Ballast? Speed? Length? For Wake Boarding
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: Ski, Ride and Foot Talk
Forum Discription: Share photos, techniques, discuss equipment, etc.
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13564
Printed Date: June-06-2024 at 10:32am
Topic: Ballast? Speed? Length? For Wake Boarding
Posted By: Bimmerboyz
Subject: Ballast? Speed? Length? For Wake Boarding
Date Posted: May-05-2009 at 3:28am
|
What weight do you guys run?
Also what is your favorite spot to mount sacs? Favorite speed to ride at and length? ------------- Truck 2002 F350 14" lift Powerstroke 1978 Correct Craft Ski Nautique |
Replies:
Posted By: Sell
Date Posted: May-05-2009 at 4:03am
I have a 1980 that we ride behind in Australia. It depends on how big you want the wake...With 450Lb in the rear in place of the rear seat, the wake is good & fuel consumption is good too. Put another 3-400 down the back & 200 up the front & the wake is massive, but the consumption suffers significantly. This photo has 400Kg (circa 850Lb) in the rear & 100Kg up front plus driver & observer
|
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: May-05-2009 at 4:13am
|
I've seen a couple of your photos on planetnautique Andrew, depicting what I assume is you riding.
It's interesting, lots of people on this site who own older Nautiques, like yours, but most are not wakeboarders, or at least not hard core wakboarders. Some of the guys like Sell from Australia are the ones I can think of that really load up these older boats. I'll be interested to see the responses, but I can't think of too many who are looking to load them up like you do. To answer you question, I have a SAN, so I don't load it up much. We're intermediates at best. If I have a hardcore rider, I'll occasionally load it up. We run 18-24 mph depending upon rider preference and skill, and 60 to 85 feet - again, depending on rider preference and skill. BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: GottaSki
Date Posted: May-05-2009 at 11:56am
Egad, this is going to go nowhere good... ------------- "There is nothing, absolutely nothing, half so much worthwhile as messing around with boats...simply messing." River Rat to Mole |
Bimmerboyz wrote:Posted By: Bimmerboyz
Date Posted: May-05-2009 at 6:15pm
get your mind out of the gutter. ------------- Truck 2002 F350 14" lift Powerstroke 1978 Correct Craft Ski Nautique |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: May-05-2009 at 7:43pm
|
Sell what prop are you turning???
I own an 80' as well, last week I had one 350 between the engine and the rear seat and another 350 over the observer's seat, plus a 200lbs driver. I liked the wake shape but felt it needed more weight I ride at 22mph and 70feet rope. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: 86BFN
Date Posted: May-05-2009 at 9:05pm
No sacs, 39-40 MPH, 90 ft. and no board!  ------------- 👣 Steve http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=4057&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1986&yrend=1986" rel="nofollow - 86 Barefoot Nautique 89 Martinique Former Owner: 93 Hydrodyne 350 MAG |
Posted By: Sell
Date Posted: May-06-2009 at 11:45pm
|
Hi Luchog - I am running a 13x13, with a fairly substantial amount of cup. It is not an OEM federal - the blades are much larger, more like an ACME or OJ.
I think you are a bit forward in the weight bias. The wake will steepen as you bias to the stern, but give more punch. We always ride at least 22 & on 70 feet off highpole mounted to centre pole. BTW, I found that running 350 each side of the engine made the wake was terribly crumbly. 86 - Had my Bro-In Law out over the WE. He is a skiier/footer & had him footing with 450 lbs in the rear. Fairly big bump for him to cross & the boat was porpoising quite nastily |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: May-07-2009 at 2:55am
|
Sell, how do you setup your weight?
I prefer a mellow wake over a steep one, that's why I weight 50/50 or even more on the front of the boat. Also I feel the wake is very sensitive to the water stream, when going with the stream it shapes very steep, when going against it it's perfect. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: MI-nick
Date Posted: May-07-2009 at 11:47am
|
I have an '88 that usually has 400lb of lead under the back seat + 100 lb lead under the bow + driver. that wake is quite nice. many times there are an extra 2 people sitting on the spotter seat and I add a 250lb sac behind the motor box. that wake is really nice and big. I usually ride at 23 MPH and 70' line. ------------- As far as I can tell, I'm not quite sure... |
Posted By: Bimmerboyz
Date Posted: May-07-2009 at 10:24pm
|
What does everyone use for lead weights? ------------- Truck 2002 F350 14" lift Powerstroke 1978 Correct Craft Ski Nautique |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: May-08-2009 at 3:21am
|
I dont use lead weights. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: Bimmerboyz
Date Posted: May-08-2009 at 4:25am
|
For the people that use lead weights what do they use!? ------------- Truck 2002 F350 14" lift Powerstroke 1978 Correct Craft Ski Nautique |
Posted By: MI-nick
Date Posted: May-08-2009 at 3:23pm
|
i have 25lb bags of lead shot (same as you would buy for reloading shotgun shells) wrapped in plastic bags and then wrapped in duct tape. easy to carry around and stash wherever you need. i've heard of people getting old wheel weights from tire shops, melting them down and forming them in to bars. you need to be very careful about that due to the highly toxic lead fumes. i've also heard of people filling PVC pipe or square steel tubing with old wheel weights or sinkers or whatever. square steel tubing seems like a good way to go...you could weld caps on the end and paint it and it wouldn't roll around. you could also buy bags of steel shot. i think there is a company in california called pop products but there are many others who make these bags for use as ballast in cars for safety testing. ------------- As far as I can tell, I'm not quite sure... |
Posted By: kapla
Date Posted: May-12-2009 at 7:04pm
I use 3 x 600lb one in the back between the rear seat and the mb and one on each side of the mb as well... like and u shape...also have like 120lb on dumbells on the rear seat plus the water trapped in the foam  And persons...but sometimes I feel its not enough (sometimes I mean when I get to ride behind a san, and then ride my boat)
I ride 70 foot line @ 21-22 mph at this level I give a sh## on fuel comsuption...and hey don´t come up with load limit capacity issues!!!!  ------------- <a href="">1992 ski nautique |
Posted By: kapla
Date Posted: May-12-2009 at 7:13pm
I preffer filling the bags as carrying lead or other stuff its dead weight and I have like 1.30 hours round trip to the ski area and that extra weight in the cruise means lots of cash in fuel... more ideas for dead weight are the counterweight bars used on elevators....they are in the 60-70lb each and quiet small.... ------------- <a href="">1992 ski nautique |
Posted By: Bimmerboyz
Date Posted: May-12-2009 at 11:31pm
 ------------- Truck 2002 F350 14" lift Powerstroke 1978 Correct Craft Ski Nautique |
Posted By: MI-nick
Date Posted: May-13-2009 at 10:05am
|
Sebastian,
I put the about the same amount of weight as you in my '93 and the wake still isn't as good as only 500lbs lead in the '88...and fuel consumption is terrible...but, it's still a great boat... ------------- As far as I can tell, I'm not quite sure... |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: May-13-2009 at 2:33pm
|
Mi-nick, what prop are you running? ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: kapla
Date Posted: May-13-2009 at 3:31pm
after posting this I though of the controversy yes..but I mean if I have to get a decent wake and sacrifice fuel consuption is all rigth for me..but not all the time.. just when i´m ridind and not while cruising boating etc.... To get to the ski area we ride the same canals the big cuisers go so water get little choppy sometimes and having that extra lead would compromise driveability ------------- <a href="">1992 ski nautique |
Posted By: MI-nick
Date Posted: May-14-2009 at 11:23am
Acme 542 on the '88...not sure on the '93...it's a 4 blade and the boat has the 1.23:1 reduction trans and gets out of the hole real nice so I never had the need to check... ------------- As far as I can tell, I'm not quite sure... |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: May-14-2009 at 2:24pm
|
We used to board behind a 95' Ski (GT40 Pro Boss), we had over 1000lbs over it, the wake shape was quite nice (it was noticeable steeper with the 3 blade) and fuel usage was good, around 7gph ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: Sell
Date Posted: May-17-2009 at 11:59pm
We must have different ideas on 'good', I would cringe at using near 30 ltr / hr.... I don't really think you will ever get a really mellow wake out of an old SN - but definately you will get the biggest wake available from a 30 year old boat. |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: May-18-2009 at 1:08am
|
sorry, fuel usage was 24-25lts/hour boarding, 19 cruising.
------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: carnes99
Date Posted: May-20-2009 at 8:40am
|
We used to have an 89 ski nautique and we ran two 540 lb. launch pad sac's on each side of the MC. We thought the wake was good. Then I got my 05 SAN and I have a 250 lb. sac on each side of the motor, 540 lb. sac in the front and center( not much walking room). This plus the 850 lbs. of stock weight and that my friends is what I call a wake! 2450lbs.+ passengers. ------------- Keep mama happy and life is GOOD! Josh http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=4465&yrstart=2001&yrend=2005 - 2005 SAN LE |
Posted By: Bimmerboyz
Date Posted: May-20-2009 at 10:43pm
Some of us can't afford a new SAN. I have seen almost every trick hit behind my boat. So a Huge wake isn't a necessity. ------------- Truck 2002 F350 14" lift Powerstroke 1978 Correct Craft Ski Nautique |
Posted By: boat dr
Date Posted: May-20-2009 at 11:31pm
|
How long doe's it take to sink?For some reason I see a bit of insanity there....
This plus the 850 lbs. of stock weight and 2450lbs+ that my friends is what I call a wake! ------------- boat dr /diaries/details.asp?ID=4631 - 1949 Dart /diaries/details.asp?ID=1533 - 1964 American Skier |
Posted By: chessloveedit
Date Posted: May-21-2009 at 3:34am
| be careful with too much lead weight on the trailer. It might get weird. as far as the line length goes, just let it out as you get bored. I think that we ride 70 feet now but I hear of people at 85 all the time. We started at like 50 feet. It really doesnt matter, its just more fun to jump farther. Also, as you let the line out further you can go different speeds to shape the wake or change the weight around. It all depends on the mood of the day I guess. If you need more weight get some bigger girls and tall beers. |
Posted By: carnes99
Date Posted: May-22-2009 at 3:38am
I'm sorry if you miss understood me. I wasn't saying that the older nautiques suck. I loved the 89 very much. I thought we were just sharing our wake sizes. I totally agree that almost anything can be landed without the extra weight; however , you can take your tricks much bigger with the extra weight. Boat dr. I hope to never find out! ------------- Keep mama happy and life is GOOD! Josh http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=4465&yrstart=2001&yrend=2005 - 2005 SAN LE |
Posted By: kapla
Date Posted: May-27-2009 at 5:00pm
Is not on the size but on the skill of the rider...LOL... I can land a backroll with or without ballast.. but its gonna be easier with the sacs though.. As for the size of the wake mine has a reasonable wake.. and was the best boat availabele when I made my first move on the wakeboard... I drulled at her when PO used it.. Also It used to be the official towboat at the local tournaments....And all the pros shoot their flipos behind her....Then when I got the chance to buy her I didn´t doubt it...
 ------------- <a href="">1992 ski nautique |
Posted By: kapla
Date Posted: May-27-2009 at 5:03pm
|
I will try and dig out some old pics of the boat before it belonged to me.. I have to scan them though as they are paper pictures LOL..Its hard to get printed pics these days... Almost all my pics are in the computer... ------------- <a href="">1992 ski nautique |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: May-27-2009 at 10:12pm
|
Kapla, i should dig on my backups but I have some pics from the last tournament at Puerto Roldan your boat pulled, I even got some pics of you riding there as well.
Also... I think I have some sunglasses magazine ad. featuring a young local Pro rider named Sebastian Kaplansky. you know him? ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: glyder907
Date Posted: July-17-2009 at 2:39am
|
1992 Sport Nautique. I run two 500lb sacs on either side of the engine and about 400lbs in the ski locker + 4 ppl. SWEET FRIGGIN WAKE. Ride about 80 feet out at 23-24mph. ------------- ***LIVE IT UP*** |