WakeWorld

WakeWorld (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/index.php)
-   Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=3183)
-   -   Serious question: is a Malibu a badly built boat? (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=797219)

wakintime 03-10-2013 6:56 PM

Serious question: is a Malibu a badly built boat?
 
This is not to start a war but I always see snark little comments (ie:JetRanger) that they are made with plywood etc. Does anyone really know this for a fact? I have always thought they were right up there with MC and Nautique. I would really like someone that isn't a snob on their favorite brand answer this. It just gets really old reading the remarks. Thanks.

wakintime 03-10-2013 6:57 PM

Especially when you're plunking down a good chunk of change for one.

boardman74 03-10-2013 7:00 PM

As far as I know, none of the major Wake boat makes use any wood anywhere in their boats.

wakintime 03-10-2013 7:04 PM

I know Sanger still uses wood but they make one heck of a boat and they last forever

SS_Hooke102 03-10-2013 7:09 PM

The only thing I have ever heard as far as construction goes is that mc uses twice the amount of fiberglass as compared to most boat companies

jwmustangin 03-10-2013 7:10 PM

no wood in Malibu...
 
5 Attachment(s)
I took a tour of the Malibu plant this past Friday....no wood.

03-10-2013 7:13 PM

im not a malibu owner, but i was and didnt have any problems.. i do know one of the big things when i moved to epic was that they are thee ONLY hull that is resin infused and i dont mean any offense to antone but more fiberglass isnt the answer... a stronger thinner product is a better result

westsidarider 03-10-2013 8:02 PM

GTFOOH epic

saberworks 03-10-2013 8:08 PM

The problems with wood you have likely heard about are old pre-90s boats most of the time. People get in wet, the water goes through the carpet, seams in the floor, and soaks the floorboards and stringers, which is a costly repair.

My '04 Sanger V210 definitely has wood in certain places. It's definitely not just "marine grain plywood" as it's completely coated with and/or impregnated with some sort of finish/chemicals and in the places I've purposefully dripped water, it's beaded right off. They used to have a video on their web site talking about the wood they use and what they do to it, but I don't have a direct link.

JetRanger 03-10-2013 8:49 PM

Malibus are not a badly built boat and though some may point at CC or MC and say they are better built, I would argue that they are simply overbuilt. And even guys like MC build crappy products that go through several reiterations before made sound (towers and braces).

To put your mind at ease, I'm willing to bet no one on this forum has ever seen or even heard of a structural issue on a Malibu or even Axis (their budget brand). I'm willing to guess the same goes for any other brand.

The plywood issue was an expansion on a previous post of mine in a different thread where I referred to Malibu's propensity to putting carpet on exposed surfaces as opposed to moulded fibreglass (I can't speak intelligently on what this carpet is glued/stapled to).

Also important to note, I love to party.

03-10-2013 8:53 PM

i think Jetranger hit the nail on the head...;)

xstarrider 03-10-2013 8:57 PM

The only issues I have with Bu are their honeycomb floors. Mid 2000's Bu was still bolting all the seat base panels in with screws rather than making them in the mold. Left kind of an unsolid cheap look/feel. Some will argue its better, some won't .......for me it just left an unfinished look to me.

But as far as overall quality they are right on. Their boats all feel like lazyboys................ Very roomy, comfy, and plush I would argue the most comfortable relaxing interior in the market......... smooth lines and very simple inside interior wise .

bftskir 03-10-2013 11:48 PM

This can't possibly be a serious question.

ixfe 03-11-2013 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SS_Hooke102 (Post 1810642)
The only thing I have ever heard as far as construction goes is that mc uses twice the amount of fiberglass as compared to most boat companies

I always get a good chuckle out of this claim. Twice as much fiberglass, huh? Then the boats must weight twice as much, right?

wakintime 03-11-2013 12:13 AM

It wasn't. Just got tired of posters like JetRanger who always talks crap like he has on other threads.

nitrousbird 03-11-2013 2:41 AM

No real build quality issues with mine. Malibu hasn't used wood in a boat since the early 90's.

SS_Hooke102 03-11-2013 3:51 AM

Btw, I am not a mc pistol polisher FWIW, just a very common claim. There are a lot of great wakeboard boats out there. :)

jtiblier123 03-11-2013 5:04 AM

5 Attachment(s)
These pictures should be a testament to the quality and strength of Malibu boats as of 2003. I own two Mastercraft boats now, and would probably never go back to another company (despite the g23), but I had this Malibu before Hurricane Katrina wiped out our neighborhood back when I was living on the Gulf Coast of Mississippi. The Malibu was tossed off of its' hoist, carried about 300 yards by the hurricane's storm surge, and was dropped into a bunch of pine trees, being suspended in the air for three years. It finally fell out of the tree and sat in that spot for another 4 years. No cover, no maintenance, nothing went into this boat. It was not touched for 7 years, went through a hurricane, fell out of a tree, sat in the sun all day and it still looks this good. Insurance gave me the money so I didn't want to touch it, they said they would come get it and seven years later...no word from the insurance company. We call and they say "do what you want with it". Having already replaced the boat, we decided to give it to a close family friend who would not buy a wakeboard boat for his kids but would be able to restore the boat if given to him.

I will NEVER bash Malibu because of my story. I love my X-Star and Prostar, but this 2003 Malibu Wakesetter (direct drive) was a beast. Only problem I ever had with it was the fuel filter but I was 14 at the time and would run that engine dry every week. Wish i had more pics but here it is since it has been rescued. I hope this helps

Here she is... OLD YELLA'

cjh1669 03-11-2013 7:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SS_Hooke102 (Post 1810691)
Btw, I am not a mc pistol polisher FWIW, just a very common claim. There are a lot of great wakeboard boats out there. :)

It may be, but logic and reason should tell you it's complete BS. Like was said earlier, it would have to weigh significantly more than other boats if this were true, it's not. MCs build process on their hull is no better than any other wakeboat out there. They will calim it is and that the 2 Piece deck is better than the 3 piece used by a company like malibu. In the end each build process has it's p[positives and negatives. I wouldn't say either is better, but each has it's things different preferences would move towards. Malibus are built every bit as good as MCs and CCs, infact I prefer the interior of the BUs over both.

tdickman4 03-11-2013 8:04 AM

the vinyl rips easily on malibus

cjh1669 03-11-2013 8:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdickman4 (Post 1810721)
the vinyl rips easily on malibus

???? Really? My Bu is an 07, it's almost 6 years old and my vinyl has held up great, except my corner cushions are just starting to have issues form everyone stepping down on them, but it's a minor fix after almost 6 years of 150hr a season use. Vinyl can have issues on any boat, but as long as you take care of it it will last. I've never heard malibus vinyl as a common issue.

Brett_B 03-11-2013 8:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wakintime (Post 1810637)
This is not to start a war but I always see snark little comments (ie:JetRanger) that they are made with plywood etc. Does anyone really know this for a fact? I have always thought they were right up there with MC and Nautique. I would really like someone that isn't a snob on their favorite brand answer this. It just gets really old reading the remarks. Thanks.

JetRanger is the worst kind of brand snob. His posts illustrate that he really has no clue what he is talking about regarding any actual technical differences and is just here to troll.

As for your original question, the big 3 all make great boats, test drive them all and just get what you like the best. They all have their various bugs/problems as well. As for which manufacturer stands behind their quality, here is a simple comparison of warranties.

http://carphotos3.cardomain.com/imag...0205_large.jpg

Spend some time talking to the dealers, talking to owners, ride in the various makes that are a few years old to see how they hold up, and read the various forums for the brands to see what the most common problems are across the spectrum. For example:

Most common interior problem? Stitching.
Most common hull/deck problem? Gel cracks.
Most common mechanical/structural problems? Weak, loose, or broken towers.
Etc…

Once you start seeing what the common problems are the warranties become very telling, especially when you pay specific attention to the exclusions and limitations. Because believe me the manufacturers know exactly what their most common problems are and will write in exclusions intentionally to save on costs.

My opinion?
Nautique has the best warranty overall, but you pay more for it up front.
Malibu has the second best overall warranty, and the best drivetrain warranty at 5-years.
MC has the 3rd best overall warranty. They only cover gel for 1 year, stitching for 1 year, they have an hour limitation on their drivetrain warranty, CATS are only covered for 50 hours, and the fuel pump is only covered for 1 year even though it is a very common known problem with their boats.
Supra obviously has the shortest warranty. One of the reasons I think it’s crazy that they are charging more for an SA450/550 than the MXZ they clearly copied it off of.

I’m sure plenty will have different opinions, but this looks pretty cut and dry to me. Covering parts only doesn’t really appeal to me much. Interior parts (stitching/vinyl for example) are cheap, the labor cost to replace those parts is huge. I'm not trying to start a brand war, just trying to get some real factual info out there. I really do like all of the different boats and can see plusses and minuses to each one. So in the end just get what you like best and be happy.

chattwake 03-11-2013 8:38 AM

But, But, But, Tige has the best warranty on the planet. For five years, they will change your oil, do your dishes, wash your dog, change poopy diapers, trim the hedges AND eat your pesky leftovers.

Hahahaha just joking. This thread takes me back.

jarrod 03-11-2013 8:49 AM

This is f-ing ridiculous.

polarbill 03-11-2013 8:52 AM

I think Malibu's are complete garbage. IF one of you Malibu owners wants me to take the POS off your hands for free so you can buy a real boat I will help you out.

Just so there is no confusion those 2 sentences are completely sarcastic. Well all but the part about giving me your boat for free. I would like a free boat.

biggator 03-11-2013 8:59 AM

I'm pretty sure my '06 LSV had plywood floorboards in the lockers, but that's about it. Just traded it for a G23 - but in the entire time I owned that boat, the only things that needed replacing were ballast pumps, batteries and oil. The thing was plenty well built.

jtiblier123 03-11-2013 9:58 AM

Brett, thank you for that comparison sheet. Informative and explains a lot about why certain companies highlight certain parts of their boats more so than others.

nitrousbird 03-11-2013 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by biggator (Post 1810750)
I'm pretty sure my '06 LSV had plywood floorboards in the lockers, but that's about it. Just traded it for a G23 - but in the entire time I owned that boat, the only things that needed replacing were ballast pumps, batteries and oil. The thing was plenty well built.

No it didn't. No wood means NO WOOD. Plywood is wood. Aluminum honecomb maybe, but that's far from being wood.

wakebordr11 03-11-2013 11:37 AM

Is this thread a serious question?

boardjnky4 03-11-2013 12:32 PM

Many people have their preferences and reasons to buy other brands. Different strokes for different folks. But anyone that claims Malbu to be poorly built is a stupid person. You can't fix stupid.

tuneman 03-11-2013 1:02 PM

To answer the original question, yes! Totally dysfunctional.

The last time I went huntin’ with one, the prop got stuck in the mud. You can’t trim it up in the reeds! There's a lot of nice storage for my decoys, but that’s about it. That stupid radar arch sticks out like a sore thumb and there’s no place to mount my downriggers! The colors are so flashy, the ducks see me comin’ a mile away! Bad, bad, badly built boat.

Don’t even get me going on all the excessive vinyl my dog trashes with his muddy paws!

There are waay better duck boats out there…

JetRanger 03-11-2013 1:18 PM

I have a question: Malibu are the best selling boats out there, we all know this. Are they gaining or losing market share right now?

Here is why I ask. Malibu's have always been priced less than CC and MC yet still offer the premium construction/features/finishes. The Wakesetter brand is iconic and they marry bling, functionality, and value all in one package.

However, now several manufacturers do the same thing (Tige, MB, etc...), where Bu's are now priced with CC's and MC's (at least where I am from).

jarrod 03-11-2013 1:32 PM

I don't know about the market share. The reports for units sold used to publish every year, but I haven't seen one in a while.

I was just at the boat show. It seemed to me that the gap between Malibu and MC/CC was about the same percentage wise, and that the so called price point boats were climbing up to the Malibu prices. There seemed to be a smaller gap between Tige / Centurion and Malibu for example.

wakintime 03-11-2013 1:39 PM

Actually a cc 230 was priced right with a bu LSV with same options.

boardman74 03-11-2013 1:53 PM

Man not here. Tige and Malibu don't even compare in price. I think pricing is very regional and per dealer. Here the Tige dealer is giving away boats to gain market share and the Malibu dealer didn't seem willing to deal when I tried so there is a large price difference. But I hear the Tige dealer in Wisconsin is selling about 10K higher for the same boat and if that Malibu dealer is willing to deal it would be closer.

We can all agree...they are all getting way to expensive!!

JetRanger 03-11-2013 6:08 PM

I'd take a Tige over a Bu, say if someone was going to give me a free 22MXZ or RZ2, I'd choose the RZ2 every time.

boardman74 03-11-2013 6:42 PM

See I'm opposite. I'd take the Malibu if the price was equal. But their not.

wakebordr11 03-11-2013 7:29 PM

LOL jet pulls you in with bu is awesome then sneaks a tige vs bu slam. Nicely played sir, nicely played

Fixable 03-12-2013 7:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cjh1669 (Post 1810710)
It may be, but logic and reason should tell you it's complete BS. Like was said earlier, it would have to weigh significantly more than other boats if this were true, it's not. MCs build process on their hull is no better than any other wakeboat out there. They will calim it is and that the 2 Piece deck is better than the 3 piece used by a company like malibu. In the end each build process has it's p[positives and negatives. I wouldn't say either is better, but each has it's things different preferences would move towards. Malibus are built every bit as good as MCs and CCs, infact I prefer the interior of the BUs over both.


They are heavier....... Usually 300-600lbs compared to the same size bu. An example would be the X25 vs 21VLX. 21'6" boats, and the X25 weighs 800lbs more. You will say the X25 weighs more because of the PF.... Well, The X25 weighs more than the MXZ 22, which is a bigger boat. The perfect comparo is probably X30 vs the 23LSV. The X30 weighs 600lbs more and they are sized exactly the same.

MC does make a heavier and thicker hull, and they also use integrated mounting plates, and a much stronger stringer system than malibu. If you are denying those facts, you are kidding yourself.

With that said, Malibu's are built strong enough. They do not need to be built any stronger! They are great boats. They are just not overbuilt like a MC or CC.

JetRanger 03-12-2013 7:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fixable (Post 1810899)
They are heavier....... Usually 300-600lbs compared to the same size bu. An example would be the X25 vs 21VLX. 21'6" boats, and the X25 weighs 800lbs more. You will say the X25 weighs more because of the PF.... Well, The X25 weighs more than the MXZ 22, which is a bigger boat. The perfect comparo is probably X30 vs the 23LSV. The X30 weighs 600lbs more and they are sized exactly the same.

MC does make a heavier and thicker hull, and they also use integrated mounting plates, and a much stronger stringer system than malibu. If you are denying those facts, you are kidding yourself.

With that said, Malibu's are built strong enough. They do not need to be built any stronger! They are great boats. They are just not overbuilt like a MC or CC.

And we've come full circle.

Someone tell me what Malibu glues/staples their carpet to on their exposed surfaces?

rallyart 03-12-2013 7:44 AM

JR Smith. To answer your original question, I think the build quality of Malibu currently and for many years has been very high. I have never owned a Malibu but I need to say that one of the reasons I bought my Sanger was because it had WOOD in its construction. The Malibus I've ridden in have all been very good. I think the fit of the interior is better than my boat and as good as the Mastercrafts and (few) CCs I've ever been in. Everyone I've talked to who owned a Malibu has thought well of them.
If I were buying another boat this year it would probably be another Sanger because of its handling and ride. Malibu would certainly be one of the boats I would be test driving though. They make good products.

cjh1669 03-12-2013 8:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fixable (Post 1810899)
They are heavier....... Usually 300-600lbs compared to the same size bu. An example would be the X25 vs 21VLX. 21'6" boats, and the X25 weighs 800lbs more. You will say the X25 weighs more because of the PF.... Well, The X25 weighs more than the MXZ 22, which is a bigger boat. The perfect comparo is probably X30 vs the 23LSV. The X30 weighs 600lbs more and they are sized exactly the same.

MC does make a heavier and thicker hull, and they also use integrated mounting plates, and a much stronger stringer system than malibu. If you are denying those facts, you are kidding yourself.

With that said, Malibu's are built strong enough. They do not need to be built any stronger! They are great boats. They are just not overbuilt like a MC or CC.

So double the fiber glass equals 300-600lbs? My next question is what do these claimed better hull structures give you? A higher price point? They definitely don't equate to real world advantages since malibu hulls aren't failing right and left. I think you've been either sold by the classic BS MC sales pitch or you are drinking the coolaid......

You also forget that MCs are V hull boats, meaning that there is more hull throughout the boat Vs malibus, which are flat bottom hulls that would have less structure on the back end of the boat itself. Could this maybe be why MCs have a slight weight advantage, as do tiges, and all the other V hull boats......

Brett_B 03-12-2013 8:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fixable (Post 1810899)
They are heavier....... Usually 300-600lbs compared to the same size bu. An example would be the X25 vs 21VLX. 21'6" boats, and the X25 weighs 800lbs more. You will say the X25 weighs more because of the PF.... Well, The X25 weighs more than the MXZ 22, which is a bigger boat. The perfect comparo is probably X30 vs the 23LSV. The X30 weighs 600lbs more and they are sized exactly the same.

MC does make a heavier and thicker hull, and they also use integrated mounting plates, and a much stronger stringer system than malibu. If you are denying those facts, you are kidding yourself.

With that said, Malibu's are built strong enough. They do not need to be built any stronger! They are great boats. They are just not overbuilt like a MC or CC.

Like it was straight out of the marketing brochure.

Trying to argue dry weights as a sign of build quality, while completely ignoring the warranty differences, is ridiculous. Manufactures don’t even calculate their dry weights the same. Regardless, even doing so when you actually look at comparable models the weights are very close, with MC being lighter even on some.


20 MXZ, 20’ pickle fork: 4000lbs
X2, 20’ pickle fork: 4300lbs

VLX, 21’6” traditional: 3700lbs
X15, 21’8” traditional: 3575lbs

22 MXZ, 22’ pickle fork: 4400lbs
2011 X-Star, 22’3” pickle fork: 4250lbs
X25, 21.5 foot pickle fork: 4570lbs

So using your weight argument the 22 MXZ clearly has a stronger "heavier and thicker hull" build than the venerable 3rd generation X-Star. :confused: Looks like the VLX tops the X15 as well...:p

cjh1669 03-12-2013 8:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brett_B (Post 1810913)
Like it was straight out of the marketing brochure.

Trying to argue dry weights as a sign of build quality, while completely ignoring the warranty differences, is ridiculous. Manufactures don’t even calculate their dry weights the same. Regardless, even doing so when you actually look at comparable models the weights are very close, with MC being lighter even on some.


20 MXZ, 20’ pickle fork: 4000lbs
X2, 20’ pickle fork: 4300lbs

VLX, 21’6” traditional: 3700lbs
X15, 21’8” traditional: 3575lbs

22 MXZ, 22’ pickle fork: 4400lbs
2011 X-Star, 22’3” pickle fork: 4250lbs
X25, 21.5 foot pickle fork: 4570lbs

So using your weight argument the 22 MXZ clearly has a stronger "heavier and thicker hull" build than the venerable 3rd generation X-Star. :confused: Looks like the VLX tops the X15 as well...:p

The whole argument is stupid in the first place. There isn't a wakeboat on the market well known for hull failures. Next they are going to quote the 2 piece vs 3 piece deck MC sales pitch.... MCs are great boats, but to say they are built better than Malibus, or tiges, or CCs just shows how easily you are sold and how little research you do.......

Fixable 03-12-2013 9:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brett_B (Post 1810913)
Like it was straight out of the marketing brochure.

Trying to argue dry weights as a sign of build quality, while completely ignoring the warranty differences, is ridiculous. Manufactures don’t even calculate their dry weights the same. Regardless, even doing so when you actually look at comparable models the weights are very close, with MC being lighter even on some.


20 MXZ, 20’ pickle fork: 4000lbs
X2, 20’ pickle fork: 4300lbs

VLX, 21’6” traditional: 3700lbs
X15, 21’8” traditional: 3575lbs

22 MXZ, 22’ pickle fork: 4400lbs
2011 X-Star, 22’3” pickle fork: 4250lbs
X25, 21.5 foot pickle fork: 4570lbs

So using your weight argument the 22 MXZ clearly has a stronger "heavier and thicker hull" build than the venerable 3rd generation X-Star. :confused: Looks like the VLX tops the X15 as well...:p


Funny thing is, you don't know a thing about how MC used to advertise their dry weights. Due to the MariStar line, all MCs listed a dry weight that did not include towers, or any of the ballast hardware. They advertised the same weight for a MariStar as an X series. Now that they have gotten rid of the MariStars, the X-boats list appropriate weights.

Why didn't you compare the VLX to the X10?? Oh right, because the X10 is a lot heavier, and smaller..... Go weigh an older X15, or an Xstar....

It's funny how I always hear the malibu guys calling a MC or CC a "fat heavy pig that struggles to get on plane, and can't handle as good as a bu"....... Right up until somebody mentions hull integrity.

Don't get all butthurt, sparky. I never said there was anything wrong with a Malibu. I love Malibu's. I said malibu's are built well, and there is no reason they need to be built heavier.

chattwake 03-12-2013 9:17 AM

Quote:


(JetRanger)

And we've come full circle.

Someone tell me what Malibu glues/staples their carpet to on their exposed surfaces?
I've heard that malibu uses heavier glue than Mastercraft or Moomba to affix carpet to interior hull areas. One ounce of Malibu glue weighs two ounces, while one ounce of Mastercraft or Moomba glue weights half an ounce. Clearly, Malibu's build quality is superior due to higher weight glue. Also, the Malibu glue, or as I call it, "Maliglue", has twice the spirit power of the glue used by competitors. It's like Maliglue is Mario after eating a power flower, laying waste to Bowser and making sweet sweet love to the princes, while the competitor's glue is like Luigi chasing a mushroom on level 1-1.

The carpet, or the "Malibarpet" as I call it, is consists entirely of spun baby sealion eyelashes and weighs twice as much as the carpet found in Nautiques. I mean, if you want some garbage carpet made up of hair torn from the rear end of an ugly sheep animal, go out and buy you a Nautique you sucker. I mean, heavier is better, and nothing's heavier than carpet made of baby sealion eyelashes (well, maybe if you made carpet out of Snookie's back fat, but could you imagine the smell???)

At the end of the day, I think we can all agree that heavier is better, except when it comes to women.

shawndoggy 03-12-2013 9:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fixable (Post 1810923)
Funny thing is, you don't know a thing about how MC used to advertise their dry weights. Due to the MariStar line, all MCs listed a dry weight that did not include towers, or any of the ballast hardware. They advertised the same weight for a MariStar as an X series. Now that they have gotten rid of the MariStars, the X-boats list appropriate weights.

Why didn't you compare the VLX to the X10?? Oh right, because the X10 is a lot heavier, and smaller..... Go weigh an older X15, or an Xstar....

It's funny how I always hear the malibu guys calling a MC or CC a "fat heavy pig that struggles to get on plane, and can't handle as good as a bu"....... Right up until somebody mentions hull integrity.

Don't get all butthurt, sparky. I never said there was anything wrong with a Malibu. I love Malibu's. I said malibu's are built well, and there is no reason they need to be built heavier.

So you are saying that Malibu's dry weights DO include tower, ballast, batteries, fluids, etc? Pretty much every "how much does my boat weigh" thread on themalibucrew would be counter to that, including the ones where folks have weighted their boat/trailer combos on a scale.

"Hull integrity" !?!? how and when is it important if there's no need to build a boat heavier? Why is unnecessary weight a virtue? Won't all that "hull integrity" contribute to early wear on your drivetrain (not to mention your tow vehicle's drive train) and cost you at the pump?

Surely there's a balance to be struck between durability and efficiency. Since nobody had questioned the durability of the 'bu hulls, sounds to me like added "hull integrity" is just a synonym for "unnecessary heft."

Fixable 03-12-2013 9:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cjh1669 (Post 1810908)
So double the fiber glass equals 300-600lbs? My next question is what do these claimed better hull structures give you? A higher price point? They definitely don't equate to real world advantages since malibu hulls aren't failing right and left. I think you've been either sold by the classic BS MC sales pitch or you are drinking the coolaid......

What part of "With that said, Malibu's are built strong enough. They do not need to be built any stronger! They are great boats. They are just not overbuilt like a MC or CC." Did you not understand?? Geeze you malibu guys get awfully defensive!

Fixable 03-12-2013 9:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shawndoggy (Post 1810928)
So you are saying that Malibu's dry weights DO include tower, ballast, batteries, fluids, etc? Pretty much every "how much does my boat weigh" thread on themalibucrew would be counter to that, including the ones where folks have weighted their boat/trailer combos on a scale.

"Hull integrity" !?!? how and when is it important if there's no need to build a boat heavier? Why is unnecessary weight a virtue? Won't all that "hull integrity" contribute to early wear on your drivetrain (not to mention your tow vehicle's drive train) and cost you at the pump?

Surely there's a balance to be struck between durability and efficiency. Since nobody had questioned the durability of the 'bu hulls, sounds to me like added "hull integrity" is just a synonym for "unnecessary heft."

I would tend to agree with everything you said...... No need to be overbuilt, and there is no question to the structural integrity of a malibu.

As far as the weight, my 23 LSV weighed 5180lbs on the trailer, and my X25 weighed 6050lbs on the trailer. Both boatmate TA trailers..... And yes, Bu includes a typical tower weight in their dry weight figures.

shawndoggy 03-12-2013 9:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fixable (Post 1810932)
I would tend to agree with everything you said...... No need to be overbuilt, and there is no question to the structural integrity of a malibu.

As far as the weight, my 23 LSV weighed 5180lbs on the trailer, and my X25 weighed 6050lbs on the trailer. Both boatmate TA trailers..... And yes, Bu includes a typical tower weight in their dry weight figures.

What year LSV? Current 08+ models appear to weigh much more:

http://www.themalibucrew.com/forums/...setter-23-lsv/

Fixable 03-12-2013 9:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shawndoggy (Post 1810935)
What year LSV? Current 08+ models appear to weigh much more:

http://www.themalibucrew.com/forums/...setter-23-lsv/

2010....

Just occured to me, that I may have to bite my tongue. It was a different truck when I weighed the Bu. It wasn't a diesel, so I need to figure out the difference in weight to my gasser.



Scratch that- Looks like the LSV came in at 5630 if my truck was out of gas. Slightly lighter depending on gas level.

ilikebeaverandboats 03-12-2013 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chattwake (Post 1810924)
I've heard that malibu uses heavier glue than Mastercraft or Moomba to affix carpet to interior hull areas. One ounce of Malibu glue weighs two ounces, while one ounce of Mastercraft or Moomba glue weights half an ounce. Clearly, Malibu's build quality is superior due to higher weight glue. Also, the Malibu glue, or as I call it, "Maliglue", has twice the spirit power of the glue used by competitors. It's like Maliglue is Mario after eating a power flower, laying waste to Bowser and making sweet sweet love to the princes, while the competitor's glue is like Luigi chasing a mushroom on level 1-1.

The carpet, or the "Malibarpet" as I call it, is consists entirely of spun baby sealion eyelashes and weighs twice as much as the carpet found in Nautiques. I mean, if you want some garbage carpet made up of hair torn from the rear end of an ugly sheep animal, go out and buy you a Nautique you sucker. I mean, heavier is better, and nothing's heavier than carpet made of baby sealion eyelashes (well, maybe if you made carpet out of Snookie's back fat, but could you imagine the smell???)

At the end of the day, I think we can all agree that heavier is better, except when it comes to women.

Ah! I must provide a counter argument as I do not completely agree with your statement about the volumetric weight advantage of sealion eyelashes.... How could you ignore the high quality plush feel that can only be obtained from the under coat of the rare, and illusive, Western Beaver!? Simply thinking about such plush heavy fur whilst sitting in your monstrous tow vessel will be equivalent to strategically adding 200# (multiplied by the number of people pondering the the aforementioned fur of course!). If pricepoint is your route, might a recommend a twill weave blend of 25% beaver pelt, 15% Africanized Bumblebee fuzz, and the remainder of a low grade Hossenfeffer. This proprietary blend will give you a fantastically comfortable feel for your little toes and drastically add to the overall weight of your vessel, this is the secret behind all great surf boats and the only scientifically proven method to handle double ups! Be sure that it is all glued down with a glue derived from a combination of Giraffe Elbow Grease, Fish oil, and Pabst Blue Ribbon in a mixture of 50%, 50%, 45% , respectively. This added 45% is the secret to securely fastening the beaver pelt and really locking in that weight!

jarrod 03-12-2013 10:08 AM

All of this talk about build quality is hilarious. I've owed 5 Mastercrafts (an X2 and 4 XStars), and 3 Malibu Boats (2 LSVs and an MXZ). None of these boats had any structural problems. And while they have probably changed hands a few times, I'd bet money that every one of those boats is still in great structural shape today. The only hull that I have ever seen completely fail structurally was an early 2000's Nautique 210.

Show me some examples of failed Malibu hulls, or any failed hulls by the top 3. Or better yet, show me an example of why these so called superior built boats have provided a benefit to the consumer.

chattwake 03-12-2013 10:18 AM

Joe,

With all due respect, and I mean with all respect that is due to you, (which is none), yes, you could go the Western Beaver route. That is, if you want to feel like you're in an Alaskin whore house with beaver pelts stapled to the walls. JetRanger knows what I'm talking about...

I also recommend against Hossenfeffer. I am a recent veterinarian school dropout with a best friend who is a geological engineer, and I can say with certainty that Hossenfeffer is the wrong blending choice. I mean, sure, you could use the stuff, but it's hardly hyperalergenic. I think Tige uses some Hossenfeffer in its speaker grills, and the last time I was in an RZ2, I broke out in hives. Sure, some people may not mind scratching themselves raw because of the piece of mind that they will have knowing the density of Hossenfeffer renders a heavier weight speaker grill, but I'm not in that camp. I don't care how heavy the boat is, I don't want to feel like I'm riding on a boat shaped cloud of hungry mosquitoes.

I weighed a RZ2 the other day with the Hossenfeffer equipped speakers (Stereo Pack D - as in TroyD), and it came out to 45,000 tons. Wait, now that I think about it, the RZ2 was loaded on a container ship that was also placed on the scale. Hmmmmm. For the last non-Hossenfeffer edition Malibu I weighed, I had to get Adele to sit on the swim platform just to make the damn thing register it was so light.

chattwake 03-12-2013 10:34 AM

1 Attachment(s)
For all you non-believers.

Brett_B 03-12-2013 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fixable (Post 1810923)
Funny thing is, you don't know a thing about how MC used to advertise their dry weights. Due to the MariStar line, all MCs listed a dry weight that did not include towers, or any of the ballast hardware. They advertised the same weight for a MariStar as an X series. Now that they have gotten rid of the MariStars, the X-boats list appropriate weights.

Why didn't you compare the VLX to the X10?? Oh right, because the X10 is a lot heavier, and smaller..... Go weigh an older X15, or an Xstar....

It's funny how I always hear the malibu guys calling a MC or CC a "fat heavy pig that struggles to get on plane, and can't handle as good as a bu"....... Right up until somebody mentions hull integrity.

Don't get all butthurt, sparky. I never said there was anything wrong with a Malibu. I love Malibu's. I said malibu's are built well, and there is no reason they need to be built heavier.


I love it, when presented with some actual facts your tone completely changes.

So does MC pick and chose which boats it "overbuilds" then? The 2011 X15 wasn't "overbuilt" but the X10 is? How do I make sure I get an "overbuilt" one? :confused:

Here is exactly what you said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fixable (Post 1810899)
They are heavier....... Usually 300-600lbs compared to the same size bu...MC does make a heavier and thicker hull...With that said, Malibu's are built strong enough. They do not need to be built any stronger! They are great boats. They are just not overbuilt like a MC or CC.

So all I want to know, does the 2011 X-star, the flagship of the MC wakeboat line, still have a “heavier and thicker hull” than the same size 22 MXZ? Because according to your dry-weight based “logic” it doesn’t. So the X-Star isn’t one of the special “overbuilt” MC’s then? I'm so confused. :confused:

By the way, structural analysis happens to be one of my areas. Nothing you have posted contains any technical merit what so ever. You are simply repeating all of the marketing lines your dealer fed you.

Oh, and my 2012 VLX weighs right at 5900 lbs on the trailer (certified scales) without any gear in it. When subtracting fuel, trailer, aftermarket stereo, battery, etc, my dry weight comes out to 4250 lbs. The dry weights listed by the various manufacturers are completely inconsistent, and using them as a judgment to structural integrity is absurd.

JetRanger 03-12-2013 10:41 AM

All this because I made reference to plywood.

I'm pretty most of us have plywood in our homes, what's wrong with a little OSB in our boats?

tuneman 03-12-2013 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetRanger (Post 1810973)

I'm pretty most of us have plywood in our homes, what's wrong with a little OSB in our boats?

Because the resin adhesive used to make OSB is derived from Orca blubber. So, it's completely incompatible with spun baby sealion eyelashes.

Have you ever seen what happens when an Orca comes in contact with a baby sealion??

chattwake 03-12-2013 11:23 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Tuneman,

Seen it too many times. ;(

chattwake 03-12-2013 11:24 AM

North Koreans are still trying to figure this out. So simple.

davez71 03-12-2013 11:31 AM

I have had 2 malibu VLX's and now have a Mastercraft X45. Will never say anything bad about a Malibu Boat. Never had a problem with either of the boats. My last Malibu was an 05 and i Kept it for 7 years and all I have had to do was change the oil and impellors and misc. engine parts with age. I was in a brackish water area so that took a toll on some of the chrome but it can be easily. Malbu makes as good of a boat as MC or CC.

So what they arent as heavy, they use a completely different process than MC to build there boats. There are way to many HATERs on WW that just like to type in words behind a keyboard because they can. MC, CC and Malibu are hands down the top 3 wakeboat Manufacturer and all are better than the other in certain areas. It all comes down to personal preference and what boat fits your needs.

Fixable 03-12-2013 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brett_B (Post 1810971)
I love it, when presented with some actual facts your tone completely changes.

So does MC pick and chose which boats it "overbuilds" then? The 2011 X15 wasn't "overbuilt" but the X10 is? How do I make sure I get an "overbuilt" one? :confused:

Here is exactly what you said:



So all I want to know, does the 2011 X-star, the flagship of the MC wakeboat line, still have a “heavier and thicker hull” than the same size 22 MXZ? Because according to your dry-weight based “logic” it doesn’t. So the X-Star isn’t one of the special “overbuilt” MC’s then? I'm so confused. :confused:

By the way, structural analysis happens to be one of my areas. Nothing you have posted contains any technical merit what so ever. You are simply repeating all of the marketing lines your dealer fed you.

Oh, and my 2012 VLX weighs right at 5900 lbs on the trailer (certified scales) without any gear in it. When subtracting fuel, trailer, aftermarket stereo, battery, etc, my dry weight comes out to 4250 lbs. The dry weights listed by the various manufacturers are completely inconsistent, and using them as a judgment to structural integrity is absurd.


:banghead:


As I already stated, go weigh an Xstar or an X15...... They are considerably heavier than what they were listed as.

I love how you threw in the "certified scales"........ Classic



Note to self- remember this thread when a fan-bu starts bashing MC or CC because they are too heavy and dont handle like a BU.

You are getting way too defensive about this. :D

King12 03-12-2013 11:44 AM

Ever thread Chatt posts pics in goes to another level. This is great

King12 03-12-2013 11:47 AM

Also to James thats pretty awesome that that malibu took that kind of punishment and looks like it does pretty cool

Brett_B 03-12-2013 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fixable (Post 1811005)
:banghead:


As I already stated, go weigh an Xstar or an X15...... They are considerably heavier than what they were listed as.

I love how you threw in the "certified scales"........ Classic



Note to self- remember this thread when a fan-bu starts bashing MC or CC because they are too heavy and dont handle like a BU.

You are getting way too defensive about this. :D

This is great, you get called out on your BS and suddenly everybody else is defensive. So the Mastercraft dry weights are conservative, but the Malibu ones aren't? Well when put on the scales the 22 MXZ weighs 7200lbs on a 1200lb boatmate trailer. It is heavier than the 3rd gen X-Star in both listed dry weight and in actual weights on the trailer.

So does the 2011 X-star, the flagship of the MC wakeboat line, still have a “heavier and thicker hull” than the same size 22 MXZ? Because according to your weight based “logic” it still doesn’t. I guess the X-Star isn’t one of the special “overbuilt” MC’s afterall.

Houstonshark 03-12-2013 12:26 PM

Man, I'm so confused. I thought for sure JetRanger was TroyD. His comment that he would take a Tige over a Malibu threw me for a loop.

Wait, maybe that was by design...dammit, well played TroyRanger, well played.

Nordicron 03-12-2013 1:08 PM

Would be nice if manufactures published hull thickness specs. All the big name alum fishing boat manufactures do this. Just from my scientific pounding and pressing on the hulls of new boats I'd have to say that the New x-30 hull felt thicker/stronger all over than did a MXz hull. And forget about Axis that thing felt really flimsy when I banged on it. I'll go ahead and offend Tige also because the rZ2 I banged on wasn't to much better than the axis. So I'll go out on a limb here and say that different manufactures do indeed spec their hull thickness/build standards differently, ultimately one prob costing more and being stronger than another. Now which one is it?

Seems like BU guys tend to want to be "Just as good as a MC" and MC guys feel nothing is as good as a MC. What's that say?

Fixable 03-12-2013 1:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brett_B (Post 1811016)
This is great, you get called out on your BS and suddenly everybody else is defensive. So the Mastercraft dry weights are conservative, but the Malibu ones aren't? Well when put on the scales the 22 MXZ weighs 7200lbs on a 1200lb boatmate trailer. It is heavier than the 3rd gen X-Star in both listed dry weight and in actual weights on the trailer.

So does the 2011 X-star, the flagship of the MC wakeboat line, still have a “heavier and thicker hull” than the same size 22 MXZ? Because according to your weight based “logic” it still doesn’t. I guess the X-Star isn’t one of the special “overbuilt” MC’s afterall.

Ok, sorry. What I meant to say, was "MasterCraft and Correct Craft build lighter boats than Malibu, therefore Malibu's are fat frikkin pigs!!"

I'm sorry Brett!! Malibu's are mega heavy, yo!! JFC. Get ahold of yourself. What difference does it make?? I never said a Bu was anything less than a great boat. It doesn't matter to me which one is heavier, and I should have just said "The 23' Malibu, that I had, was much lighter than the 21' MasterCraft, that I had."

boardman74 03-12-2013 2:01 PM

Just out of curiosity has anyone every had a hull failure in any of these boats that are inferior to the over built Mastercraft? What I am saying if every other hull is thinner and not as good are they failing. With all the hating on here i don't recall ever hearing about a Tige, or Axis, or Malibu hull failing because it was made of thin fiberglass.

If all other wake boat hulls are inferior you would think we'd be hearing about it. You'd think the manufacturers with life time hull warrantees would be out of business.

Doesn't Mastercraft also claim their Hp ratings are spot on and everyone else's are overrated and produce 30% less Hp than there's? When I was taught sales I was taught to sell your product on it's merits, not to sell by running the competitors down. Makes you look shady. I have walked out of dealers before that try to sell by bad mouthing all the other brands.

Nordicron 03-12-2013 2:56 PM

I don't like dealers that bad mouth either. Also I've never heard of a bayliner hull cracking or failing but that doesn't mean it doesnt happen. I'd also never spend money on a bayliner even though I've never personally heard of it. Point being if a manufacture such as bayliner takes short cuts or try's and save money with a thin hull because they get by, then I have to ask myself what other stuff do they do to save a dollar? For instance how far apart do they space their screws apart that attach the hull deck to hull bottom? For that matter does one maker use bolts and where another uses screws? How thick is the inner hull? List could go on and on. Point is these boats are all made to different standards and to say they are all the same just isn't true. It also doesn't mean that Malibu isnt made good either.

willyt 03-12-2013 3:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boardman74 (Post 1811044)
Doesn't Mastercraft also claim their Hp ratings are spot on and everyone else's are overrated and produce 30% less Hp than there's? When I was taught sales I was taught to sell your product on it's merits, not to sell by running the competitors down. Makes you look shady. I have walked out of dealers before that try to sell by bad mouthing all the other brands.

http://arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad/cert/cert.php

take that for what its worth (as its government testing). my mc dealer will quote those stats because another dealer in their area prices the indmar 5.7 against the ilmor 6.0 (obv more expensive) because the ilmor 5.7 doesnt have as many claimed horses as the indmar 5.7, now thats shady sales.

I have an xstar. i want my dry weight to be lighter so i can fit more chicks and beer on it. gosh, you guys are all focusing on the wrong stuff...

Fixable 03-12-2013 3:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boardman74 (Post 1811044)
Just out of curiosity has anyone every had a hull failure in any of these boats that are inferior to the over built Mastercraft? What I am saying if every other hull is thinner and not as good are they failing. With all the hating on here i don't recall ever hearing about a Tige, or Axis, or Malibu hull failing because it was made of thin fiberglass.

If all other wake boat hulls are inferior you would think we'd be hearing about it. You'd think the manufacturers with life time hull warrantees would be out of business.

Doesn't Mastercraft also claim their Hp ratings are spot on and everyone else's are overrated and produce 30% less Hp than there's? When I was taught sales I was taught to sell your product on it's merits, not to sell by running the competitors down. Makes you look shady. I have walked out of dealers before that try to sell by bad mouthing all the other brands.


Nah, none of the other hulls are inferior. They are all plenty strong enough.


The HP thing is because Ilmore uses SAE testing procedures for their ratings. (The engine is dynoed with all accessory drive systems, cat converters, and pumps on the motor) The other marine manufacturers were dynoing without that stuff. (Which is what the marine industry normally does) So, basically, an Ilmore will technically have 20-35 more hp than advertised, if it is dynoed under the same conditions. It was definitely not 30%.... more like 7 or 8%. It is actually true. If you look at the CARB tests on marine engines, Ilmore's tested higher than the others, compared to the advertised numbers. There is a thread somewhere on WW with that data..... That being said, the #s were appropriate for a comparative engine. An Ilmore 5.7l is rated lower than the PCM or Indmar 5.7, but on the carb tests, they were at least as powerful.

Edit- Right here is the 2013 stuff.... For instance, the 7.4L tested higher hp than the LSA 6.2 supercharged from Indmar and PCM, yet, it is rated at 34hp lower. If you look around, you can find the others..... http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad...ts.php?order=0

Fixable 03-12-2013 3:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willyt (Post 1811063)
http://arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad/cert/cert.php

take that for what its worth (as its government testing). my mc dealer will quote those stats because another dealer in their area prices the indmar 5.7 against the ilmor 6.0 (obv more expensive) because the ilmor 5.7 doesnt have as many claimed horses as the indmar 5.7, now thats shady sales.

I have an xstar. i want my dry weight to be lighter so i can fit more chicks and beer on it. gosh, you guys are all focusing on the wrong stuff...

CARB does their tests via SAE standards, and Ilmore uses these tests to rate the engines. I converted them quickly.....

Ilmore-
5.7=320hp
6.0=382hp
6.2=430hp
7.4=522hp
All same as advertised...

Indmar-
5.7=308hp adv = 350 i think.
6.0=361hp adv=410
6.2 SC=520hp adv=555

PCM-
6.0=373hp adv=409
6.2 SC=506hp adv=550

JetRanger 03-12-2013 4:05 PM

So why will no bu guys tell me what they affix the carpet to? Legit question. They must just glue it to fibreglass?

rallyart 03-12-2013 4:45 PM

I like glued in carpet more than snap in. I also like eating popcorn mixed with red Nibs in the theatre (yes, I'm Canadian so the spelling is correct)
I've seen a guy who owns a Calabria do the same but I'm not naming names.

Chattwake, I'm impressed with the quality of your spy shots. I thought only those guys that are the 'they' they always talk about had access to that sort of stuff. At least that is what 'they' say.

boardman74 03-12-2013 5:07 PM

You mean one of "those" guys??????

Like G23 James with his insider information? He is one of "those" guys!!

JetRanger 03-12-2013 5:26 PM

Here is some "inside info".

Exposed surfaces covered in carpet in Malibu's are in fact plywood until proven otherwise.

Rule of scientific deduction: you don't need to prove your theory, you only need lack of disproof.

pprior 03-12-2013 5:50 PM

http://www.latenightwithjimmyfallon....x197-14878.gif

willyt 03-12-2013 5:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetRanger (Post 1811098)
Rule of scientific deduction: you don't need to prove your theory, you only need lack of disproof.

rabbits are gods

rdlangston13 03-12-2013 7:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cjh1669 (Post 1810710)
It may be, but logic and reason should tell you it's complete BS. Like was said earlier, it would have to weigh significantly more than other boats if this were true, it's not. MCs build process on their hull is no better than any other wakeboat out there. They will calim it is and that the 2 Piece deck is better than the 3 piece used by a company like malibu. In the end each build process has it's p[positives and negatives. I wouldn't say either is better, but each has it's things different preferences would move towards. Malibus are built every bit as good as MCs and CCs, infact I prefer the interior of the BUs over both.

Actually MCs do weight more than other boats of the same size...

A MC X25 weighs in at 4,575 lbs and is 21 ft 6 inch long

A look at other boats 21-22 ft in length...
Moomba LSV - 3,800 lbs
Supra 21V - 3,600 lbs
Axis A22 - 3,600 lbs
Malibu VLX - 3,700 lbs

the only one that comes close is the Tige Z1 at 4,285 lbs

Doubling fiberglass would NOT double weight, you would have to double everything for that to happen such as running gear, engine, transmission, seat cushions, ect ect but maintaining the same thickness of fiberglass used below the water above the water line could definitely be the cause for this increase in weight. Most boats become considerably thinner the farther up you get from the bottom of the boat, maybe MCs dont?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:03 AM.