We really appreciate all of the input from this community. It was one of our first customers who directed us here with regards to the discussion over our product. The reason we created this thread is to simply help explain the reasoning behind our design.
While we believe we have changed the approach to a known problem and come up with a different design solution, we strongly agree that the competition works. Our team has owned various jet boats for many years and all of us had both systems installed. They have worked great on all our boats and we have had no reason to complain. Our founder, who has a strong Aeronautical Engineering background, initially approached the maker of one of the other products with suggestions for improvements, but they simply didn't seem interested in pursuing it. Since then, with his engineering and manufacturing capabilities he continued to refine and perfect his ideas, resulting in HydroJet Pro.
My opinion you have 3 major flaws with this design.
1. You ripped off another guys patent
2. The fins are plastic. Water and UV will drive the plasticizers out of their molecular bond and turn that plastic brittle, then force will be put on them and they will crack or break. 99% of the boating world here store their boats out of water either on a lift or a trailer, so these plastic fins will be exposed to UV most of the time. Unless you can show that the plastic you are using has a high amount of Elvaloy polymer or has undergone 10,000 hours in an accelerated weathering test, I would be suspect of using plastic.
3. The shape of the fin is a safety hazard. The lounge area design of the Yamaha jet boat is one of the most appealing aspects of these boats. It invites a social interaction at the rear of the boat with people lounging on the back of the boat and others in the water. If anyone kicks their foot wrong while in the water at the rear of the boat with your fin installed it is going to result in an injury. Basically that is why the thrust vectors and cobras have rounded designs.
1.We are engineers, not lawyers. However, our patent attorney has already done extended research and is confident that we are not infringing and that we will be eventually granted a patent on our improvements.
2.The fins are plastic indeed. A very specific type of plastic however. HDPE Marine Seaboard, which is a high density polyethylene sheet formulated to meet the specific requirements of marine and other outdoor environments. In addition, special post-production treatment enhances its ability to withstand the effects of salt water, moisture and direct sunlight. You can check out the ASTM standards and material specifications here:
http://www.aetnaplastics.com/site_media/media/attachments/aetna_product_aetnaproduct/61/Seaboard.pdf
3. We would have preferred a much more aggressive shape for more efficiency and effectiveness. However, like you said, sharp corners may be dangerous, so we compromised. Safety was a major concern during the design process of the fin. .We made sure our edges and corners were safe and that no harm will come if someone accidentally bumps into these. Due to the possible damage to people or objects, when backing the boat on a trailer, material selection was also an important safety concern. We looked at various types of plastics and metals, along with different kinds of finishing and radii. After testing a variety of prototypes, we believe we have found the best compromise.
Thank you again for all your feedback. We hope to be able to keep answering all your questions.
