WakeWorld

WakeWorld (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/index.php)
-   Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=3183)
-   -   Any inboard will throw a bigger cleaner wake than an I/O (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=796611)

robandrus 01-10-2013 8:34 AM

Any inboard will throw a bigger cleaner wake than an I/O
 
"Any inboard will throw a bigger cleaner wake than an I/O" I've heard people say this so many times on this site and it always bugs me. Its just not true. Where your propulsion comes from has very little to do with the size of your wake. Displacement (weight), the shape of the hull and speed do affect it. So no, your 1985 Centurion Trutrac III does not have a bigger, better wake than a 9500lb Chapparell.

By the way, I've had an I/O and I've had at least 10 inboards. Would I buy another I/O after owning a wake boat? Probably not. In the 5 years I owned my I/O I replaced the outdrive 3 times, the floor, got horrendous gas mileage, horrible handling in chop, tons of bow rise and cheaper construction, but it did have my favorite wake out of all my the boats I've had. (with no ballast needed cause it already weighed the same as a school bus. I then bought a couple mastercrafts that I added 2500-3000#'s of ballast into and still couldn't get as good of wake out of. Over the years I've owned 5 mastercrafts (yes I dug my X-star) a nautique 210, a malibu sunsetter, 3 tige's and my 1987 Aeroglass 210. Inboards have tons of advantages, but some I/O's throw massive wakes, that you can dial in with trim adjustment. If you're gonna hate on them, hate on them for the right reasons.

psudy 01-10-2013 8:43 AM

You must have had a crappy IO if you had that many problems with it. Gas mileage should be better in an io with the ability to trim. I have a large Cobalt, and while the wake is much bigger than a WB, it also sucks. You would have to go 30 mph to clean and firm it up. My Supra was much nicer for boarding.

501s 01-10-2013 9:05 AM

I had an 18.5ft I/O before I bought my first V drive. Everything about the I/O was frustrating. Wake sucked, always curling over and washy, the boat could never hold speed well no matter how much weight it did or didnt have and the boat itself was always breaking down and giving me troubles.

At least in my experience there is/was NO comparison between the two. I don't miss my I/O at ALL!

boardman74 01-10-2013 9:08 AM

As a general statement that is a true statement. As with anything there will be exceptions.

If you love the I/O that much then by all means own one and be happy. I have ridden quite a few I/o's and some have big wakes. What they lack is shape and firmness. You can usually edge right threw the I/O wake with little lift.

Why are you switching boats so much if you like/dig them?

You may also want to study up on fluid dynamics and fluid power. The dynamics of a prop under a hull and one that hangs 3 feet behind it are certainly greatly different and will affect the wake for sure.

Just saying if you like an I/O then buy one and just laugh at all us idiots than think wake boats are better for wake sports. BTW might want to keep an eye on the prop when your surfing that I/O!

will5150 01-10-2013 10:00 AM

What is the point of this post? You say you have had a lot of boats and are complaining about people who say I/O wakes suck- they do suck for the most part. I/O's are built to get up out of the water and move you around the lake. Wake boats are meant to sit deep in the water, displace as much water as possible and throw huge wakes- and they do for the most part. Obviously there are excpetions to this on both sides. Your profile shows you with a Mastercraft, so again, Not sure what this rant is about.

larry1167 01-10-2013 10:20 AM

I thought I would chime in here because I have what I believe to be a unique I/O. It's an '87 Sanger TX. The hull is very similar to the Sanger V210 and Sanger DLX... same length, beam, hull design at the transom, deep V up front, chines etc. It's an AWSA approved tow boat... both for barefoot and slalom. As far as I know, the only I/O to receive either approval but I could be wrong. Doesn't really matter I guess because this is Wakeworld, not No-Wakeworld.

Anyway, it is an I/O with a tow boat hull and was specifically made to be a tow boat. The wakeboard wake is small, but it is firm and rampy with a clean lip. Clean at slower speeds. Don't need to go 30. I am able to adjust it's size by trimming the outdrive. I am happy with it because I am no pro and an intermediate wakeboarder at best.

Point being, I don't think you can classify all I/Os as having crappy wakes. Most probably do because they were not made to be a wake boat but I assume there are some acceptable ones out there.

All that being said, it is not an inboard and will never be. I have been behind many inboards.

Best thing about it, no one asks me to surf behind it.

robandrus 01-10-2013 11:28 AM

If you notice I didn't hate on inboards. I own one now and I even said I wouldn't own an I/O again! Just said that if you want to hate I/O's for their less efficient drive system that makes them a pain in the butt to hold speed, the safety issues, build quality, bow rise, lack of power, lack of surfing, gas mileage etc that's fine. I'm just saying that way too many people make stupid statements like "Any inboard will give you a bigger, better wake than any I/O."

While the crappy 18' I/O's won't throw any kind of a wake, neither will a crappy 18' inboard. I'd say the majority of I/O's weigh a ton and displace a ton of water. I've been behind a few that were very impressive. I've been behind lots of inboards that were impressive too, but I've owned enough inboards, not to mention installed enough ballast systems and bought enough sandbags to know that many wake boats don't naturally sit low in the water. In most wake boats, a lot of time, experimenting and thought goes into figuring out how to get a nice firm, well shaped wake. Point is that it doesn't just happen because they're inboards.

psudy 01-10-2013 12:56 PM

Again, IOs are generally better than WB on gas mileage. Build quality? That is very subjective. Lack of power? Again very subjective. Mine lacks zero power and will get on plain just as fast as any WB, and will then proceed to smoke it. Sure if you go with a low end IO, those statements will be true, but the opposite will happen if you are comparing to a low end WB.

mikebu 01-10-2013 3:15 PM

The thing I hate about IO's is the lack of Perfect Pass. When I'm pulling my kids I hate having to concentrate on keeping speed constant when I would rather be focused on other boats and the rider I am pulling. It also seems that wakeboard speeds on the IO are just on verge on coming on plane which makes it very hard to have a constant speed.

MICAH_HARPER 01-10-2013 3:41 PM

if you like I/O's buy one....if you dont buy a inboard

END OF DISCUSSION

alindquist 01-10-2013 3:53 PM

Perfect pass is an option on most IO's now a days... Hell my buddy bought a new Chaparral and it came with perfect pass and built in ballast.

Paul isn't your Cobalt 28' or 29', it could make a difference, my is 23' and does just fine at 22-25 mph...

cadunkle 01-10-2013 4:12 PM

I guess it's winter for sure now. lol

My last I/O, a 21' Marlin, threw a very clean and nicely shaped wake. It was a bit small though, and difficult to hold riding speed. I've been behind I/Os that threw a bigger wake but were really washy and impossible to clean up. It's mostly in hull shape. Drive has some effect but is not the primary factor.

As for efficiency, an I/O should be more fuel efficient than a comparable size/weight inboard with similar sized engine. Inboards, particularly wake/ski boats, have steep shaft angles and waste a lot of thrust. It's the nature of them, and also why they have less bow rise and plane more quickly. Inboards are also more simple with fewer driveline parts to fail. As for teh rotted floor and such, you'll find the same thing in inboards prior to composite construction. It's the nature of any wood boat. Saying a wood inboard in superior to a wood I/O is silly, and comes from someone who has clearly never done a floor and stringer job, basically a full restoration, of an older ski boat from any of the highly regarded big names. The glass quality was terrible and many boats have exposed wood on the floor or stringers with no glass on it at all. You'll find the same things on I/Os depending on manufacturer, day of the week, way the wind blew, etc.

Would I ever get another I/O? Absolutely, I'd love to restore an old Liberator. I think they're awesome boats... To haul ass and burn gas at 70+. Would I ever buy another I/O to ride behind? No way.

ilikebeaverandboats 01-10-2013 5:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robandrus (Post 1801479)
If you notice I didn't hate on inboards. I own one now and I even said I wouldn't own an I/O again! Just said that if you want to hate I/O's for their less efficient drive system that makes them a pain in the butt to hold speed, the safety issues, build quality, bow rise, lack of power, lack of surfing, gas mileage etc that's fine. I'm just saying that way too many people make stupid statements like "Any inboard will give you a bigger, better wake than any I/O."

While the crappy 18' I/O's won't throw any kind of a wake, neither will a crappy 18' inboard. I'd say the majority of I/O's weigh a ton and displace a ton of water. I've been behind a few that were very impressive. I've been behind lots of inboards that were impressive too, but I've owned enough inboards, not to mention installed enough ballast systems and bought enough sandbags to know that many wake boats don't naturally sit low in the water. In most wake boats, a lot of time, experimenting and thought goes into figuring out how to get a nice firm, well shaped wake. Point is that it doesn't just happen because they're inboards.

Show me a crappy 18' inboard :D

rdlangston13 01-10-2013 6:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robandrus (Post 1801479)

While the crappy 18' I/O's won't throw any kind of a wake, neither will a crappy 18' inboard. I'd say the majority of I/O's weigh a ton and displace a ton of water.

Not sure about high end I/Os but the tahoes and bayliners that I have been around weigh a good deal less than wakeboats of comparable size. I know my dads 21 ft bayliner weighs at least 1000 lbs less than my Moomba LSV




Sent from my iPhone newtys droid killer using Tapatalk

ilikebeaverandboats 01-10-2013 6:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robandrus (Post 1801479)
If you notice I didn't hate on inboards. I own one now and I even said I wouldn't own an I/O again! Just said that if you want to hate I/O's for their less efficient drive system that makes them a pain in the butt to hold speed, the safety issues, build quality, bow rise, lack of power, lack of surfing, gas mileage etc that's fine. I'm just saying that way too many people make stupid statements like "Any inboard will give you a bigger, better wake than any I/O."

While the crappy 18' I/O's won't throw any kind of a wake, neither will a crappy 18' inboard. I'd say the majority of I/O's weigh a ton and displace a ton of water. I've been behind a few that were very impressive. I've been behind lots of inboards that were impressive too, but I've owned enough inboards, not to mention installed enough ballast systems and bought enough sandbags to know that many wake boats don't naturally sit low in the water. In most wake boats, a lot of time, experimenting and thought goes into figuring out how to get a nice firm, well shaped wake. Point is that it doesn't just happen because they're inboards.

The wake is not strictly a function of displacement, the shape of the hull is an enormous factor.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 3:12 AM.