Consumer Wishlist - Manufacturers Take Note

[J-RAD]

With all the talk of the new model boats being released and what people like or dislike about them, I thought, we need a thread to let the manufacturers (all or one in particular) know what we want. What do you wish your boat had, what would you change, what could improve. Maybe, just maybe the boat manufacturer's will follow and take notes.

I know this could easily slup to the more negative, what's wrong with your boat theme... but keep the "wishlist" topic in mind. We all wish our boats didn't leak...

 

[Meetball]

I wish there was more storage, I havnt looked at the new boats but on mine there just isnt enough

 

[J-RAD]

Here's my list

1. I boat at high altitude and I'd like to see twin 1.8 SVHO gas sucking engines in a 24 ft Yamaha so I can go fast when I want to
2. Better Hull design for surfing
3. Higher quality/more durable vinyl
4. Power raise and lower tower mechanism
5. Drive by wire throttle in all models

I'll probably think of more the moment I post this...

 

[Ancient canoe]

I'd like the opposite. Less innovation or just less shiny gadgetry so it can get back to my price range.

 

[swatski]

Here's my list

1. I boat at high altitude and I'd like to see twin 1.8 SVHO gas sucking engines in a 24 ft Yamaha so I can go fast when I want to
2. Better Hull design for surfing
3. Higher quality/more durable vinyl
4. Power raise and lower tower mechanism
5. Drive by wire throttle in all models

I'll probably think of more the moment I post this...

Well, how much would you be willing to pay for that?
I also think that one of the issues is with your number 1., speed, being almost mutually exclusive with 2... Pushing top speed generally requires minimal contact of the hull with water, and placement of the intakes, which does not work well for throwing a huge awake and a big surf wave.

Do you notice how no one, literally no one, with a dedicated wake boat no matter how expensive, talks about top speed? Well, we are a little bit different here, lol, but I really feel there is virtually no middle ground there!

I think what we currently have with the 240s is about as good a middle ground as one can hope for, short of some extremely creative and very expensive surf tab mods!

To me, they could certainly improve their QC, and pay more attention to fit and finish. The price range at which these boats now sell demands that!

—

 

[jEt_jAk]

Twin SVHO

 

[Maccam26]

Here's my list

1. I boat at high altitude and I'd like to see twin 1.8 SVHO gas sucking engines in a 24 ft Yamaha so I can go fast when I want to
2. Better Hull design for surfing
3. Higher quality/more durable vinyl
4. Power raise and lower tower mechanism
5. Drive by wire throttle in all models

I'll probably think of more the moment I post this...

anchor windlass

 

[J-RAD]

Well, how much would you be willing to pay for that?
I also think that one of the issues is with your number 1., speed, being almost mutually exclusive with 2... Pushing top speed generally requires minimal contact of the hull with water, and placement of the intakes, which does not work well for throwing a huge awake and a big surf wave.

Do you notice how no one, literally no one, with a dedicated wake boat no matter how expensive, talks about top speed? Well, we are a little bit different here, lol, but I really feel there is virtually no middle ground there!

I think what we currently have with the 240s is about as good a middle ground as one can hope for, short of some extremely creative and very expensive surf tab mods!

To me, they could certainly improve their QC, and pay more attention to fit and finish. The price range at which these boats now sell demands that!

—

No doubt it would cost some extra coin, both in initial cost and operation. I'm just thinking towards my next boat. Add another $5k to the price of a 242x E and I might be a player.

I think when people hear you have a twin engine jet boat, they inherently perceive a certain level higher performance. Although I'm pretty content with most everything about my boat, an extra 10 MPH wouldn't hurt my feelings or its reception by the greater public. I think the additional power options of Scarab and Chapparal make them more and more appealing to folks with a jet = speed mindset. I don't think I've seen a Scarab generate the same scale wake as a 24' Yamaha with a transom bag yet though?

I don't know what all it would take to get there... but this is a wishlist after all and I'm wishing for it all! Lol!

 

[OrangeTJ]

How about engines/drives that can maintain a nice cruising speed at 3500 - 4000 rpm so owners don’t have to constantly explain why their boats sound like they do and can actually have a conversation while underway that doesn’t require shouting? Obviously this would require a totally different type of power plant, but behind threads about fins, threads about trying to quiet these boats have got to be most numerous on the forums.

 

[John Ballard]

I would like to see better support in adding features to the Connext system. Maps are available on the 2019 but the 2018 cannot be upgraded.

 

[Neutron]

Get rid of that crap plastic roller on the trailer Shorelandr!

 

[J-RAD]

How about engines/drives that can maintain a nice cruising speed at 3500 - 4000 rpm so owners don’t have to constantly explain why their boats sound like they do and can actually have a conversation while underway that doesn’t require shouting? Obviously this would require a totally different type of power plant, but behind threads about fins, threads about trying to quiet these boats have got to be most numerous on the forums.

Do you feel the 1.8L is a step up from the MR1? I'm thinking twin 4 cyl turbo diesel would do the trick.

[HASH=84]#NotForSaleInCalifornia[/HASH]

 

[BlkGS]

I'd like to see a smaller swim deck, replaced with some extra seating space.

Some power outlets in the head for a small fridge.

Engines that run on regular unleaded.

Maybe active noise cancelling for the engines?

 

[ptwb]

Do you feel the 1.8L is a step up from the MR1?

IMO, they're not really a step up or down. More of a sideways move. Depends on what matters to you.

The MR-1s since they are higher revving, have a higher pitched sound that is really really bad. Really bad. The 1.8s are an annoying low drone. IMO, the MR-1s are only annoying once above 3k rpm but the 1.8s are always annoying especially depending on where you sit. Each is a very different sound and type of annoyance. The MR-1s cruising speed and above high pitch is way more annoying than the 1.8s low drone, but both still suck. The 1.8s cruising around at no wake speeds were fine if I was in the captains chair but if I was sitting at the very back, very annoying. The MR-1s sound problem is easier to deal with since they are higher pitched. Just sealing all the gaps makes a huge difference, but at the same time still annoying. The 1.8s are not as easy to attenuate. Nobody with either is really that happy even after extensive attempts to quiet them.

Fuel efficiency wise, they each have their good and bad. They're about the same at no-wake speeds, the MR-1s are more efficient at cruising speeds, and the 1.8s are more efficient at higher speeds to WOT. The MR-1 boats have a much longer range if you stick to cruising speeds.

One big issue with both is the engines are hard to control throttle wise if you want to pick a speed just above no-wake, but below cruising. Very little throttle movement causes the engines to jump in rpms. So Yamaha gave us an "amazing feature" called no wake mode. You have some buttons for easier speed control. The MR-1s only offer one speed, the 1.8s offer 3 speeds. This feature is really a band-aid for the lousy throttles. Imagine pulling into a parking lot and not being able to use your accelerator and needing to switch to some buttons, would you call that a feature? What if they just made the accelerator work properly for all speeds?

For me, personally, I prefer the MR-1s. Riding on my boat that I've done work to quiet vs riding on a 240 with no sound mods, I pick the sound of my "quieted" MR-1s to the factory 1.8s. I also appreciate the MR-1s having a further range and being more fuel efficient at my most common crusing speed. I do wish I had a throttle that worked properly or at least the 3 speed version of no wake.

 

[AlphaKap]

A trashcan would be nice.

 

[jEt_jAk]

I also would like a redesign on the cleanout port. The top of the plug fills with water everytime so after every day on the lake I have to remember to pull the plug once at the ramp, then again before I get home and get in to the garage. Just seems there could be a better design on this.

The other day I trailered home in the rain, and forgot to pull the plug until I was in the garage Top of plug was full of water.

 

[bronze_10]

I like matching the mr1 engines so they harmonize while cruising... if they gonna be that loud might as well make them sound as nice as I can.

 

[the MfM]

A swim platform that is at water level at rest. Or better yet one that hydraulically lowers to below water level.

 

[ptwb]

A swim platform that is at water level at rest. Or better yet one that hydraulically lowers to below water level.

The current 240 series platform is not low enough? Why exactly do you want it to go below water? So you can sit on it and be below water or to use as a super large step?

As for lowering, what about what SeaRay did on their IO models? Some models had a large part of the center of the transom swing up, over and down and now you had a very large step just underwater.

It looks like other searay models have a sub-transom that lowers from beneath the main transom.

I'm fine with Yamaha's current transom height. I like being able to back into shallow water and just step up onto the boat and I can do that now with our 230, and it's even easier on the 240. A transom that lowers hydraulically is going to add to the cost a lot.


Their much larger models, 40'!!, have not only a part that lowers but the side swings down! Now that looks like an awesome transom! Now doubt that adds to the cost!

 

[Mainah]

Not complaining or ranting but my top 3 would be very cheap for them to do.

-fix the leaks
-fix connext comm errors
-improve overall QC