x-9 wake?? Log Out | Topics | Search | Register | Edit Profile | User List
Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Moderators | Help/Instructions
WakeWorld Discussion Board » >> Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles Archive » Archive through April 01, 2004 » x-9 wake?? « Previous Next »
By todd osterhouse (osterhousetaz) on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 11:16 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
i was wondering how the x-9 wake was compared to the old x-star(1999-2002) and how much weight it would take to make it comparable. also, i've read that the x-9s wake is extemely wide and if it takes as much effort to get across it as i've read?
 
By brandon oconnor (auwakeboarder) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 3:50 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I own a 2003 X9 as of last summer. Before we got that we rode behind my buddies 2000 x-star. THe wake of the x-star is steeper, but the x-9 is almost as good in my opinion, with weight. With 3 or 4 people we fill stock ballast, and add two 500, one on each side of engine. Makes for an Amazing wake! If you have trouble crossing the wake on a X-9, you suck. Its not that wide, wider than x-star though.
 
By Zoran Forgiarini (zorforg) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 4:58 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I own a 2002. I do not have extra ballast, but when it is full of people-it is great. I like the wake being a little wider, it makes you hang a little longer. I love the x-9 for many reasons. I am in the market for ballast bags for the sides of the engine. I am wondering what are the best bags to get. I want 500 pounders.
 
By Ral (mc_driver) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 11:30 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I own a 2001. I have two 250# on either side of the engine, but will upgrade to two 500# this yr. Also, when you have a boat load of people the wake is pretty big - stock ballast only and up to 12adults/children(most I've had was 14).

The ratio of effort to ballast is indirectly proportional to go w2w - with alot of ballast it's quite easy to get some hang time and land out in the flats.

 
By Mitch Mansfield (mitchm) on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 5:04 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Zoran, These flyhigh sacs are MC branded. If you gonna have sacs on the floor, it's a nice touch. These are the side sacs, but I've seen the larger MC one's on ebay as well. I ran flyhigh's for years and they held up great.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=23807&item=3659520760

 
By Zoran Forgiarini (zorforg) on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 2:34 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I hope to find the 500 pounders on EBay.
Ral, the picture of your boat is great. I can't wait to test your 'inderectly proportional' idea.

 
By Ral (mc_driver) on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 10:59 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
UP, UP, and AWAY!!!!

Pic was taken at Don Pedro at sunset.

 
By Clint Holland (clint_h) on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 7:20 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
What length ropes are you using. I have an 03 X9 and I can clear the wake easily at 55' but am inconsistant at 60' and before anybody goes off on me, I never claimed to be a good. Also, I generally just have one person in the boat with no extra sacs.
 
By Paul (psudy) on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 9:00 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Clint,
You might find the wake to be better at a little longer line lenght. I ride at 75ft( X-Star). When I first started though I rode at 55 and the wake was round. As soon as I lengthed the rope, I found that I could get more speed into the wake and a lot more hang time. It takes a little getting use to, but I thought it was well worth the initial spills. Just my .02

 
By Ral (mc_driver) on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 6:41 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I was clearing the wake at 70'(with the additional 500#), but am even more consistent at 65'. The rope didn't feel right to me at 55/60'.....my .02
 
By wuneyewilly (wuneyewilly) on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 9:36 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
I've had an '01 X-9 since new and with 2300 plus lbs(4 amps, dual batts, sub, 6 twr spks, etc) 75' is too far out for an X-9. Clearing the wake is no problem and I can get deep in the flats, but wakeboarding isnt really a distance sport. Airtime acquired by height is the goal, which IMO the X-9 cant produce. I run stock ballast plus switch between 500# in lead or 2x 750# isle sacks, which take the WHOLE isle...and ride at 65' normally, 70' when I have a Redbull or 2 in me. The wake is nice & rampy, super firm...not gunna bust through it, but doesnt pop you as high as I'd like. I have tried every combo in 3 yrs and still not overly impressed, not too mention that it handles like a fat pig with more than 1500# in it. I have tried three diff. props to get it outta the hole better when heavily weighted, but then cant go over 35mph at acceptable rpm. Yeah, who needs to go faster than 27mph right, well, me! I regularly find needing to blast from A to B anywhere I go. I would like to know more about other X-9 owner experiences, maybe I havent tried the right combo, but cant think of anything else to try.
 
By Cass (cwshumsky) on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 5:43 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
wuneyewilly, talked me out of buying an x-9! todd, please use lead and fat people... you can trip on fat sacs and jamb your board fin into your vinyl motor cover! (x-9 would make a killer wake boat if it was a v-drive)
 
By AMPallas (sulmaxwell) on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 9:01 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I have an 02 209-(x-9) see profile...wake is fantastic and never been an issue for the largest of tricks...we run with 8-10 people for a session, full factory ballast and full tank of Gas(that makes a large difference) plus the direct drive handles better in small channels and areas where we ride where quick turns and tight doubles ups are needed...My buddy has an X-10 I find his wake comparible although is not as clean and of course the V-Drive does not track like the 9 but overall very comparible, I also ride behind a Pro Air Nautique-V drive--with large amounts of weight...still not as clean, harder to read and a little in-consistant...Lots depends on the positioning of weight...as sometimes too much weight hinders a boats wake yes... believe it or not!..see the weighting posts in the discussion forum. also things to consider water depth and soft vs hard water..although most the water I end up in seems really hard!!! (for crashes that is!)
 
By Blabelmooch (blabel) on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 9:41 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Here's a wake pic with about 2300 pounds of ballast in salt water.

http://www.wakeworld.com/cgi-bin/Discus4/board-profile.pl?action=view_profile&profile=rymcd007-users

 
By Anthony X2 (tpanoz) on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 9:58 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I thought the x-9 wake is about that of a bass boat. I hated everything about it. The v-drive makes a huge difference is so many areas

Blabel-How the hell fast is that boat going in that pic??

 
By Blabelmooch (blabel) on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 10:09 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Probably 23 0r 24.

I am really picky and actually enjoyed riding that wake.

 
By GRAMPS (akman) on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 10:16 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Anthony, that picture is of my old boat and it was going about 22.5 in salt water.

Here is another picture of the wake with 2200lbs of ballast and 6 people in the boat in FRESH water, the rider in the picture is Arun Frances.

Nice BASS boat wake at 80'




(Message edited by akman on March 02, 2004)

 
By Anthony X2 (tpanoz) on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 10:49 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Still if youre going to spend them money... whats another 5g? go get a vdrive... you'll seat more people for one thing. I'm not saying anything bad about MC, i own one and i love em! Just didnt like the wake thats all. I see a huge difference between a x-9 and say a x-2 or X-star.
 
By Chris Moore (bullcrow) on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 1:49 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I've got a 01' 209 and we usually put 2000lbs withth fat sacs filled and people. Its not hard to make the wake comparable to that of a v-drive. Remove the back seat and put a Fly High 565lb sac in its place then lean the back seat up against the engine box. Its like a couch and it faces backwards. With the sac and 4 people watchin, the wake is nice. Don't forget to weigh down the front a bunch and a little lead in the back helps.
 
By Andre the Giant (paulsmith) on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 3:19 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
X9 with 2000+ lbs is VERY nice. Not as nice as X2 in shape and requires more weight. X2 has a little more peak and firmness at the top of the wake.

My opinion FWIW.

 
By brandon oconnor (auwakeboarder) on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 7:13 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I have a 2003 X9 and its the perfect boat for me. Sure the X2 and other V-drives have a better wakeboarding wake, but not one V-drive i know of can even come close to an empty X-9s ski and trick wake. Heck its almost as good as the boats i ski behind at three event tournaments (trick jump and slalom). A properly weighted X9's wake is awsame for wakeboarding considering its a direct drive, coming close if not being as good as V-drives. The trade off is minimal. Its a great all around boat.
 
By wuneyewilly (wuneyewilly) on Thursday, March 04, 2004 - 11:52 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
How do you X-9'ers arrange your wieght or ballast? I have 500# of lead split on either side of the motor, back as far as possible to the full rear bag. Havent put anything up front with this combo aside from the full locker sack. when i run the 2x 750# sacks, plus half full rear and full center (guessing about 2200#) the boat handles like an oil tanker. What size motors do you guys have? what size & pitch props?

GRAMPS- I have read your posts in the past and knew you had a 209, but then sold it for a SAN right? What made you change if you, and some of your riders, were so impressed with the wake?

I would obviously like to get mine dialed as that would be cheaper than switching to a WVLX I have been considering. I have so much into and added to on my x-9 that it would suck to start all over.

 
By GRAMPS (akman) on Thursday, March 04, 2004 - 1:11 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
wuneyewilly, This is strictly my OPINION.

I loved my old Prostar 209 it was a great boat, tons of fun and good times on that boat. We used to dare I say "ski" so it was a perfect boat for us, as we migrated to wakeboarding only it became apparent that we were going to have to sack the heck out of it. I was tired of towing with all the lead, filling sacks, draining sacks, pumps, blah, blah, blah.....

I tapped into the ballast system on the boat, plumbed in a 500lb bag in the back locker, built a false floor over the gas tank so I wouldn't warp it.

My set-up was;
500lbs in the back locker
100lbs of lead on each side in the rear locker along the side gunnels.
80lb flat piece of lead under the center locker bag.
400lbs of lead under the front bow cushion
stock ballast
full tank of gas

It handled like a PIG, burned gas big time, but it threw out a pretty good RAMPY wake.

Why the change?? The back seat was useless the way we were using it, 3 people in the boat with the driver and gear and it was cramped, tired of waiting for bags to fill.

SANTE, GREAT wake with very little extra weight, much BETTER fuel economy, much better storage, ballast system fills and empties in less than 3 minutes, great socializing boat 4-6 in the cabin area no problem at all, dealer is 15 minutes from my house instead of 90 minutes away, great fit and finish, blah, blah, blah, blah....

We test drove and fell in love with the boat so we bought one.

 
Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions Administration
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
WakeSpace is owned by eWake, Inc.
Copyright © 1996 - 2008, All Rights Reserved.
WakeSpace@WakeWorld.com