We been asking this question since the 2008 SJ came out!Curious: Question to Aquaholic's post .Why would a 4 stroke turn less than a 2 stroke Superjet ? Also: if the turning is soo bad , why doesn't Yamaha install better system during manufacturing ? Safety issue maybe ?
Curious: Question to Aquaholic's post .Why would a 4 stroke turn less than a 2 stroke Superjet ? Also: if the turning is soo bad , why doesn't Yamaha install better system during manufacturing ? Safety issue maybe ?
Like Kevbro sez... it's not so much the 4 Stroke motor that makes the new Superjet handle inferior to the Gen 2 Jet, although the substantial increase in weight does factor in. The hull length and shape and pump tunnel config, all make the new Superjet a really poor handling watercraft. Yamaha got the steering all wrong on the 2008+ two stroke, as well. It's almost as if Yamaha sourced out a gazillion short throw steering cables, and they were going to use them up no matter what. And as far as the actual steering system... perhaps RRP paid Yamaha to make it so bad?Curious: Question to Aquaholic's post .Why would a 4 stroke turn less than a 2 stroke Superjet ? Also: if the turning is soo bad , why doesn't Yamaha install better system during manufacturing ? Safety issue maybe ?
I totally disagree with that. It wouldn't have cost Yamaha anything more to at least use a longer throw cable with a different mounting location. And, things like handle bar, pole spring and grips, are 3 things that wouldn't cost Yamaha anything extra to get right, out of the crate. You know the saying, "The best you've ridden is the best you know"? Most new riders jumping on a new SuperJet, will have no idea how bad the turning is. They will struggle with the learning curve and may even develop bad habits, to boot. Not getting the steering right from the get go, is inexcusable. And, as far as the cavitation problem on this thing...how could the test riders, during development... sign off on something that is only going to frustrate owners, regardless of their skill level.A large company cannot change its products fast enough to keep up with the whims of customers, especially young ones. Making a standup that a fit and experienced rider wants would leave most of the actual buyers frustrated on the beach.
Ridiculous, eh? Why they paired such an anemic, puny pump on this thing really is a head scratcher. Maybe it was the bean counters at Yamaha mandating to use an existing pump setup off of their couch to keep production costs down? The plastic reduction nozzle ( also off of their couch) still has the reverse bucket tabs.They used a 144 pump in the new sj? Sheesh
The changes were huge! Much more fun to ride now and I'm really enjoying this ski more and more.Did the changes help much?