Fat Sacs, Good or Bad
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: General Discussion
Forum Discription: Anything Correct Craft
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=20629
Printed Date: November-29-2024 at 12:50pm
Topic: Fat Sacs, Good or Bad
Posted By: levinmark
Subject: Fat Sacs, Good or Bad
Date Posted: February-12-2011 at 8:54pm
|
Hey fellas, I would like some input on having a fat sac for our 96' I read a lot about having them and how they improve the wake greatly for wakeboarding, but I am concerned about wear and tear on the tranny with the extra load. Any thoughts on this, or am I being to cautious? Looking to possibly purchase one for the upcoming season. I have checked out the fly high fat sac on Wakemakers.com. One is a 750lb. sac and the other is 1100 lbs.. Anybody have any experience with these?
Thanks ------------- levin |
Replies:
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: February-12-2011 at 9:57pm
|
Fat sacks are ok to use, just for ease of mind you should match your prop with the amount of weight you'll be displacing.
Stock props on ski boats are for skiing, so you have some options for a weighted boat, but then you should also consider that if you're still using the boat for ski you dont want a prop that will compromise skiing performance. So first you should state how and what you will use the boat for. As regarding fat sacks, you should ask how are people weighting your same boat, as 750 or 1100lbs is a lot of weight for a lone sack and you could possibly need many sacks distributed along the boat. Sumo sacks or Pro X series are nice. Sumo come with a valve for not spilling water when you fill them, on the X-series you have to buy it apart. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: wakeboardin2k4
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 12:03am
|
My 86 is going to obviously have a very different wake than your 96 so my suggestions come with no experience of a 96 hull.
Ive found for myself and others that 500lbs + - on each side of the motor works well. Having too much weight in the rear creates a curb of a wake in my boat. Not sure how yours would react. The nice thing about 2 sacs is it gives you options. One large sac gives you only 1 option, back of the boat. ------------- "I'm planning to bring my girl that rides on a trailer with me and leave my girl that complains about camping at home" |
Posted By: levinmark
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 2:50am
|
Thanks, that makes sense about having two sacs instead of the one in the back of the boat. To answer a couple questions, the boat is definetely used for slaloming and footing more than boarding. I like to board, but it is not the main use for the boat. As far as props go, I have a new 1442 ready to put on as soon as it warms up a little. Cant weight to try that out. Maybe I'll give the two sac method a try. I want to see what others have to say about it before I purchase anything. ------------- levin |
Posted By: aussiesport
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 5:19am
| I ride behind a friends 97 ski , and he runs 2 750 bags on the rear seat |
Posted By: eric lavine
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 10:08am
|
you wont hurt a properly aligned transmission also ------------- "the things you own will start to own you" |
Posted By: bbishop1974
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 11:39am
| it's like owning a pickup truck.built to work.just don't drive like a donkey and keep up with the service on the trans including alignment like eric said and you will be fine. |
Posted By: SNobsessed
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 12:05pm
|
1442 should be a good prop for you. It has worked well for us ('89 w/ 1.23 trans). We run 2 400 lb sacks, usually not full. If you want to try surfing, just put 1 sack behind the motor, the other alongside. We put in a aux power outlet near stern for the tsunami pump, big improvement over tossing the cord up front! ------------- “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” Ben Franklin |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 12:09pm
|
- threadjack - Snobs, how many people on board beside the sacks and how many rpms at boarding speeds? Trying to help a friend around here with prop selection.
thanks ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: Morfoot
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 12:26pm
|
Hey Mark here's a thought for you... I see that you are in Illinois and we know there is a gathering at Lake Clinton in May so you could plan on attending, talk to those who are going and see if any are bringing their Fat Sacs. If so then you could try out different sacs and placements and see what works best for you. ------------- "Morfoot; He can ski. He can wakeboard.He can cook chicken.He can create his own self-named beverage, & can also apparently fly. A man of many talents."72 Mustang "Kermit",88 SN Miss Scarlett, 99 SN "Sherman" |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 12:27pm
|
Levinmark, in a 95' ski, which is the same hull as yours, we used one 540lbs sack on the back and 350lbs on each side of the engine plus driver/observer. It was used as wakeboard boat. wake was huge.
The 97 mentioned above is a different hull and will need more on the back than yours as the wake on that hull is rampier. I think you'll do fine with 350-500lbs sacks aft on the sides on the engine. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: levinmark
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 1:37pm
|
Thanks for the input, we'll be attending clinton in the spring, thats a good idea to try them out and see what is the best scenario. As far as an alignment goes, it is on the agenda, been reading up it, waiting for a little more warm weather to work on it in the garage. Thanks again ------------- levin |
Posted By: SNobsessed
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 9:02pm
|
Luciano - We have 4 persons, about 600# total. I estimate we put about that much weight in the fat sacks too. I would guess 200# more for gear. Have no idea how much soaked foam I have. The 1442 works great, never have a lack of power. I board about 22MPH & my son likes about 24-25.
Hope this helps. ------------- “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” Ben Franklin |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 10:06pm
|
Snobs, can you recall the rpms at 22mph with the loaded boat?
thank you for the info. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: Bama Nautique
Date Posted: February-13-2011 at 11:31pm
Hey Snobs... I am about to purchase a new prop for my 89SN2001. Glad to hear you are having good luck with the 1442. I will solicit info from this site in a month or so when I get closer to buying one. I also just bought two sacs at 350 lbs each. I thought they were fly High but instead are "Launch Pads by Straightline". They are round tubular shaped and I will have to figure out how to place them so they will not roll around on turns. Do you have any ballast in the front of the boat or is all of it in the back...? I read something a while back about ratio between front and back but dont remember where I read it. Thx ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5040 - 89 Ski Nautique 2001 89 Ski Nautique 2001 |
SNobsessed wrote:Posted By: SNobsessed
Date Posted: February-14-2011 at 10:38am
|
Luciano - I think 22MPH was around 2400-2500 RPM.
Doug - We don't have any weight up front other than the anchors & misc gear. The fat sacks are along side the motor box, so there is opportunity to place them more forward or aft. My son (whom all of this wake stuff is about anyways) will direct who he wants to sit where - sometimes insulting a female! Our fat sacks are square, but I wouldn't think that even round ones would 'roll' - they squish out sideways against the gunnel & motor box. ------------- “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” Ben Franklin |
Posted By: wakeboardin2k4
Date Posted: February-14-2011 at 11:39am
I love that part, it's one of the few times I can tell a woman to MOVE NOW, and not get in trouble for being a d!ck about it ------------- "I'm planning to bring my girl that rides on a trailer with me and leave my girl that complains about camping at home" |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: February-14-2011 at 12:28pm
|
Round sacks roll, I can tell you from experience!!! ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: mdvalant
Date Posted: February-14-2011 at 12:52pm
|
I run a single 750# in the back of the 90 ski for boarding. I like about 24mph with it and it works well for me. No lip or curl with the setup for me. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5009 - '90 Ski (sold) http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5479 - '00 Sport Mississippi River - Bellevue, IA |