Thread: fz/sho/ho confused
09-15-2008, 08:38 PM #1
ok, i was thinking the sho was going to be my next ski, but i have read, re read and read again all the details from this site, other sites and yamis site. i have asked jerry questions, and im still not sure...lol..
one final time please,
looks like the sho/fz/ho ( all 3 seater models im talking about here) have the same engine 1800 and hull nanocell, pretty much the same everything with only a few differences, which to the extreme racer or those who love to juice every mile an hour more out of matters, but to me it would not... but what we do is fast riding, slow riding, wave jumping, touring, playing, a good combination of all things...
which one to get???
the stability factor is important and jerry said the sho may be best on that.
but the whole picture is now working on me...lol... is it worth the extra money for the super charger, i mean for what i want and use a ski for, will a super charger even matter, what am i going to gain with it???vs without it... like the ho is several hundreds cheaper NA. yet has same engine and hull type.. would that be better?? really never had a tough time figuring this out as i do now with 3 great choices...
09-15-2008, 08:42 PM #2
I would think that the NA HO would be a great ski for your uses, as long as 63 is fast enough for you. My brothers HO with the old engine is good for 59 and is a fine handling ski.
09-15-2008, 08:53 PM #3
VOODOO always beats me to it, but he is right. The HO will be a great ski if your not looking for all out max performance. Plus you'll get better mpg's. The FZ's have a differant hull than the SHO. But I have a SHO and just sold a 06 HO. I absolutly loved the 06 HO, it was rock steady, absolutly wonderful ski. If I was not addicted to 70mph's I would still have the 06. Bottom line is you cant go wrong with the HO if top speed is not a factor. JMO
09-15-2008, 08:56 PM #4
09-15-2008, 08:57 PM #5
09-15-2008, 09:17 PM #6
so the extra 700 cc's on the na ho is going to get me about 11-12 mph faster over teh vx sports which do about 51-52.
09-15-2008, 09:30 PM #7
09-15-2008, 09:37 PM #8
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
Without seeing a full test on the '09 FX HO, I'd say get it. The SHO will probably be $1,000 more on the street and probably not get you any more top speed. The SHO sits on the rev-limiter so easily I'm guessing the HO will have plenty of power to get there also. The SHO will give you a bit better response when you do need it. You will recover some of the cost of the SHO when you resell it. Both will get the same efficiency under the same operating conditions since it takes the same amount of energy to push a given object through the water at a given speed.
Let's say you put 250 hours on the ski in five years, you average 7 gph since you ride kind of hard sometimes, pay an average of $4 per gallon for gas, and sell it for half what you paid. The total cost of ownership will be $11,500. In the end, you will pay an extra $500 (4.3% of TCO) for the supercharger and never have to second guess whether the ski would be better with it. Definately go with the SHO.
09-15-2008, 10:02 PM #9
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Southern Florida
I just got my SHO last weekend for all the reasons you described. If I wanted include racing in the list, I would have gone with the FZ.
09-16-2008, 07:11 PM #10
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By VinceC in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (4-stroke)Replies: 8Last Post: 11-06-2012, 07:27 PM
By bic1 in forum 4-Tec PerformanceReplies: 11Last Post: 08-18-2006, 07:34 AM
By NCHeel in forum Sea Doo Open DiscussionReplies: 4Last Post: 07-29-2006, 11:04 AM
By 4-techscharger in forum 4-Tec PerformanceReplies: 1Last Post: 06-21-2006, 02:03 PM
By Totallyblown in forum 4-Tec PerformanceReplies: 49Last Post: 11-20-2005, 03:01 PM