G23 Prop Fell Off .....

[scottb7]

"TWO" except the 3rd, which is G21. So yeah, you are wrong...about the number of boats...

[swc5150]

A Prostar with an 18" prop and 2:1 trans? You must be thinking XStar?

[Wayward]

If you look at ALL the factors affecting prop shaft loading you will see that there are only TWO boats with 17" or larger props AND a 2:1 transmission, with a significant frequency of surfing. The 2018 ProStar with an 18" prop and 2:1 transmission and the G23 with the 17. The ProStar uses a splined shaft. The G23 a keyway. And after speaking to engineers working on this very problem this is what they are thinking.

Pretty sure there is a couple more than just the XStar and G....


X24 has a 17.5” prop (hasn’t been out very long)
Malibu M235
Malibu 24 MXZ

Most notable would be the 2 Bu’s. Both of those have been out for a while with a 2:1 and 17” prop, and haven’t had issues.

Also, let’s not forget that the G’s were breaking shafts with the 550 on a 1.5:1 and 15” prop....... those were the first failures.

[greggmck]

Yea, XStar. I have owned four Master Craft boats during my waterskiing days. Thats how I still think of them

[greggmck]

Pretty sure there is a couple more than just the XStar and G....


X24 has a 17.5” prop (hasn’t been out very long)
Malibu M235
Malibu 24 MXZ

Most notable would be the 2 Bu’s. Both of those have been out for a while with a 2:1 and 17” prop, and haven’t had issues.

Also, let’s not forget that the G’s were breaking shafts with the 550 on a 1.5:1 and 15” prop....... those were the first failures.

I don't have any engineering insight into the earlier shaft failures. The earlier failures could have been for an entirely different reason.

My discussions have been about the 2018 failures caused by the long keyway cut into the latest generation shafts.

Also the information I could find indicates the 24 MXZ has a 1.76:1 Transmission not a 2:1. See: https://www.wakemakers.com/malibu-wa...oat-propellers

So that leaves the G23, XStar and the M235 with 2:1 transmissions pushing a 17"+ prop. The XStar with this new prop/transmission configuration has not been out very long and honestly I don't know what its failure rate (if any) has been. The conversations I have had with the engineers suggested a splined shaft provided more even load distribution and was less prone to failure. The Malibu M235 is not exactly a high volume boat and I don't know what shaft type (splined or keyway) it uses of if there have been any failures on it either. The point is that there are sufficient variables which cause this failure (shaft metal quality, shaft manufacturing process, keyway length, 2:1 transmission, 17" or larger prop, heavily loaded, extensive surfing, etc.).

Finally, consider that the large volume of G23s produced also introduces the need for multiple suppliers and introduces greater problems with quality control. It would seem that Nautique could definitely solve this problem with the right engineering changes, but that could mean significant production changes and perhaps less production volume for a period of time. It's frustrating they have not moved more rapidly to resolve this issue, to reduce the failures to zero. But again, the engineers working on this suggested to me that a 1 1/2" splined shaft is a likely solution, especially if the boat were updated to have greater ballast also facilitating the need for a 17 1/2 to 18" Prop.

[Wake.BC]

Malibu runs the 2:1 on the new boats wakemakers just doesn’t update right away.

Tige runs 2:1 with a 17” prop as well.


Sent from my iPhone using PLT Nautique

[Wayward]

^ This

wakemakers is always way behind on updating that stuff.

i wasn’t aware that Tige was running the 2:1 and 17 now as well, but Malibu has been running that setup on a keyed shaft for a couple years on a couple models. The M235 might not be high volume, but the bigger MXZ series boats are, and they have completed 2 years of production on a 2:1 and 17” prop now, without noted issues.

[scottb7]

"The earlier failures could have been for an entirely different reason."

You are not serious, right? Like maybe you think your right about the current boats breaking but the earlier ones are due to like the moon phase being Leo and the Sun is in Mercury. So, the mind and propeller were not connected.

Per wakemakers the m235 uses keyed shaft...Mxz uses keyed shaft...

Looks to me like lots of mfgs uses keyed shafts.

P.s. All I personally want from Nautique is for them to tell me that they will cover my prop shaft/prop even though I am out of warranty. I could live with fixing it myself, and I could live with them not admitting that there so called moral values are pretty similar to facebook. At this point 6 years in, their apology would be laura ingraham-esque.

pps. It is not so much the cost of the shaft/prop, it is just that i am a middle aged guy that still believe that they should cover something that is clearly not an owners fault, and not dependent on hours on the boat...

[Kenv]

I'm with you Scott...."The earlier failures could have been for an entirely different reason.".....completely ridiculous statement.....Jesus...really??? EVERY break has been pretty much in the same place...same m/o.......

[wakerider107]

Scott, so far Nautique has been covering the shaft replacements out of warranty. Since they haven't made a public statement acknowledging the shaft failure, they definitely won't announce that they are covering them out of warranty, but they have been so far at least.

[lucky7t]

I have an odd feeling this will get worse before it gets better. Frankly this is what’s stopping us from ordering a G. I know it’s crazy to some of you but it’s a morals thing for me . I’m shocked when I read this thread


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Kenv]

Wakerider.....wasn't the Feb 27th 2015 letter to the Nautique dealers kind of "Public Statement" acknowledging the issue?? It does say right there in the letter shaft failure. They did say exactly what is was.....not that they knew what caused it...but it was acknowledged as a problem. I agree it should have been more "Public"....but most of us deal with our boat dealers directly when something like this happens. Crazy though....how many good usable props are sitting at the bottom of our local lakes!!!

[lucky7t]

Wakerider.....wasn't the Feb 27th 2015 letter to the Nautique dealers kind of "Public Statement" acknowledging the issue?? It does say right there in the letter shaft failure. They did say exactly what is was.....not that they knew what caused it...but it was acknowledged as a problem. I agree it should have been more "Public"....but most of us deal with our boat dealers directly when something like this happens. Crazy though....how many good usable props are sitting at the bottom of our local lakes!!!

Hmm maybe another letter to new owners that it continues to happen ? Crazy thought


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[wakerider107]

Wakerider.....wasn't the Feb 27th 2015 letter to the Nautique dealers kind of "Public Statement" acknowledging the issue?? It does say right there in the letter shaft failure. They did say exactly what is was.....not that they knew what caused it...but it was acknowledged as a problem. I agree it should have been more "Public"....but most of us deal with our boat dealers directly when something like this happens. Crazy though....how many good usable props are sitting at the bottom of our local lakes!!!

I suppose that could have been considered public. It was a letter to dealers only and clearly the problem has persisted since 2015 and there has been no other bulletin to dealers that I could find.

[Kenv]

Yeah....No doubt Wake and Lucky.....there should be something more up to date put out. I was thinking.....imagine at this years boat shows....Joe shopper and family browsing around in the G23. He opens the rear locker and there is a shaft and prop in there. "What's this?" he asks the salesman. All of a sudden....Oprah jumps up on the fancy metal steps on the Nautique display and starts yelling....."You get a new shaft"!!!....and YOU get a new shaft.....you All get new shafts.....LOL