TXI - end of the line?

[braindamage]

There are many ways to obsolete a product line. Starving it of resources and promotion is a pretty common one. 

[Tjards]

Malibu has sent out an email to dealers stating the TXI is not going away

[85 Barefoot]

On 2/17/2024 at 12:59 AM, Tjards said:

Malibu has sent out an email to dealers stating the TXI is not going away

Sure, they can say that they’ll take an order, but I would be very confident that in two years no one orders a txi

[Woodski]

On 2/19/2024 at 3:07 PM, 85 Barefoot said:

Sure, they can say that they’ll take an order, but I would be very confident that in two years no one orders a txi

It sounds like the TXI is relatively popular in Europe.  The Aussie / Kiwi market may remain solid given Malibu makes boats in Oz.  Stateside may be a tough one with no promo boats or event promotion.

[oldjeep]

Course skiing is a dying thing.  They might just be ahead of the curve.  Same thing is happening in downhill racing.

 

Edited February 21 by oldjeep

[HollywoodBall]

Serious question, how much have they innovated the wake on the newer slalom boats?  Or did they plateau, and the ski wake is just as good as boats 10-12-15-20 years old?  Asking from a place of pure ignorance, not being a smart a**.

[UWSkier]

44 minutes ago, HollywoodBall said:

Serious question, how much have they innovated the wake on the newer slalom boats?  Or did they plateau, and the ski wake is just as good as boats 10-12-15-20 years old?  Asking from a place of pure ignorance, not being a smart a**.

A 26 year old Response on the original Diamond hull has wakes that rival anything made today.  Maybe 9/10 compared to current.  What the old boat lacks though is modern speed control and Gen 5 engines like you're likely to see in many tournaments.  Still, unless you're a tournament die-hard, the new boat doesn't really do much for you.  In fact, the interior appointments of my 23 year old boat are better for public water than that of the newest slalom rigs.  They don't even have trunks anymore.

[SkiPablo]

On 2/20/2024 at 7:58 PM, oldjeep said:

Course skiing is a dying thing.  They might just be ahead of the curve.  Same thing is happening in downhill racing.

 

maybe, but not the case where I live - we have 5 slalom lakes within an hour of my house! - we started a brand new course lake in 2020 and have 16 families that are part of it now.    I do think that Malibu ruined the look on the TXI in the last major revision (weird nose and weird cuts) - i like the Response LXI and the 1st Gen TXI looks better.

Edited February 22 by SkiPablo

[oldjeep]

49 minutes ago, SkiPablo said:

maybe, but not the case where I live - we have 5 slalom lakes within an hour of my house! - we started a brand course lake in 2020 and have 16 families that are part of it now.    I do think that Malibu ruined the look on the TXI in the last major revision (weird nose and weird cuts) - i like the Repsonse LXI and the 1st Gen TXI looks better.

We have tons of courses near my house too - the people using them are my age or older

[HollywoodBall]

1 hour ago, UWSkier said:

A 26 year old Response on the original Diamond hull has wakes that rival anything made today.  Maybe 9/10 compared to current.  What the old boat lacks though is modern speed control and Gen 5 engines like you're likely to see in many tournaments.  Still, unless you're a tournament die-hard, the new boat doesn't really do much for you.  In fact, the interior appointments of my 23 year old boat are better for public water than that of the newest slalom rigs.  They don't even have trunks anymore.

This is what I was sort of thinking.  I've seen a handful of comments from skiers on the Nautique forum (my previous boat was a 97 Air (Sport) Nautique and I often saw comments that their current 25+ year old boat's wake was just as good or better than what was coming out and that $100K slalom ski boat just wasn't worth it.  With a dwindling interest in that particular water sport, I can see why they would pull out.

[UWSkier]

1 hour ago, oldjeep said:

We have tons of courses near my house too - the people using them are my age or older

I'd say for tournaments, the average skier age is probably mid to late 50s.  But when I'm out at the ski lake, I also see plenty of teens and college age kids skiing.

The problem, as @jjackkrash has pointed out, is that as wake boats have chased skiers off of public water, course slalom has become like dressage, polo, etc.  A sport for rich kids.  Collegiate programs are thriving, but those kids graduate and mostly move back to public water, which largely means no courses.  The boomers are holding onto their ski lake homes until they croak, or they try to sell them for $3 Million.

[Woodski]

4 hours ago, HollywoodBall said:

Serious question, how much have they innovated the wake on the newer slalom boats?  Or did they plateau, and the ski wake is just as good as boats 10-12-15-20 years old?  Asking from a place of pure ignorance, not being a smart a**.

Specifically on the wake - improvements have been subtle since the very good wakes of the 90's Prostar 190 ('91-94), SN 196, Malibu SV23 hull (Echelon/Response LX, LXI, TXI).  Many hard core shortline slalom skiers still prefer the SN 196 wakes as the best.  The latest generation (post '14 +/-) boats from the big three focused on improving long line wakes.  

The improvements have come in improved tracking (SN 200 most notably as a gold standard), and post 96 power increases.  '08 onward ZO (Zero Off)has been the mandated (lawsuit settled) DBW ECU speed control.

Shortcomings - the newer slalom tugs are bigger (wider) and heavier than the earlier versions, all tipping the scales at over 3,000 lbs.  And expensive.

A lot is personal preference - I have found the latest Prostar to have (by a slight amount) the softest wakes for slalom.  With all that, very hard to justify from purely a performance aspect a new $100k slalom tug is worth 2-4 times what one could pick up a nice used mid 2k tug for. 

[85 Barefoot]

18 hours ago, oldjeep said:

Course skiing is a dying thing.  They might just be ahead of the curve.  Same thing is happening in downhill racing.

 

Junior, skier numbers at nationals are actually on par with nationals 15 years ago. Tournaments skiing isn’t dead yet.  The biggest nationals in history was three years ago.  

[85 Barefoot]

37 minutes ago, Woodski said:

Specifically on the wake - improvements have been subtle since the very good wakes of the 90's Prostar 190 ('91-94), SN 196, Malibu SV23 hull (Echelon/Response LX, LXI, TXI).  Many hard core shortline slalom skiers still prefer the SN 196 wakes as the best.  The latest generation (post '14 +/-) boats from the big three focused on improving long line wakes.  

The improvements have come in improved tracking (SN 200 most notably as a gold standard), and post 96 power increases.  '08 onward ZO (Zero Off)has been the mandated (lawsuit settled) DBW ECU speed control.

Shortcomings - the newer slalom tugs are bigger (wider) and heavier than the earlier versions, all tipping the scales at over 3,000 lbs.  And expensive.

A lot is personal preference - I have found the latest Prostar to have (by a slight amount) the softest wakes for slalom.  With all that, very hard to justify from purely a performance aspect a new $100k slalom tug is worth 2-4 times what one could pick up a nice used mid 2k tug for. 

I’ve had multiple responses, sunsetter Lxis, 2 response lxis, a bubble back nautique, a 196, and now have the newest Ski Nautique design with the 6.2.  The biggest improvements across-the-board are in jump (for those that can take advantage of the power).  As for slalom wakes, they’re like everything else, everyone’s got an opinion. My favorite wake was my old bubble back Nautique. However, it was carbureted and ran perfect pass.  196 was Zero Off, and I liked the way it skied quite a bit, but there is definitely improvements seen in the new Nautique.  There is absolutely no spray concern in the new Nautique and it tracks like an Abrams tank.   In terms of wake characteristics, in my opinion, Malibu has stayed the most consistent. It’s basically still the SV 23 Hull from 25 years ago.  

Short answer, are there reasons to spend six figures on a ski tug?  Yes. Are they compelling enough for everyone? Obviously not.

[jjackkrash]

46 minutes ago, Woodski said:

 

Shortcomings - the newer slalom tugs are bigger (wider) and heavier than the earlier versions, all tipping the scales at over 3,000 lbs.  And expensive.

 

The 2019+ Ski Nautique is right around 3k lbs. despite its size thanks to a hand laid carbon fiber hull.  The downside is price.  This really, really drove up the build cost of the boat, and reduced its profitability from what I am told, and also allowed the other two manufacturers came along for the price ride.     

[uk_exile]

The slalom wakes have improved at 58kph and 55kph for shorter line lengths. Hull design focus is on the upper 0.5% of skiers. However at slower speeds or longer line lengths the wakes have stayed same, are similar or have become worse. That's often why commenters say their older Nautank, Mastercrap or whatever are better then current models. For their level skiing it's true.

[Woodski]

@uk_exile - I don’t disagree with your analysis and watching the youngsters compete (on TWBC broadcasts) they do bounce at longer line lengths.  The mfg’s have stated the hull improvements were targeted at longer line lengths - specifically the ‘16 TXI deadrise change and the ‘14 Prostar.  But saying and reality perhaps don’t match.

[uk_exile]

@Woodski the reality is boats have become heavier. Works ok at higher speeds with tweaks in hull design, tracking is great, etc but sadly at lower speeds the physics dominates and the weight becomes higher wakes. Not ideal for juniors or for adult learners.  Can't win them all!

[Woodski]

@uk_exile - 100% agree on weight, a pet peeve of mine for a tourney boat.  Given the numerous examples of wakes being improved with even the simple commonly known items such as taking out rear seats, running low fuel, etc. it is sad to have watched the weight climb from 2500 +/- lbs to an average of over 3000 lbs.  Like you say, can't win them all.  Every time I see your profile location I think green mussels, they are so good.

@jjackkrash - the Ski SN is not a full carbon hull, it is a blend so not sure the % material / weight breakdown.  To your point, carbon parts or construction can really reduce the weight.  Carbon cloth is not cheap.

 

[85 Barefoot]

It’s not “just” weight.  Running surface, particularly width, and running attitude (can) compensate for weight.  In my personal experience, the last response I owned was an 05.  Great wake at 30+.  Slower speeds though it ran significantly more bow high and with a relatively narrow hull, crests were larger than other options.  Is it splitting hairs, sure, but just because boats get heavier doesn;t mean they’re moving backward from behind the boat.

[85 Barefoot]

Just now, 85 Barefoot said:

It’s not “just” weight.  Running surface, particularly width, and running attitude (can) compensate for weight.  In my personal experience, the last response I owned was an 05.  Great wake at 30+.  Slower speeds though it ran significantly more bow high and with a relatively narrow hull, crests were larger than other options.  Is it splitting hairs, sure, but just because boats get heavier doesn;t mean they’re moving backward from behind the boat.

It’s kind of similar to comparing sportster to response.  Sportster was lighter but few would prefer sportster wake to response.  Yes I realize that the sportster was never on the diamond but that’s kind of the point. Hull design can compensate for higher weight.

[LXRBarefooter]

19 hours ago, Woodski said:

@uk_exile - 100% agree on weight, a pet peeve of mine for a tourney boat.  Given the numerous examples of wakes being improved with even the simple commonly known items such as taking out rear seats, running low fuel, etc. it is sad to have watched the weight climb from 2500 +/- lbs to an average of over 3000 lbs.  Like you say, can't win them all.  Every time I see your profile location I think green mussels, they are so good.

@jjackkrash - the Ski SN is not a full carbon hull, it is a blend so not sure the % material / weight breakdown.  To your point, carbon parts or construction can really reduce the weight.  Carbon cloth is not cheap.

 

Carbon fibre matting is awesome, and carbon in general is groundbreaking, but the significant strength to weight gains of going to fibreglass matting over chopped strand combined with getting you glass to resin ratios nailed via resin transfer or vacuum molds shouldn’t be ignored. 
 

A lot of boats could see strength to weight efficiencies through adopting fibreglass mat and better resin injection techniques, if you coupled this with more use of honeycomb stiffening you’d be a long way of the way there. Throw in a few bits of aluminium and an Alloy engine block and you’d be about as good as you could get without using exotic materials like Carbon, Kevlar, and more exciting honeycombs than plain old PVC or aluminium.
 

It amazes me every time I stick my head under the dash or poke around the bilge of my Response just how much glass is in these boats. Is it any wonder they’re around 1350kg/3000lbs.

Don’t get me wrong, I love the fact my boat is built like a tank, the weight and rigidity are amazing for surviving surf wakes, but surely there’s a better way that doesn’t blow the bank account out to the astronomical amounts they’re up to now. 

Edited February 22 by LXRBarefooter

[jjackkrash]

@HollywoodBall, my take on your query is "the wake" is a small part of what separates ski boats, IMO.  Tracking, build quality, seat ergonomics, power, speed consistency under load, versatility and adjustability have all come a long way over the years.  The new SN is a truly amazing 3-event boat with ballast and a wake you can customize for slalom trick and jump.  It can even be dialed in specifically for junior/novice skiers once you understand how to micro-adjust the hydrogate using dealer codes.  The tracking and driver feel makes it a joy to drive.   And other things like having the gas tank wrap around the engine towards the bow are huge because now the wake does not materially change depending on fuel level.

I ski behind all brands and can't tell much difference from the handle, truth be told, but I can tell a difference in the driver's seat.  I will also say I do really like the new MC as well and the Response and would take a newish modern boat over any of the old classics all day every day.  That said, I also have ski buddies with 90s classic ski boats and won't pass up a ride behind those boats either, they are just are not as easy to drive in a strait line.  I personally skied behind a $12K old American Skier for a lot of seasons when I was between Nautiques and has happy as a clam to be skiing, but when my budget improved I was also happy to upgrade.

So to summarize, there are plenty of options on a tight budget, but there are real and actual benefits to upgrading if your budget allows. 

 

 

Edited February 22 by jjackkrash

[LXRBarefooter]

5 minutes ago, jjackkrash said:

@HollywoodBall, my take on your query is "the wake" is a small part of what separates ski boats, IMO.  Tracking, build quality, seat ergonomics, power, speed consistency under load, versatility and adjustability have all come a long way over the years.  The new SN is a truly amazing 3-event boat with ballast and a wake you can customize for slalom trick and jump.  It can even be dialed in specifically for junior/novice skiers once you understand how to micro-adjust the hydrogate using dealer codes.  The tracking and driver feel makes it a joy to drive.   And other things like having the gas tank wrap around the engine towards the bow are huge because now the wake does not materially change depending on fuel level.

I ski behind all brands and can't tell much difference from the handle, truth be told, but I can tell a difference in the driver's seat.  I will also say I do really like the new MC as well and the Response and would take a newish modern boat over any of the old classics all day every day.  That said, I also have ski buddies with 90s classic ski boats and won't pass up a ride behind those boats either, they are just are not as easy to drive in a strait line.  I personally skied behind a $12K old American Skier for a lot of seasons when I was between Nautiques and has happy as a clam to be skiing, but when my budget improved I was also happy to upgrade.

So to summarize, there are plenty of options on a tight budget, but there are real and actual benefits to upgrading if your budget allows. 

 

 

@jjackkrash you raise a lot of good design features there. The vast majority of them could be incorporated into a ‘base’ model slalom boat with relatively low cost overheads. 
 

Basic things like using glass matting, optimum resin ratios, placing fuel tanks in the centerline around the boat’s centre of mass, adding small (yet effective) ballast/trim tanks at the boats extremities (increasing CoG arm and thus effective moment, with minimal weight penalty) and using the right prop combo with alloy engines & closed circuit coolant all add to an optimal experience, reduce weight yet add minimal costs.

Touch screen digital displays, big stereos, high tech DI engines, electric adjustable trim/cav plates and excessively styled interiors all add cost, weight and complexity. 
 

In an effort to keep up with the ‘bling’ that modern wake and surf boats have, many manufacturers have forgotten that a boat’s fundamental design should be rock solid, and simple. The rest should just be optional extras if, and when needed. 
 

There’s a reason B.O.A.T stands for Bring on another thousand…
 

Some people just want the Tradesman pack not the Limited with all the bells and whistles when they buy their next pickup. All the fun none of the fluff. 

[jjackkrash]

20 minutes ago, LXRBarefooter said:

@jjackkrash you raise a lot of good design features there. The vast majority of them could be incorporated into a ‘base’ model slalom boat with relatively low cost overheads. 
 

The profits are directly tied to the so called "fluff" and "bling" and ski boats, as they sit, are the lowest profit boats these manufacturers make.  None of the current manufacturers have any interest in making even less profit per boat and I seriously doubt there are any new manufacturers looking to jump into this niche market.  The current choice is the ski boats they make now or no ski boats.  There is no going backwards.  

Edited February 22 by jjackkrash