I agree with the VX option. It would have been a much better choice and about the same cost had I gone with units a couple years old. I purchased the sparks not because they were an inexpensive ski, but because they looked fun, were half the weight and claimed to consume half the fuel. They seemed like an innovative improvement on the current choices. However, my ridiculous experience with this product can't be dismissed as simply an aberration. I have 4 of them--all with the exact same problems. I have them at my second home in the Caribbean where they are used regularly but never abused. Most of the problems I've encountered are documented--either by BRP through multiple recalls, or by service techs directly. We get seaweed and floating plastic debris (it's everywhere in the Caribbean), but apparently those fairly common ocean obstacles weren't taken into account during the design of the wear ring. The hulls are defective and the composite material chosen for them is too brittle. There are thousands of different plastic choices that could have been made based on proper design and testing. BRP obviously rushed this product to market without thorough testing. The wave jumping in various Spark videos looks fun, but the hulls on these units won't take that for long. The purpose of my posts is simply to share an experience with a product that could have been so much better. The spark is a great concept, but BRP blew it. They are arrogant and have little regard for rider safety (As a classic example of this, BRP refused to replace the defective handle bars on my skis because my second home isn't covered by a regional dealer). I, for one, would be happy to pay more for a spark-like PWC that was actually built to last. Just as Tata recently learned with the Nano, the public appetite for cheap and pooly made is very limited. I'm sure it won't be long before Yamaha releases a Spark killer, but that day can't come too soon for me.
