trying to talk you out of it, just trying to see all sides.

Edited by WakeGirl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnDoe
Powerslot or gear reduction won't have an effect on top speed, MC hull design does.  It's a fact that the hull design of MC boats is what causes them to be slower on the top end.  Aside from the wake quality, that's a big reason that 'footers don't tend to like them, power slot or no.  Read this thread on gear reduction for more info on how it works & why it's the cat's meow:

http://www.themalibucrew.com/forums/index....3&hl=power+slot

The powerslot most definitely affects top speed. lets say it's 1.5:1. Thats reducing the efficiency by 50%! Thus, an engine that is capable of turning x rpms and then gets reduced by 1.5 turns physically cannot go as fast as as a malibu without the reduction. You may be thinking of CC's hulls, they are slow, but MC hulls are very fast, but the props are limited in revolutions as opposed to malibu's 5000-5500. What makes MC hulls fast are the number of reverse chines underneath (4 vs malibu's 2). Thats why a sportstar, with essentially the same hull as a prostar will run faster with a smaller motor becasue there's no reduction. I would never buy a reduced boat, it's just not near fast enough. I have a friend thats a former national champion and he skis at 46. No MC can come close, the 209 in WS mags test had the MCX and ran 43 with no barefooter! At least the lxi got 46. That'd be even better with the hammerhead. The MC wake is awful, but they are out of the running right off the bat because they're not fast enough. Rlx with the HH is guaranteed to run 51, some 53. Change the prop out on a slxi and it's be plenty fast.

Edited by wakebrdgod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoverOn
It's a leaner.

We have a 23 ft Sunsetter XTI and I haven't noticed the lean. However, I previously had a 21 ft Sea Ray I/O that leaned quite a bit so I might have a bad frame of reference.....

Jeff/AirChair1

If you wakeboard goofy with only a driver you will REALLY notice it...it totally washes out the wake on the observer side....need to get about 220lbs of lead for under the observer's seat...

On the other hand...with the HH, even the 23 can move....

Edited by RoverOn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WakeGirl
Powerslot or gear reduction won't have an effect on top speed, MC hull design does.  It's a fact that the hull design of MC boats is what causes them to be slower on the top end.  Aside from the wake quality, that's a big reason that 'footers don't tend to like them, power slot or no.  Read this thread on gear reduction for more info on how it works & why it's the cat's meow:

http://www.themalibucrew.com/forums/index....3&hl=power+slot

The powerslot most definitely affects top speed. lets say it's 1.5:1. Thats reducing the efficiency by 50%! Thus, an engine that is capable of turning x rpms and then gets reduced by 1.5 turns physically cannot go as fast as as a malibu without the reduction. You may be thinking of CC's hulls, they are slow, but MC hulls are very fast, but the props are limited in revolutions as opposed to malibu's 5000-5500. What makes MC hulls fast are the number of reverse chines underneath (4 vs malibu's 2). Thats why a sportstar, with essentially the same hull as a prostar will run faster with a smaller motor becasue there's no reduction. I would never buy a reduced boat, it's just not near fast enough. I have a friend thats a former national champion and he skis at 46. No MC can come close, the 209 in WS mags test had the MCX and ran 43 with no barefooter! At least the lxi got 46. That'd be even better with the hammerhead. The MC wake is awful, but they are out of the running right off the bat because they're not fast enough. Rlx with the HH is guaranteed to run 51, some 53. Change the prop out on a slxi and it's be plenty fast.

You're talking theory, but it's not correct. Did you read that thread that I linked to? If you want to discuss it further, let's take it to that thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnDoe

I moved it. But it's not theory. A pickup truck in 1st gear won't go as fast as a ferrari becasue the ratios are different. It's the same principle.

Back to the topic, I don't think you can go wring with that new lxi. It shoudl be a great seller and will hopefully revive the DD demand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WakeGirl

Thanks for moving the subject, I've moved both yours & Bill's subsequent posts to that thread as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Malibudude

The new SLXI is a total departure from a DD ski boat w/ some great storage and performance to a large boat that really doesn't do anything well and frankly wouldn't understand why they discontinued a great model. There really isn't a model that replaced it but the RLXI would be the closest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TomS

I tried all of them on the April 16 demo days with the idea that I'd buy an RLXi. After trying all of those they had a consignment '03 Sunsetter LXi with only 17 hours in perfect condition and under warranty. I bought it over the new one. It gets through the slalom course neat and tidy just like my old Echelon LX and still has plenty of storage and room. I just don't get the new one when there are so many other choices in their line for that purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Addictedto6

Start looking for that SLXI Classic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
edwin

You mentioned a CC216 - here's a review I wrote 10/6/2003 after water testing a 216 back to back with my 2001 SLXi:

Was fortunate enough to get to test drive and ski behind an 04 Sport 216 this evening. To do a real world comparison, I brought my 01 Malibu Sunsetter LXi along to drop in the water and ski immediately after the 216. Here were my thoughts:

Styling / interior design- It's obvious that the fit and finish of the 216 far exceeds my LXi. The layouts are very similar (makes me wonder what boat CC was modeling the 216 after :lol: ). My LXi has storage under two of the 3 back jump seats, the observer seat on the LXi opens with the seat back, then the bottom removes. I question if the 216 observer seat will open completely if a bimini top is installed. Might be an issue. The 216 observer seat is a seat and half (maybe), the LXi is a full two seater. Walk thru space from observer to motor box is more open on the 216, but either boat will require observers to move their legs to allow passengers by. Trunk is larger on the LXi, might be easier for smaller people to get things out of as it's not as deep as the 216. 216 trunk looks like it will hold a ton of stuff, but will require piling things on top of one another. Overall - I could go either way here, but the CC fit and finish is outstanding.

Holeshot performance - 2 adults, 1 child on board - holeshot was great behind the 216. Actually, exceeded my expectations (330hp Excalibur motor). This has been a beef with my LXi (325hp Monsoon motor), but has recently been fixed with a bit of prop work tweaking the stock 13x14 OJ 4 blade into a 13x12. Overall - the nod goes to the 216.

Handling - slow speeds such as docking, loading on trailer, picking up a skier, the LXi is hands down better here. The dealer readily admitted that the slow speed manuvering was not as good as smaller CC's.

- skiing speeds - CC was slower to turn, req'd a much more deliberate attempt at making the boat change directions. Not bad at all, just different. LXi on the other hand has the steering wheel feel of a 96 Crown Victoria and changes direction very easily. It turns sharper, faster, and stayed flatter in the turns than the 216.

Overall, no question the LXi is better here.

Wake quality at skiing speeds - skied 30mph, 15 off for the wife, 15, 22, and 28 off at 34mph for me. 216 at 30mph is not it's strong suit. At 30mph, the boat has not lifted out of the water completely resulting in a big hump in the middle. I had no issues zipping across it, but a non-edged ski will launch. On the other hand, the LXi is very nice at this speed. Much smaller, no where as turbulent as the 216.

Bumping the speed at 15 off helped tremendously, much better but still a decent bump. 22 off at 34 has you right in the rooster tails...keep the ski on edge and it's not too big of a problem. Non-edged and the ski took to the air. 28 off was great, no reason to think shorter than 28 would be anything less than ideal. At 34 mph, I'd say the difference between the two was even more noticeable. There's just not that much there behind my LXi, especially at 22 and 28 (where I happen to ski the most)

If I were the only one to ski behind the boat, I'd say the 216 wakes would be fine. However, since we normally ski as a family, the less skilled skiers need every bit of assistance they can get. To compare the two, the LXi wins this part hands down.

Tracking - wife commented that the 216 tracked better than the LXi, rarely even felt a pull even into 28 off. This isn't the case for our LXi as I do have to fight powerful skiers a bit. 216 it is, no questions asked.

This was the best test drive I've ever been on...truly helped me make my decision and won't think twice about it. Being able to drive / ski the two boats back to back is the way to do it, at least for me. The differences between the two are readily apparent. I was hesitant about the 216's slalom wakes after watching the Waterski magazine video - the CC marketing guy basically recognizes that the 216 is targeted toward the wakeboarder who also skis a bit. I have to say I agree with him - this boat is no where as slalom focused as the the 206. Given that we ski 95% of the time, I think I'll stick with my LXi.

UPDATE as of 5.10.05 - Still haven't found a better boat for us than the SLXi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buwannabe

I looked at the same three boats last year. Deceided on either the 21 XTI or the LXI until my lake access went poof! I did not like the interior and storage of the Nautique. This is just a personal preference. As far as the Mastercraft, I loved the wake and handling but hated the back seat more than words can express. I could just here my family grumbling about sitting back there. That was enough for me. Add in the lousy sales guy and I walked. My wife loved the XTI while I had my heart set on the LXI. Obviously, had we made the purchse, we would have bought the XTI :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...