95 XP Jet Pump Extension

Note: This site contains eBay affiliate links for which SeaDooForum.com may be compensated
Status
Not open for further replies.

riffe723

Active Member
From my research, the 95 xp came out with the 3" jet pump extension. I noticed when I rode this ski the first time that it handle considerably well compared to the 97 spx 720 that I grew up on. But with that said none of the models after had that extension to my knowledge.

Real question is Keep it or Ditch it.

I want to know the benefits and downfalls. Does it actually improve the handling or is it just that an XP handles better than an SPX. (Both 720).


Is this something people add to skis that dont have it?

Any info is appreciated. I've searched the threads and really aren't getting clear answers. Someone said top speed increase...
 
@Matt Braley would be able to tell you why it was used in 1995 and not after.

I can only tell you the 1997 SPX is not a 720, it is the 787 X4. The 720 SPX stopped being made in 1996.
 
Then I was lied to my whole childhood. LOL. Either way, our SPX looks like what a 96 looks like but my dad always told me they were 97.
 
Yes it does handle better with the extension. Both the steering and the VTS response are more noticeable. It's also 1 to 1.5mph faster. Some folks(including me) have added it to custom builds to take advantage of those performance increases.

So why did they stop? well the increase of volume in the pump area was a problem. The X4 is always hopping every little bump and the pump comes unhooked. Then when it lands it takes longer to reload and it shocks the crank and driveline. In racing conditions the longer steering cables would bend up and the longer drive shafts tend to bend as well.
 
Then I was lied to my whole childhood. LOL. Either way, our SPX looks like what a 96 looks like but my dad always told me they were 97.

The last two digits of the VIN is the year. If it’s green and white and says SPX it’s a 96’. If it’s a yellow and white SPX it’s a 97’.
 
My first ski was a 95xp with the pump extension. I sold that long ago but loved how much better it handled compared to other x4’s. So after i got my 96xp which again was long ago, i added the extension and the difference is greatly noticed. But like a lot of things, when you are looking for improvements there are down falls. And matt explained it. Hard to get pump to stay filled.
 
Yes. Just do a splash guard when you do the sponsons or you get splashed in the face while turning.
 
Planned on that too. Cool. Thanks for the info. I’m building an 800 spx too so I’m wanting to add the extension to that.
 
If your rec riding smoother water you'll never encounter the negative aspects of the 3" extension. When sourcing parts keep in mind that the 95XP and the 95XP 800 have different parts. The regular 95XP driveshaft will be 1" too short for a 787 powered ski. The part in between the hull and pump is plastic on the XP800 and aluminum on the regular 95.
 
If your rec riding smoother water you'll never encounter the negative aspects of the 3" extension. When sourcing parts keep in mind that the 95XP and the 95XP 800 have different parts. The regular 95XP driveshaft will be 1" too short for a 787 powered ski. The part in between the hull and pump is plastic on the XP800 and aluminum on the regular 95.

I don't want to derail this thread but have to ask if you are doing alright after the hurricane Matt? If I remember correctly I think you live in that area? I purchased a 1995 XP800 from you last year, hope you and your family are are doing well.
 
Yes we were OK. Gas and groceries have been thin because it hit 50 miles away and folks have to drive over for supplies. I'm in the tree service business but plenty busy already.
 
I added worx sponsons and worx intake grate to my 95 xp and it was a major improvement. Way less cavitation. And when cornering hard it’s almost impossible to hang onto. Holds the water fantastic.
 
I'd sell the extension and studs for 65 shipped. The drive shafts are everywhere just get one for a 96-97 GTX. Those have the groove for the carbon seal top hat so make sure that is not riding where the 95 seal/carrier bearing is and your fine.
 
I'd sell the extension and studs for 65 shipped. The drive shafts are everywhere just get one for a 96-97 GTX. Those have the groove for the carbon seal top hat so make sure that is not riding where the 95 seal/carrier bearing is and your fine.

Sounds like a deal to me. Give me a couple days. Im on work trip in California right now. As soon as im back ill get that from you.
 
@Matt Braley would be able to tell you why it was used in 1995 and not after.

I can only tell you the 1997 SPX is not a 720, it is the 787 X4. The 720 SPX stopped being made in 1996.

Not sure if your talking about the SPX, or the 720, more commonly known as the 717cc, turning out 85 horsepower. As far as I know, for sure, that engine was still being used in the 2000 year model skis. The 2005 GTI, GTS, HX and other models, were the last models to run that motor. That was also the last year for it to be produced.

The original thread, pump extensions? This will likely depend on who you ask. In 1988-89, when the first Seadoo came out, it was equipped with the 587 engine, and was really under-powered, so it was pretty much a get on and have fun kinda ski.

In the years that followed, the 717cc (or 720), was the first engine that really had any gusto to it, but without the RAVE valves, was still a bit under powered, IMO. When Rotax patented the RAVE valve, they pretty much took the 717, added a balance shaft, and with the addition of the RAVE valves, increased horsepower from 85 to 110hp. When you think about power in an engine, it does not matter how big or how much fuel you put in an engine, if you cant allow that engine to breath out, your doing nothing but adding back pressure.

Now, to get back to the pump extensions. These really made a big impact before we had VTS, because with the added power of these engines, the front ends wanted to come up, porpoise and cavitate. Before the extensions, we took washers and added them to the top bolts, to angle the nozzle down a bit, to help trim out the ski. When the VTS came out, that changed the ball game.

Where the pump extensions really make a big difference is on the V-TEC, 255 and greater engines, since manufacturers were mandated to not design an engine to operate over 70 mph. That was so easily gone around by impellers, pump extensions, wedges, changes to the resonance, and a butt load of other high performance parts. The actual extensions are almost, a thing of the past.

If your still running an other model ski, you don't really have to invest in a pump extension, because your motor doesn't make the horsepower to make it beneficial. If you can to try a few things, take off your pump, and put a couple washers behind the two upper pump bolts. This will drive the nose down just a little, giving you a better plane. If you want to see if you can bring the hull up a bit, ride more on the pump intake and nozzle, put a couple washers on the bottom two bolts.

Here, someone might say, "that'll take your shaft out of alignment". No, it actually won't. If you've ever taken that shaft out, you'll notice it's kinda rounded at the ends. This is designed that way, to take up any small variables on pump alignment.
 
If your rec riding smoother water you'll never encounter the negative aspects of the 3" extension. When sourcing parts keep in mind that the 95XP and the 95XP 800 have different parts. The regular 95XP driveshaft will be 1" too short for a 787 powered ski. The part in between the hull and pump is plastic on the XP800 and aluminum on the regular 95.

Your kinda right... The 1995 XP came equipped with the 717cc (or 720) engine, which was (IMO), way under powered for the hull design. The first 787cc engine, 110hp engine, was first introduced in 1995, and was listed as the 1995 XP 800. So, if you went to the showroom, you'd see the 1995 XP, then you'd see the 1995 XP 800. They were both yellow, but the 787cc had "XP 800" on the back corner, just below the hand grip. They were kinda hard to tell apart, and since very few have survived, you'd have to probably google images on it. So, to answer the question, yes, the drive shafts were not the same, but that was because they were two different engines.
 

Attachments

  • 800 xp.jpg
    800 xp.jpg
    483.9 KB · Views: 18
From my research, the 95 xp came out with the 3" jet pump extension. I noticed when I rode this ski the first time that it handle considerably well compared to the 97 spx 720 that I grew up on. But with that said none of the models after had that extension to my knowledge.

Real question is Keep it or Ditch it.

I want to know the benefits and downfalls. Does it actually improve the handling or is it just that an XP handles better than an SPX. (Both 720).


Is this something people add to skis that dont have it?

Any info is appreciated. I've searched the threads and really aren't getting clear answers. Someone said top speed increase...

I'd keep it just because. I have two Challenger Jet boats, and two GTX, all 4 with the 787cc. With both your skis running the same engine, the reason for the pump extension, only from my opinion, was because that hull was originally designed for the 587. With the extension, it only gave the hull better handling. When the SPX came out, the hull designs were beginning to change, so they weren't a big deal anymore. I do find it fun, when I pull my pumps every year, to add washers to the top 2 bolts, to see if that will keep my hull in the water, and give me any extra speed. The GTX doesn't have the VTS, so I had to come up with some of my own ideas. You can't add more than 1/4" worth, because you don't want to move your shaft too far from the PTO.
 
I don't want to derail this thread but have to ask if you are doing alright after the hurricane Matt? If I remember correctly I think you live in that area? I purchased a 1995 XP800 from you last year, hope you and your family are are doing well.
Not sure where the info is coming from, but the 1995 XP was the first year that introduced the 787cc. The built two, the original XP, which in 95 had the 717cc, and in 1994, ran the 657cc. The first 787cc that went into production was in the 1995 XP 800. So yes, these engines are not interchangeable in parts. They are completely different engines.

Matt, I'm from Mobile, we only got about a 3 foot surge as it came in. I have friends in Panama, and they were devastated. My prayers go out to you and your loved ones.
 
Then I was lied to my whole childhood. LOL. Either way, our SPX looks like what a 96 looks like but my dad always told me they were 97.

Pretty easy to figure out. There are two numbers on the skis, the EIN (engine ID number) and the HIN (hull ID). The HIN is located in the back of the ski, usually under the rub rail, on the right hand side. The last 2 numbers, will tell you the year. But, quite honestly, they are so close, that by one year, I'd not really give it a second thought.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top