Hahahah love the intro..I get it man! Kawi also features a stainless steel handlebar and adjustable all-steel steering riser on the Kawi (SeaDoo is 100% plastic) fabricated catch can, factory rear-exit exhaust, stainless oval-edge impeller stock from factory, and maintenance-free through hull bearing. As you guys mention in the video, the SeaDoo has a better reverse system (when it’s not throwing errors) and the SeaDoo accessory offerings are much more robust. For long-term durability and reliability go Kawi. That n/a 1498cc engine is proven both on the water and on the track, has no known issues or problems, and is exceptionally easy to maintain.
Hey! THIS mum wants something a little sportier!!! Lol. I'm used to ridung a Yamaha R6 on the road so the Kawasaki is definiteky what I'm looking to buy (but the 310 Ultra LX). Have learnt a lot from your videos before making my purchase, so thanks a bunch! From Gold Coast Australia. 😁
Great shootout Kevin, you and Greg did a good job explaining the two PWC’s. I would agree the Kawi is the better choice between the two PWC’s. Thanks for sharing
Thanks for another great review Kawasaki all the way for me down here in Australia Kawasaki comes a 5-year warranty Seadoo a 2-year warranty and Yamaha with a 3 year warranty.
Ive been racing skiis since 1996 ijsba old school, have never used a brake on a skii ever. the yamaha reverse in docking is fantastic one lever no switching sides like the seadoos
Our 2007 Ultra 250x, is fun, fast, and still looks great. Contemplating if we should update, but Kawi hasn't really updated the hull, and really thinking about going to a SeaDoo gtx for easier hull access when on the water. Other complaint out our ultra is the nose really submarines when in a wake zone, never liked that, and newer ones do the same, plowing the water instead of riding over it.
The Sea Doo GTX is the perfect blend of Comfort, performance & swagger with his industry - leading and Stability hull & low center of gravity and genius.
So , I remember you saying the seadoo 170 power felt “wore out” .. does the Kawasaki feel under powered ?? I know Kawasaki is known for making engines with great torque.. does it have good pull and just kinda lack on top end ? Are there good mods for performance for the Kawasaki?
Kawi needs to talk to actual riders about the bow storage use but I do love the gullwing storage. Sea Doo storage is great but would not swap it for the Kawi gullwings and cupholders.
If the engine is not setup to use higher octane gas, you are 100% wasting your money if you use higher octane gas. It’s not “cleaner”. It’s not “better” for the engine.
You are clever to know this little known fact. Without going into too much detail the main problem with high octane fuels is they take longer to burn in the combustion cycle so most of it will go out the exhaust port and you will get less power.
Thanks so much for the video. 60 lbs. Maybe that will take some of the wind out of the "Kawi is so heavy" argument. How about the Kawi catch can weight?
@@watercraftjournal it has a catch can believe it or not! It’s actually the same can they put on the ultra 250 and 260- it’s smaller than the one on the 310s.
The Kawi should include the adjustable seat on all Ultras. Especially considering the Kawi price. 2024 increase bites BUT Kawi is made in USA vs Mexico!
Not quite. You heard that the Kawi had 5 gallons left in the tank, meaning it burning over 16 gallons. The Sea-Doo did about the same. They were almost identical.
While this was a great review, as always, it should be noted that both of these machines call for 87 octane gasoline. Using a higher octane certainly won’t hurt anything besides your wallet more, it also doesn’t help in any way with more power. Using “the good stuff” is not in any way, shape or form better than using 87. All have the same ethanol content and additives for what the brand specifies. So it’s yours and anyone else’s business what they want to pay for, but just know you’re not doing anything any better. Now If the engine has a compression ratio, timing mods or boost that requires higher octane and is specified for that engine, then yes, you absolutely need to use it.
This comment is DEMONSTRABLY wrong. All 3rd party data proves otherwise. Using premium fuel provides superior ADDITIVES that reduce wear, knocking (detonation) and carbon collection. Yes, octane is higher, which improves ignition completion, but it's not just about octane but additives. Gmtail's comment is wrong.
@@watercraftjournalWe are at an impasse here sir, and I’d have to say you are incorrect. Higher octane fuel is NOT universally better. You speak of complete combustion, which in some cases, using higher octane in an engine not designed for it can result in lower power output and incomplete combustion. This could also result in the wasting of fuel, although it’s negligible. I’d say let’s not argue about it. You are influential in the industry, so get ahold of some engineers from the companies, as well as some petrol chemical folks and let’s see what they have to say. 👍
Like Lake Speed Jr., developer of DRIVEN Racing? How about Aaron Michaels at Rockett Racing? BOTH sponsored me while I raced and both detailed why. Also, how about Neal Hassman, Plant Facilities Manager of Exxon's Long Beach refinery? He was my neighbor growing up. Told me all about it. Hmm... Oh, I know, how about Rotax’s Project Manager Norbert Schofbanker who's words I literally repeated in this video? It's always funny when YT commenters try to bring their tertiary opinions to a fact fight.
@@watercraftjournal exactly. How about those guys. That’s my point, let’s hear from them. I know you’re background, and I trust your info, however I’m still saying you’re wrong(just about this single subject) You don’t know my background, but trust me, I’m more than a regular YT commenter. But again, please, let’s hear from those guys. At the end of the day I am in no way starting Sh^*+ with you, however there are tons of misconceptions about gasoline. And it would be awesome to hear from experts. I think that’s fair.
I raced NHRA Stock Eliminator for many years and have considerable experience with different octane fuels. Bottom line is I used a higher octane fuel in my competition engines than I did in my tow vehicles...all which ran perfectly well with 87 octane which is what they were designed to use. Sure, I've tried higher octane fuel in them, but the results (mpg) were no better in any case. That being said, there is no point in spending extra money on something that gains you nothing measurable at the end of the day. If you care to do some back to back controlled testing with different fuels in jet skis then we would be all ears...otherwise it's a hard sell for me and others. Taking advice from any motorsport gurus on fuel and oil has been found to be less than productive in general as most do not have credible experience in fuel and oil testing procedures. That worn out standby phrase "I've used such and such oil on a thousand new engines without failure" is a rather weak testament and has zero scientific basis for facts. All they are really saying is "I've used such and such and there was not enough stress to induce a failure". Most have no clue as to the why of these things.
I love the reviews, but they're always Kawi biased. Like everyone has good things, BUT Kawi wins no matter what, and whatever other brand is better, it's something dumb. Like Seadoo has 12.1 gal storage, BUT Kawi has 12.2 ( then they exaggerate why that .1 is soooooo much more) It's just an example, the haven't said this EXACT example.
The Kawasaki has significantly more storage and they both preferred the playful nature of the ultra. I don't think you can say Greg is a Kawasaki guy at all.
Hahahah love the intro..I get it man! Kawi also features a stainless steel handlebar and adjustable all-steel steering riser on the Kawi (SeaDoo is 100% plastic) fabricated catch can, factory rear-exit exhaust, stainless oval-edge impeller stock from factory, and maintenance-free through hull bearing. As you guys mention in the video, the SeaDoo has a better reverse system (when it’s not throwing errors) and the SeaDoo accessory offerings are much more robust. For long-term durability and reliability go Kawi. That n/a 1498cc engine is proven both on the water and on the track, has no known issues or problems, and is exceptionally easy to maintain.
The N/A ski doesn't have the catch can.
@@watercraftjournal Kevin, it most definitely does have one- believe it or not! 😝
Mine does
If JD says it does - it does! Haha
Hard to beat those Kawi’s!
Hey! THIS mum wants something a little sportier!!! Lol. I'm used to ridung a Yamaha R6 on the road so the Kawasaki is definiteky what I'm looking to buy (but the 310 Ultra LX). Have learnt a lot from your videos before making my purchase, so thanks a bunch! From Gold Coast Australia. 😁
Most wouldnt recommend a supercharged ski for a first time owner. Has a bit more complexity and what not
Great shootout Kevin, you and Greg did a good job explaining the two PWC’s. I would agree the Kawi is the better choice between the two PWC’s. Thanks for sharing
Thanks for another great review Kawasaki all the way for me down here in Australia Kawasaki comes a 5-year warranty Seadoo a 2-year warranty and Yamaha with a 3 year warranty.
Ive been racing skiis since 1996 ijsba old school, have never used a brake on a skii ever. the yamaha reverse in docking is fantastic one lever no switching sides like the seadoos
$3,300 off of the MSRP at my local dealer on the remaining stock of 2023s 160LX and 160LX-S.
Our 2007 Ultra 250x, is fun, fast, and still looks great. Contemplating if we should update, but Kawi hasn't really updated the hull, and really thinking about going to a SeaDoo gtx for easier hull access when on the water.
Other complaint out our ultra is the nose really submarines when in a wake zone, never liked that, and newer ones do the same, plowing the water instead of riding over it.
The Sea Doo GTX is the perfect blend of Comfort, performance & swagger with his industry - leading and Stability hull & low center of gravity and genius.
15 gallons back in the Kawi and almost 17 used in the Sea Doo. How many miles did you cover? Assume similar mileage on the two?
Can you stand on the edge of the kawi like that of the Sea-Doo with the new hull design? 🤔
I absolutely love my gtx 300. Easily accessible and huge front storage. Super comfortable dry ride. Can't recommend enough!
So , I remember you saying the seadoo 170 power felt “wore out” .. does the Kawasaki feel under powered ??
I know Kawasaki is known for making engines with great torque.. does it have good pull and just kinda lack on top end ?
Are there good mods for performance for the Kawasaki?
Kawi needs to talk to actual riders about the bow storage use but I do love the gullwing storage. Sea Doo storage is great but would not swap it for the Kawi gullwings and cupholders.
Agree on the Kawi latches. Great quality. My fiance struggled with releasing the Sea Doo latches to open the storage.
I went with a 2024 GTRX 300. It’s amazing.
If the engine is not setup to use higher octane gas, you are 100% wasting your money if you use higher octane gas. It’s not “cleaner”. It’s not “better” for the engine.
You are clever to know this little known fact. Without going into too much detail the main problem with high octane fuels is they take longer to burn in the combustion cycle so most of it will go out the exhaust port and you will get less power.
The display on the Kari is bigger and better.
Thanks so much for the video. 60 lbs. Maybe that will take some of the wind out of the "Kawi is so heavy" argument. How about the Kawi catch can weight?
No catch can on a N/A ski.
@@watercraftjournal it has a catch can believe it or not! It’s actually the same can they put on the ultra 250 and 260- it’s smaller than the one on the 310s.
Correct. It is on the 15f and STX 160s. Part # 52001. $85 part. Listed as an oil separator.
Meant 15f and STX 160s also.
I see some Mississippi Ski Riders! 👀
When the side is open on the kawi It looks like a deer lol
Hate to say it but nothing beats the Yamaha fx.
A great many skis beat the Yamaha FX.
Thanks for makin me Famous Kevin! 🤣
DAAAAAMN DAVE CHAPPELLE!
🤣
The Kawi should include the adjustable seat on all Ultras. Especially considering the Kawi price. 2024 increase bites BUT Kawi is made in USA vs Mexico!
Agreed, They should have those adjustable brackets on all models and trims!
BUENAS MOTOS DE KAWASAKI
1ER PUESTO LA KAWASAKI NINJA 400
2DO PUESTO KAWASAKI ULTRA 310 LX
3ER PUESTO KAWASAKI H2R 🔥🔥😈
Kawasaki has almost no accessories. Sea-Doo has lots. I am not a experienced pwc rider, but I like a company that supports what it sells.
BACANES MOTOS DE AGUA 🚤
Did I hear correctly kawi burned 15 gal. and sea doo burned 17 gal.did y’all run together all day. I thought kawi was worse on gas.
Not quite. You heard that the Kawi had 5 gallons left in the tank, meaning it burning over 16 gallons. The Sea-Doo did about the same. They were almost identical.
He said he put 15 back in the Kawi and almost 17 back in the Sea Doo.
If you filled up the Kawasaki with less than 17 gallons you still had over 4 gallons remaining in the tank...
👍🏻
While this was a great review, as always, it should be noted that both of these machines call for 87 octane gasoline. Using a higher octane certainly won’t hurt anything besides your wallet more, it also doesn’t help in any way with more power. Using “the good stuff” is not in any way, shape or form better than using 87. All have the same ethanol content and additives for what the brand specifies. So it’s yours and anyone else’s business what they want to pay for, but just know you’re not doing anything any better.
Now If the engine has a compression ratio, timing mods or boost that requires higher octane and is specified for that engine, then yes, you absolutely need to use it.
This comment is DEMONSTRABLY wrong. All 3rd party data proves otherwise. Using premium fuel provides superior ADDITIVES that reduce wear, knocking (detonation) and carbon collection. Yes, octane is higher, which improves ignition completion, but it's not just about octane but additives. Gmtail's comment is wrong.
@@watercraftjournalWe are at an impasse here sir, and I’d have to say you are incorrect. Higher octane fuel is NOT universally better. You speak of complete combustion, which in some cases, using higher octane in an engine not designed for it can result in lower power output and incomplete combustion. This could also result in the wasting of fuel, although it’s negligible. I’d say let’s not argue about it. You are influential in the industry, so get ahold of some engineers from the companies, as well as some petrol chemical folks and let’s see what they have to say. 👍
Like Lake Speed Jr., developer of DRIVEN Racing? How about Aaron Michaels at Rockett Racing? BOTH sponsored me while I raced and both detailed why. Also, how about Neal Hassman, Plant Facilities Manager of Exxon's Long Beach refinery? He was my neighbor growing up. Told me all about it. Hmm... Oh, I know, how about Rotax’s Project Manager Norbert Schofbanker who's words I literally repeated in this video? It's always funny when YT commenters try to bring their tertiary opinions to a fact fight.
@@watercraftjournal exactly. How about those guys. That’s my point, let’s hear from them. I know you’re background, and I trust your info, however I’m still saying you’re wrong(just about this single subject) You don’t know my background, but trust me, I’m more than a regular YT commenter. But again, please, let’s hear from those guys.
At the end of the day I am in no way starting Sh^*+ with you, however there are tons of misconceptions about gasoline. And it would be awesome to hear from experts. I think that’s fair.
I raced NHRA Stock Eliminator for many years and have considerable experience with different octane fuels. Bottom line is I used a higher octane fuel in my competition engines than I did in my tow vehicles...all which ran perfectly well with 87 octane which is what they were designed to use. Sure, I've tried higher octane fuel in them, but the results (mpg) were no better in any case. That being said, there is no point in spending extra money on something that gains you nothing measurable at the end of the day. If you care to do some back to back controlled testing with different fuels in jet skis then we would be all ears...otherwise it's a hard sell for me and others. Taking advice from any motorsport gurus on fuel and oil has been found to be less than productive in general as most do not have credible experience in fuel and oil testing procedures. That worn out standby phrase "I've used such and such oil on a thousand new engines without failure" is a rather weak testament and has zero scientific basis for facts. All they are really saying is "I've used such and such and there was not enough stress to induce a failure". Most have no clue as to the why of these things.
I love the reviews, but they're always Kawi biased. Like everyone has good things, BUT Kawi wins no matter what, and whatever other brand is better, it's something dumb. Like Seadoo has 12.1 gal storage, BUT Kawi has 12.2 ( then they exaggerate why that .1 is soooooo much more) It's just an example, the haven't said this EXACT example.
The Kawasaki has significantly more storage and they both preferred the playful nature of the ultra. I don't think you can say Greg is a Kawasaki guy at all.
Seadoo is a better overall ski.
@@GrampyScottIf you say so. I would disagree. Just the design of the drive shaft through the hull would call you statement into question.
"If the opening is too small ", get creative.........
That front end on the kawi looks like jar jar binks or an elephant sat on it. Very nice looking seadoo !
Both nice looking. Sitting next to each other the Kawi looks better. Probably just the orange popping!