Any predictions on the future of this sport? <BR> <BR>All flex boards. <BR> <BR>Extremely huge wakes. <BR> <BR>Tension abilities for ropes. <BR> <BR>Automatic double up makers.

I don't think flex boards are the future. Like a wakeskate, I think they're a preference. <BR> <BR>I think somehow the wakes will get bigger through some sort of device, not more ballast. <BR> <BR>Ropes? <BR> <BR>I heard someone already had a device to create a constent double-up.

What is this double up device you speak of?

Fuel efficient boats and more cable parks.

Someone had an invention that that was designed to drag in the water off the side of the boat, and route additional water in toward the wake to create a constant DU size wake. I forget who was telling me about it. I want to say it was first mentioned here on WW about 2-3 years ago, or more.

I think fuel efficient boats might be one of the more important things to look at in terms of the future of the sport. <BR> <BR>This sport is certainly not going to get any cheaper with the price of oil hitting $100 a barrel.

I've been waiting for someone to make a turbo charged 4 banger for years. Street racing went from big block V8s to 2 Liters. Maybe even electric could happen (that makes me nervous, lots of water and lots of juice don't mix).

Bio diesel would be cool, I remember reading in alliance wakeboard mag that West Coast Camps was looking into it.

Hybrid boats. <BR> <BR>Believe.

I know one company that is making a tower extention.... maybe its already out but it adds like 2-4 more feet on top of your tower and i guess you just fly for days.

Jruss-its made by fly high! <BR> <BR><a href="http://www.fatsac.com/FlyHigh/FlyHighProducts.html" target="_blank">http://www.fatsac.com/FlyHigh/FlyHighProducts.html</a>

heres a pic <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65919/521005.jpg" alt="Upload">

more cable parks

That's aleady been done, years ago, and it didn't stick. I'm suprised that a company would try that tower extension again. Already failed

Did it fail yet? To early to tell I think. I would like to try one actually.

im sure its in the process of failing, i have never seen one on the water and we havent have anyone ask about them in the shop.

they are expensive too $1,000.00.

that invention is 5 years old or more. Tried and failed. <BR> <BR>Good luck to FlyHigh though. Great people and great products.

A turbo charger isn't going to help torque. If street racing were done at a max of 20MPH, you'd still see plenty of V8s over a turbo-charged 4 cylinder. Likewise, it we all start wakeboarding at footer speeds, maybe a turbo will start to make sense. <BR> <BR>I could see a hybrid like the Chevrolet Volt powertrain being tried on a boat. An electric engine would have a sick amount of torque and could be powered pretty reliably by a smallish horsepower gasoline generator. <BR> <BR>Before wakes get much bigger, there are going to have to be some breakthroughs in board to water impact. We can't keep increasing wake size without killing our knees. I also think with all the systems out there now making bindings tighter on your feet while riding, there is eventually going to be some future move towards bindings that break away on a fall.

How could I ever, ever forget the one that is nearest and dearest to my heart. <BR> <BR><b>RELEASE BINDINGS</b>. <BR> <BR>Industry, please, please do this. ASAP K THX

Easier said then done. <BR> <BR>When to release, when to not release? Is there a reason this hasn't been done in snowboarding?

Thats why they need to do it - not you or me. I've seen a few prototypes and design documents. I can't talk too much about that but it is something that companies and individuals have most definitely spent time thinking about, and working on... <BR> <BR>And I am NOT talking about a wakeboard version of the Goode PowerShell waterski boots. <BR> <BR>By the way Jrod are you trying to crush everyone's hopes/ideas in this thread? LoL. Its tough to get one past you. <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0> <BR> <BR>Just messing around. But I am serious about release systems. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by juniorhawk on November 20, 2007)

Bring on the release bindings!!! I'm suffering my second sprained ankle this year from no release. I've read plenty on here that have suffered worse.

In the future there will only be Epics, the future will be amazing

I think that wakes will have to get bigger. But landings will be a big problem too. I think a bigger and wider wake will make a "landing ramp". If you keep getting air and land in the flats, impact is going to kill your knees. <BR> <BR>But for that to happen, boats are going to have to be alot bigger. And with gas prices nowadays, that will be something only affordable for a few people. <BR> <BR>You never know, if you look at other older sports like moto X, snowboarding, surfing, skateboarding you can kinda see when it was sorta slow and then some technology or even an athlete changed the sport. Im interested to see what will happen

more cable parks would be cool and more fuel efficient boats. Look at cars like the Sti and the EVO. They're only 2 liters pushing out 300 ponies. Turbo's are the way to go, more power less motor. <BR> <BR>I don't see why that fly high pole failed. Has anyone seen the video of Rob Mapp riding behind the boat with the huge tower extension? He did the biggest S-Bend I've ever seen. I'll post it when I get home.

Don't see the need for release bindings. Either you stay in, or smack down hard enough to DB eject. <BR> <BR>More watersport complexes

Hey sorry Erik. I've been around Wakeworld for a long time, and a lot of these subjects have been discussed over and over. I don't mean to be negative. <BR> <BR>The tower extension really is something that came and went. <BR> <BR>The release bindings sound great in concept. I personally think coming out of your bindings is best, but 50% of wakeboarders disagree with me. A lot of guys want their boots to stay on to avoid a 1 in / 1 out scenario, or a collision with the board once it comes off.

Snowboarding is different. For one, releasing from your board could mean that your board goes sliding all the way down the slope. Then what? <BR> <BR>More importantly is what happens on the edge catch. In snowboarding your momentum is still carrying you downhill and you don't come to a complete stop therefore the impact isn't quite as abrupt. In wakeboarding, an edge catch usually means you come to an almost complete stop when you hit the water. I could see where release bindings would minimize that catapult action that slams you down into the water right now. <BR> <BR>Who knows...I guess we'll see in a few years.

Fuel efficient boats (and trucks) are almost a must - or we will all be on here looking for pulls. Fuel prices are just getting friggen retarded.

I agree Eubanks. I just ride loose bindings though. I come right out

Huh, I ride them as tight as possible! I think I'm in the crowd that fears the one in and one out senario. Plus I like the responsiveness of tight bindings. My wife actually makes fun of me because anything I wear on my feet I like really tight including shoes when I go running.

i think that almost every board in the future will have some amount of flex to it. some may still be stiffer than others but, i think that some amount of flex will be applied in different areas to the boards to get the most amount of pop possible

look at this video of Rob Mapp. The first trick (s-bend) was on a boat with the extended tower. I don't see how anyone could get that much air without the extended tower. <BR> <BR><a href="http://www.trufei.com/Videos/CableAble.wmv" target="_blank">http://www.trufei.com/Videos/CableAble.wmv</a>

that is an impressive video. he really is awesome. <BR> <BR>but, that tower extension looks a little risky to me. i would definitely have to see quite a few riders, way better than me, ride it to make sure it wouldn't fold back.

Could some some explain to me release bindings. As in the whole binding releases from the board with your foot in it? That just spells mishaps all over the place. Eubanks if you fall out of your binding some how snowboarding thats y you have a leash, like a surf board, most hills are enforcing them around here. Now im trying to picture how a double up aparatus and how it wouldnt effect your ride to the wake to hit it, though its a great idea you have a double up on demand.

i dont think that whatever we come up with would be quick enough to prevent the pain of catching an edge as far as the release goes. <BR> <BR>anything that released that fast would also release at inconvienent times,

That tower is giant! I think they should be just as high as a guy can go. If the rope is aiming down, than it's pulling you down.

im gonna have to bash on the relase bindings a little bit too....when i first saw the comment about them, i thaught it was a sick idea, but then i started thinking about it, and they really wouldnt work out (for snowboarding too). say you were doing a tail block on a snowboard, or a tail ride or something on the wake. i dont really think that the release system could tell when it had to release, and if it did release on you at a bad time, then you might be more hesitant to stomp tricks or whatever, because you dont want your bindings to fall off.

More efficient boats and bigger wakes are on the opposite end of the spectrum. <BR> <BR>Hybrid doesn’t make any sense for the boat market. An automotive hybrid recovers a lot of energy during breaking and has an auto shut off feature. You can’t recover much energy while stoping your boat. Conceivably you could add auto shut of and save a few cents but I think it would be annoying. Maybe if you had a small electric motor to power your boat while bring the rope back to your skier. <BR> <BR>Gas engines won’t get any more efficient – they are already at the upper limit. Your boat motor is working against two major forces. The first is surface resistance of water against the hull. The second is the energy required to make the surface wake. At slow speeds you mostly have the first type of energy loss. At higher speeds the surf face wake, Kelvin wake, dominates. <BR> <BR>The Kelvin wake has two components. The first is a series of waves that leave the boat at 19.5 degrees. The second is a transverse wake that goes from diagonal wake to diagonal wake. Most of the Kelvin wake energy goes into the traverse wake. Large shipping and cruise vessels have added “bulbous noses” to reduce the transverse wake. At best these modifications reduce fuel consumption by 10%. This savings are only realized in a very narrow range of speeds. I doubt that the next X-Star/Wakeseter/whatever is going to have a bulbous nose. If someone did offer a bulbous nose boat you might save as much as 10%, I wouldn't expect more. <BR> <BR>An I6/I5/I4 diesel would probably be your best bet for reducing fuel costs. With the lower sulfur diesel fuel requirements I expect that there will be some advancement in the automotive and truck markets. Importers have put off importing diesels waiting for this change. Diesel engine prices won’t fall until diesel engines reach parity with gasoline engines. Until then you’ll pay a hefty premium for a marine diesel engine. <BR> <BR>If energy costs continue to climb cable parks might do well. <BR> <BR>I think bigger wakes are going to also be a problem. First, it takes a lot of energy. Second, at least locally, wakeboarders and wakeboard wake aren’t appreciated by other boaters. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by Bigshow on November 24, 2007)

another problem with the release system: <BR> <BR>what if the board is released, then nails you in the head or other part of the body after being released. <BR> <BR>its not safe

Active ballast. Ballast system which integrates into PP, fills when riding, dumps when you fall. Every time you plane up its with an empty boat. It can be done with scoops, I'm working on a prototype now. I offered the concept to Epic but they were not interested, if any other boat manfs are reading and interested I can send you my calcs. Not interested in money just want to get the concept out there. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by Ralph on November 24, 2007)

Darren, most ballast systems take many minutes to fill and empty. The only fast system that I’m aware of is the Calabria Pure Vent System. Have you checked the Calabria Pure Vent Wake System (TM) patent? <BR> <BR>Many boat owners augment factory ballast systems. Would your system be large enough that most wouldn’t augment? <BR> <BR>How will a rapid dump and fill system tied to perfect pass be beneficial? I haven’t noticed that anyone with a hard core wakeboarding boat complaining about getting on plane. If your system takes more than 30 or 60 second to fill some riders might complain. <BR> <BR>A system that rapidly switches from wakeboard, to goofy wakesurf, to regular wakesurf, and back to wakeboard would be greatly appreciated by the wakesurf community. If you have something that does that without treading on a Calabria patent that would be interesting. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by Bigshow on November 25, 2007)

The system I currently have is 2x 1&amp;1/4 scoops which fills 1500 pounds in 2 min @ 20mph (This is tested not calculated). I would need to check my calcs to see how fast a pair of 2" scoops would fill but it is less than 60 seconds. <BR> <BR>If you have a smart controller you could customize how far you dump the tanks when PP dis-engages, this would allow you to run in economy vs performance settings. Obviously dumping all the ballast would mean you use the least gas but have to wait the longest time before the wake is 100% again. <BR> <BR>Tanks can be made any size to suit the application. <BR> <BR>The reason to tie it into PP is not so you can plane up with more ballast its so the boat can plane empty using significantly less petrol then fill once on plane. Running cost savings would be more than 50%, that is a pretty powerful benefit. <BR> <BR>Yes I have seen the pure vert system, it is a great concept but does nothing for running costs or greenhouse gas emissions. This system is similar with no pumps but different because it uses scoops to fill the tanks rather than just flooding them.

Empty rate equals fill rate? I would guess that without pumps empty via scoops would be slower and you’d have to have the boat moving. You’d need a pretty big valve. The controller would be trivial, you could monitor PP speed or just engine RPM and time at RPM. <BR> <BR>Are you sure about your cost savings assessment, do you have data on that? The system will let you get on plane and then carry more ballast than you would have without the system. In that case you’d end up using more fuel than before. Scopes will add friction all the time. <BR> <BR>So are you sure you’re not covering existing patent space, if not you should start thinking about patents? A novel system that works would be really beneficial for wakesurfing. I get more of a work out moving surfing ballast around than I get actually surfing. <BR> <BR>Not trying to be a pain, just asking questions. Good luck with your system. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by Bigshow on November 25, 2007)

what if the scoops could open and close?... they could open when stopped to empty to prepare the boat to take off again then they could fill while the scoops were open, then close to reduce drag? I don't know much, but it seems this idea solves it all? ideally anyway

as for <font size="+1">releasable bindings</font> even if they were dialed in so they worked fairly well, the plates would surely scratch the surface of the board at times... who wants a scratched up board... at least not on the top anyway. <BR> <BR>and as for <font size="+1">flex</font>, i second what has been said so far. I don't see it becoming a replacement, but i definately see it increasing in popularity. I bet half the boards will be flex and half will be stiff in the coming future. I also agree that hybrid-flex-stiff boards (like byerly monarch) will begin surfacing more and more}

also i could see release bindings being a problem on trip flips and those times you catch an edge and pull out of it luckily

If the scoops are if the flow they add drag, period. You have other running gear under the water line such as the strut that hold the prop shaft. How much drag don't know.

If the possible issues surrounding a releasable binding were trivial, then they'd we'd already have them. All of the counter-arguments I've seen against them are situational events that would need to be accounted for. No, it's not acceptable for your bindings to pop off any time other than impact. And no, it's not acceptable for them to break away in such a fashion that the board could hit you after a fall. And scratching up the board is also not an option. All this means is that there are significant hurdles to overcome. It does not mean the the concept isn't sound. That's why we're talking about where we think we're going instead of where we think we are. <BR> <BR>There would have to be a lot of research into exactly when a binding would need to release vs. staying together. Then, there would have to be a lot of research into a binding release system that would match those scenarios. But the first thing we'd have to do is actually study whether or not it's a good idea. Because it may be or it may not be safer but I don't have any firm data on that and as far as I can tell, nobody else does either.

<font color="0000ff">Four Hole/Bolt Binding Mounting Systems (similar to Slingshot and snowboards)</font>}