210 wake report...

[Flux]

Sorry redelf75, but you are way off.

It's really simple. Heavier = more water displacement = bigger wake

You can do some things to the hull shape or add gizmo's to tune the wake and help displace a bit more water, but the result will be the same. These gizmo's will alter the boats handling characteristics much the same way as adding weight to the boat will. In effect, there is no free lunch.

If people could take a 22' boat, weight it until it could barely turn, and produce a 4' foot high booter, they most certainly would. The CG rating is important, especially from a liability standpoint. More importantly, it should give the operator a clear indicator of the safe weight of the boat until it's handling characteristics have been compromised.

"Needing" extra ballast is a personal thing. Nobody needs ballast, but they want air, so they sack the boat. I don't need a big wake, I want it. I don't expect the boat companies to make their boats unsafe for me. But I want a boat that can be weighted down to my preferences and produce a monster wake.

I looked at the storage on the new 210. It looks like you could easily add 1000#'s to that ride with minimal intrusion.

[redelf75]

Sorry if I wasn't very clear. I propose using technology and design to enhance the wake, not weight that takes up useful space. Presumably one should be able to produce a relatively small boat at a reasnable cost but with a good interior layout and storage and an excellent wake.

It seems to me that these new wakeboard boats are much like a hard drive and software. No matter how big you make them someone will always want to fill them up with ballast.

[Flux]

Thus many people like the SAN because it is small and nimble and could be more easily weighted.

I agree with you though. Maybe it just ain't possible.

Think about a foil, like the one malibu used. Supposedly it enhances the wake. I have never seen it personally so I cannot attest. Now if you wanted to use this to enhance the wake, it has to displace as much water as the whole of the hull with an extra 1000 lbs in it. Seems to me that foil would become very large, and require serious reinforcement for the hull stresses it produces. It may also mess with the handling characteristics.

As far as hull shapes, this seems most logical and we pretty much know they have tried. Again, I suspect that there is a tradeoff in handling characteristics. Perhaps the boat manufacturers simply cannot have their boats handle poorly unballasted and they only offer ballast which fits, conforms to CGA, and does not make the boat unsafe to drive. Overloading the boat is the end users liability, not theirs.

Seeing that even the hallowed X-Star is being slammed with sacs, I think it is just the way it is. If you want a big wake, you are gonna have to weight the boat yourself. Personally I don't have a problem with it. My 02 SANTE get's an extra 400 in the back and 600 in the front, and maybe another 100 on the floor to adjust the wake with. Yes, it's no fun filling up the bow and floor sacs, but it's just what we do to max out the wake.

[tdc_worm]

It's really simple. Heavier = more water displacement = bigger wake

close. you forgot to factor in wetted surface. the more gel-coated fiberglass that you have in the water will require exponentially more weight (ballast) to achieve the same water displacment (while under way). that is why narrow beamed boats have and will always be easier to throw larger wakes with.

as far as hull shapes, there are only so many ways to drag a hole in the lake, and i am sure that every possible design has been experimented with.

[wilcar]

Thats is right more surface area on the water makes it more buoyant therefore harder to sink. My fav boats to ride behind with only 500kgs of ballast would be the 210 and malibu response.

[redelf75]

A lot of good points... but all of the factors discussed are intergrated so not one alone is correct. The idea of making a larger boat to hold more people becomes a bit of a paradox as owners keep on filling the space with sacks... (1000lbs in a new 210won't be enough for many.

For me, I rather have my cake and eat it too. I still believe there is a lot of wake advancement available using design instead of mass and weight. I don't suggest that I have the answer nor do any of the manufactures. I think the right balance of these mechanisms is yet to be discovered and that manufactuers need to direct their efforts in this direction as opposed to thinking bigger is better...

Meanwhile, I would like the law enforcements to uphold the CG max weight limits as much as they do the life vest laws.

[sperbet]

Meanwhile, I would like the law enforcements to uphold the CG max weight limits as much as they do the life vest laws.

worst idea EVER!!!! :mrgreen:

[DRAGON88]

Meanwhile, I would like the law enforcements to uphold the CG max weight limits as much as they do the life vest laws.

CG is only concerned with boats under 20 ft, anything above that is exempt from CG flotation requirements...

[MNSuperAir]

Meanwhile, I would like the law enforcements to uphold the CG max weight limits as much as they do the life vest laws.

CG is only concerned with boats under 20 ft, anything above that is exempt from CG flotation requirements...

Is this true in all states? So I can't get ticketed for extra ballast while surfing if I exceed the CG plate?

[redelf75]

CG is only concerned with boats under 20 ft, anything above that is exempt from CG flotation requirements...

Well, I checked the CT boating laws and I stand corrected, sort of. It says not to overload your boat and that the safe carrying capacity is determind by the CG plate affixed by the manufacture on boats less than 20 feet. And to use the forementioned formula LxW/15 for number of people if no plate is affixed.

I'm thinking if they wanted to issue a citation, it would stick in court.

[wake_fun]

hhhhhmmmmmm, maybe my SS has gone up in value Yellow_Flash_Colorz:

[mike-d]

2007 210 wake pic

here is a wake pic at 23mph, three adults, full team edition ballast.

Mike :shock:

hydrogate up / down

[mike-d]

RE: 2007 210 wake pic

I would still like to sack this boat up with another 1000pds or so and ride it. It would remind me of a fully sacked out bu wake. Big and rampy!

[Sinkoumn]

RE: 2007 210 wake pic

"Elvis has left the building"......

[sperbet]

great ANOTHER rampy wake