Articles
   
       
       
Pics/Video
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WAKE WORLD HOME
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       08-02-2012, 8:10 AM Reply   
A couple of weeks ago while hanging out with West Coast Camps instructor Conor Bayak (who's a blast to hang out with by the way), we got on the subject on line length. We were pulling riders all day long, with a wide range of ability, so we were constantly adjusting the weight / line length / speed formula.

He brought to my attention that some of the top riders are riding shorter lines. Last I heard, I think Harley rides at 72' or something. It sounds like a lot of the camp instructors also ride between 70-75 feet.

So after 5 years of riding 80 feet, I dropped down to 75, dropped about 700 pounds of ballast (all from the rear), and shaved 1 mph off of my speed. A couple of my buddies rode 70' yesterday, and were going huge.

After one set I wondered why I ever went to 80. Everything was timed better. I was popping bigger than ever, the crashes were far less intense, and I found myself working to get old tricks back. The wake was bigger than ever, we got on plane much faster, and saved 10 gallons of fuel for the day.

Has anyone else started shortening the line from 80 feet?
Old     (theloungelife)      Join Date: Jun 2012       08-02-2012, 8:20 AM Reply   
This is an interesting concept, especially the fuel savings. It would be cool to see how others fared testing this out.
Old     (jeff_mn)      Join Date: Jul 2009       08-02-2012, 8:29 AM Reply   
No way bro>

how can we have dick swining contests if we're nto running 6k of ballast and 87.5' lines at 27mph?
Old     (hunter660)      Join Date: Aug 2007       08-02-2012, 10:45 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff_mn View Post
No way bro>

how can we have dick swining contests if we're nto running 6k of ballast and 87.5' lines at 27mph?
this
Old     (petrie141)      Join Date: Jun 2012       08-02-2012, 8:42 AM Reply   
Funny this thread was brought up. I test drove a boat yesterday (which we're getting fingers crossed) and noticed something. The owner picked us up at the doc and cruised out of the no wake zone before really getting after it. We cruised for a while at 30 - 35 to get to the other side of the lake. Once I got behind the wheel I slowed it down to about 22 ish to check out the wake. I couldn't help but notice that with no sacs and only two people in the boat, increasing the speed by only a few miles per hour did indeed diminish the wake little by little. It made me wonder what the deal was with the 80 foot lines. You've got to do everything that much harder with a line that long. Have to edge longer to get enough speed, have to pop harder off the wake to get to the other side, the slams are harder due to the higher speed... etc. The more I thought about it, the more it made sense to choke up the rope and slow down a hair. Since riders don't have to worry about width, they can concentrate on height. Isn't that what everyone wants (see all the "how do I get more pop" threads). The gas savings is an extra blessing.
Old     (detonate69)      Join Date: Apr 2001       08-02-2012, 9:45 AM Reply   
I just can't ride a short line, I'm constantly landing in the flats. I'd rather go wake to wake so I usually ride at 80'. I just cut more naturally and don't feel like I'm holding back.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk 2
Old     (liquidmx)      Join Date: Jun 2005       08-02-2012, 10:17 AM Reply   
Agreed J-Rod. I have been riding shorter with less weight to try and get better technique and fundamentals back...then plan on going back to a bigg(er) wake...hopefully with good/better habits. I found that after riding big wakes for a few years I came to rely on them and as a result my pop and technique suffered. In addition, as I age I dont mind taking a few things in the flats but generally prefer more "poppy wake to wake" stuff to take it easy(er) on my battered knees.

One other thing people dont realize when watching a lot of the pro level guys ride is the size differential. For the most part the wakeboarders you watch on videos are gymnastic jockeys who are rarely over 5'9" and are generally under 175lbs (in general). So when you watch guys get ridiculous air you need to remember the wake to weight/size ratio differential. I would need to ride a yacht wake to get something comparable to someone like Shota's size behind an X Star with 8k in ballast.
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       08-02-2012, 10:21 AM Reply   
David, When you slow the boat down at 75, the wake is just as wide. I went bigger wake to wake at 75, then I did at 80.
Old     (Michael)      Join Date: Mar 2010       08-02-2012, 10:33 AM Reply   
I started doing this this year... went from 4k lbs in the VLX running an 80ft line down to less weight and a 75ft line... The one problem I have is line tension when im cutting and going through the wake...

Do you have a solution for this?

On the bright side i started doing this because I became somewhat of a nancy when it came to the slams learning tech tricks.
Old     (Kerry)      Join Date: Jun 2010       08-02-2012, 10:30 AM Reply   
It completely depends on the boat too but in generally the wake can be real nice at some shorter lengths and slower speed. I for one have always been riding about 65 feet. But my boat is an x-9 not as wide as some wakeboard boats but it is pretty wide. I think the shape of the wake is much better at 65 feet. However if I wanted to speed up to 23-24 I would probably go to 70 feet. I really like 22 though.
Old     (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       08-02-2012, 10:36 AM Reply   
Yeah I have toned back and now ride at 75' pretty much all the time. I understand the philosophy of having a longer line and faster speed but for me I have to work too hard. My buddy is all about riding his boat at 80' and I can't ride at that speed and the crashes hurt a hell of a lot more. I just ask him to drop 1mph and I bring my rope in 5'. Funny thing is, my buddy's wake is better at my speed/length.
Old     (mastercraf)      Join Date: Jul 2009       08-03-2012, 6:14 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kerry View Post
It completely depends on the boat too but in generally the wake can be real nice at some shorter lengths and slower speed. I for one have always been riding about 65 feet. But my boat is an x-9 not as wide as some wakeboard boats but it is pretty wide. I think the shape of the wake is much better at 65 feet. However if I wanted to speed up to 23-24 I would probably go to 70 feet. I really like 22 though.
I also ride an X-9 and I'm with you on this one. I used to ride 65' when we had the old rope with a section for it. Now I'm stuck at 70' with the new coated line, but with stock ballast about 21 mph you can't go wrong. Add a few people to the back seat with the ballast full, and it's a pretty poppy wake if you charge it hard!

Last edited by mastercraf; 08-03-2012 at 6:17 AM.
Old     (scotthons)      Join Date: Mar 2010       08-03-2012, 7:00 AM Reply   
I pulled my line in 5 feet at the beginning of season to work on a new trick and liked it so much that is where I now permanently keep it.
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       08-02-2012, 10:40 AM Reply   
The line tension didn't seem to be any different for me. I have to start my edge further out, that's about it.
Old     (Michael)      Join Date: Mar 2010       08-02-2012, 10:59 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarrod View Post
The line tension didn't seem to be any different for me. I have to start my edge further out, that's about it.
I probably do need to cut out farther than, just the wake is super soft.
Old     (boomshot)      Join Date: Jan 2008       08-02-2012, 10:58 AM Reply   
Good 'cause I never fell for that anyway.
Pros were riding longer lines because they could. I saw no benefit ant anything past 75 felt too long. So it's always been 65-70 for me, maybe shorter. I never measured.

Are the stupid wide-as-fug stances going away too? Because there IS actually a right width to ride based on your height. None of the "all the way out" bullsnizz.
Old     (benjaminp)      Join Date: Nov 2008       08-02-2012, 11:23 AM Reply   
I've been pretty consistent at 75' and 23.6 mph behind a friend's VLX, and have never really felt the need to speed up or move the line out. I dont feel limited by it at all, and why fix what isnt broken?
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       08-02-2012, 11:35 AM Reply   
"Because there IS actually a right width to ride based on your height."

What do you feel is the right width then?

I base my stance on my individual body mechanics, and how I'm able to squat my butt to the board with minimal resistance and pressure on ankles, knees, and hips. I think it has more to do with relative flexibility.

I do agree that too wide looks silly.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       08-02-2012, 12:22 PM Reply   
I pulled my type in 5ft and slowed the boat down 0.5mph for last session, just thought it was because i was getting old. Didn't take any weight out of the boat tho.....
Old     (boomshot)      Join Date: Jan 2008       08-02-2012, 12:49 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarrod View Post
"Because there IS actually a right width to ride based on your height."

What do you feel is the right width then?

I base my stance on my individual body mechanics, and how I'm able to squat my butt to the board with minimal resistance and pressure on ankles, knees, and hips. I think it has more to do with relative flexibility.

I do agree that too wide looks silly.
That's basically what I meant. We're on the same page.

When you see a 5' 3" manlet at the cable on a 142 all the way out you know dude's misinformed.
Old     (boardjnky4)      Join Date: Dec 2011       08-02-2012, 1:14 PM Reply   
95 feet with no ballast or bust
Old     (norwalkbeast)      Join Date: May 2011       08-02-2012, 2:24 PM Reply   
I've never understood this, but what is the exact point of riding at 95 feet? it doesn't make much sense to me?
Old     (cwb4me)      Join Date: Apr 2010       08-02-2012, 4:39 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by norwalkbeast View Post
I've never understood this, but what is the exact point of riding at 95 feet? it doesn't make much sense to me?
To see if it could be done at 23mph with No weight in the boat.Next up is 100' at 24mph with no weight of course.It takes technique to clear the wake at that line length.Then when you ride a shorter rope length[70-75'] with No weight you get much better pop because your technique is solid.
Old     (boardjnky4)      Join Date: Dec 2011       08-03-2012, 5:40 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by norwalkbeast View Post
I've never understood this, but what is the exact point of riding at 95 feet? it doesn't make much sense to me?
There isn't any point to it. It's a bit of a running joke, but a certain member here seems to think it makes him cool.
Old     (brhanley)      Join Date: Jun 2001       08-02-2012, 5:06 PM Reply   
This is interesting. We occasionally take sets with shorter rope, less ballast (usually 1/2 to 2/3 ballast) and slower speeds, but have not gotten the "more air" sensation. Maybe worth a try to put in a bit more ballast to see what happens with that...
Old     (alexair)      Join Date: Oct 2008       08-02-2012, 9:23 PM Reply   
I always recommend to watch this video for all who ask me about what size of wake, length of rope or type of board/bindings needed for good riding

Exclusive Footage of a Young Scott Byerly Riding at a Clinic in Massachusetts
Old     (boardman74)      Join Date: Jul 2012       08-02-2012, 10:39 PM Reply   
Thats pretty sick!! I'll never be able to do that no matter how big the wake is and there was hardly any wake there at all!!
Old     (westsidarider)      Join Date: Feb 2003       08-02-2012, 10:56 PM Reply   
Longer line = more time in the air, whether your popping way high up in the air wake to wake or sailing out into the flats, longer line = going bigger.

I ride as long of a line as possible and then bring it back in just a foot or 2 to get that sweet spot.

The one time I rode 95' was behind a bu 247. Wake was beyond waist high, and I'm 6' 1". If I had another 10 feet of line on the boat I would have added it.

Side note, I do enjoy a short line ride fairly often because of the saved gas and slower speeds. So I do see both sides
Old     (wakerider111)      Join Date: Jul 2006       08-03-2012, 12:16 AM Reply   
surprised that THE name has not be mentioned... Randall Harris!!
Seeing the Vandal jump TWO wakes at his length of rope = intense (Transgression)


...

...

but there hardly is anyone who can compare to Randall so whats the point in trying. ha
although i did try it once just to see what it felt like. mad props.

but i am with David (detonate69) i like a line length that i can land wake to wake with some push... usually whatever length i can still land a toeside wake jump, or even a switch toeside wake jump

Last edited by wakerider111; 08-03-2012 at 12:21 AM.
Old     (slidin_out)      Join Date: Apr 2010       08-03-2012, 7:40 AM Reply   
rode with two guys much better than me last weekend and was shocked to see them both riding at 70', guy i usually ride with was hell bent on riding at 80', i didn't let the rope out from my 70' for one of his pulls and he converted to 70' after that
Old     (bhyatt_ohp)      Join Date: Oct 2007       08-03-2012, 8:05 AM Reply   
All depends on riding stye, personal preference and what you are trying to achieve. Harley, Phil and others that excel on the pro tour use slower speeds and shorter line lengths because it allows for 6-7 tricks per pass. They can pack more tricks in that way vs. a Randall Harris, Keith Lyman, etc. Running 26.5mph at 85-90ft' soaring into the flats on every trick only getting 3-4 hits at the wake per pass. Tournament/tech style = slower with shorter line lengths - Freeride/balls out into the flats style = longer lengths and more speed. Personally I like 24mph at 75ft behind my 08 VLX running 3,800lb ballast. Shorter cuts, more straight up and down pop, with less effort in my opinion.
Old     (cwb4me)      Join Date: Apr 2010       08-03-2012, 8:21 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhyatt_ohp View Post
All depends on riding stye, personal preference and what you are trying to achieve. Harley, Phil and others that excel on the pro tour use slower speeds and shorter line lengths because it allows for 6-7 tricks per pass. They can pack more tricks in that way vs. a Randall Harris, Keith Lyman, etc. Running 26.5mph at 85-90ft' soaring into the flats on every trick only getting 3-4 hits at the wake per pass. Tournament/tech style = slower with shorter line lengths - Freeride/balls out into the flats style = longer lengths and more speed. Personally I like 24mph at 75ft behind my 08 VLX running 3,800lb ballast. Shorter cuts, more straight up and down pop, with less effort in my opinion.
It is definitely less effort on a shorter line length.Slower speed helps with the effort also.
Old     (tahoeguy7)      Join Date: Sep 2006       08-03-2012, 8:12 AM Reply   
I like riding about 21 mph and 70 feet of line. This year we have been riding behind an X25, and with the wake tab up, you don't even really need any weight in the boat. We usually warm up in the mornings with no weight, and then throw the weight in after we get warmed up. It definitely helps to save some gas.
Old     (wakebordr11)      Join Date: May 2001       08-03-2012, 8:37 AM Reply   
One thing I like doing is take a set behind my Tige unweighted and really work for every bit of air, line tension, really progressive edge. Then hop on my buddies weighted 2001 Nautique and just BOOST everything multiple feet higher and float out the tricks. Still trying just as hard but going higher. I know this will sound like I'm being a dick but I laugh inside every time I see someone slamming their boat with 2500lbs and my backrolls on my unweighted wake are just as big as theirs... My friends say sometimes unweighted I pop higher for rolls, technique thing whereas bigger wake I gotta slow them down a lot.
Old     (boomshot)      Join Date: Jan 2008       08-06-2012, 9:15 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakebordr11 View Post
One thing I like doing is take a set behind my Tige unweighted and really work for every bit of air, line tension, really progressive edge. Then hop on my buddies weighted 2001 Nautique and just BOOST everything multiple feet higher and float out the tricks. Still trying just as hard but going higher. I know this will sound like I'm being a dick but I laugh inside every time I see someone slamming their boat with 2500lbs and my backrolls on my unweighted wake are just as big as theirs... My friends say sometimes unweighted I pop higher for rolls, technique thing whereas bigger wake I gotta slow them down a lot.
Worst Tige commercial ever.
Old     (wakebordr11)      Join Date: May 2001       08-06-2012, 9:25 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by boomshot View Post
Worst Tige commercial ever.
Shouldn't have said Tige, especially with my line of comment, made me sound like Robert, knew that'd draw some criticism, its a 99 inboard, widely regarded as having low free-board and a sh*tty wake, so be it

Allow me to re-phrase for the(allknowing)truth:

Warmup sets taken on an unweighted wake where technique plays a role gets me in a solid mindset of edging hard and making the most of my edge to get the most amplitude for all of my limited tricks I can do. Then when I ride a weighted out boat, such as my buddies 2001, Supra SSV or Avalanche where I've got a longer transition, and bigger harder wake, I can get some solid air and it makes everything easier. I see lots of people taking lazy cuts on big wakes.

Last edited by wakebordr11; 08-06-2012 at 9:30 AM.
Old     (ToPHeR35)      Join Date: Jul 2011       08-03-2012, 9:45 AM Reply   
I ride 65Ft at 22 MPH behind an X2

Gotta ride at this length because of the wake behind the X2, any longer and you miss the sweet spot
Old     (brhanley)      Join Date: Jun 2001       08-03-2012, 10:03 AM Reply   
Comparing line length on different boats is apples v. oranges. I ride about 5' less on the X1 v. my SAN. I ride about 10-15' less on my friend's old Centurion Avalanche. I'd imagine I'd ride shorter on any of the new huge, wide boats. 70' on a fully loaded SAN would suck arse and be about 5 feet wide. I haven't found a pull that beats a fully loaded, full rope length pull. That said, I bet it does save energy and am interested to check this out as perhaps an alternative.
Old     (cadunkle)      Join Date: Jul 2009       08-03-2012, 11:46 AM Reply   
I slowed it down recently. I normally ride a tidal river and my PP was not calibrated properly. Hard to get it dead on since you only get a very small window at high or low tide to get it right. Calibrated on vaca on a perfectly still lake and found when I thought I was riding at 21 MPH I was actually riding at 23 MPH. Tried 21 for real and wake just felt too wide (and way bigger). 22.2 is working for me and wake is noticeably bigger... Falls feel a little softer too.
Old     (Readyaimfire)      Join Date: Jun 2012       08-05-2012, 5:08 PM Reply   
Unless your name is Randall, no need to be past 75'.
Old     (tranner)      Join Date: Aug 2003       08-06-2012, 8:59 AM Reply   
I just scanned through this thread and forgive me if I missed it, but when everyone is talking line lengths and saying that they ride at 70' or 75', is that with or without the 5' of handle? So when you say that you ride at 70', does that mean 65' line + 5' handle?
Old     (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       08-06-2012, 2:26 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by tranner View Post
I just scanned through this thread and forgive me if I missed it, but when everyone is talking line lengths and saying that they ride at 70' or 75', is that with or without the 5' of handle? So when you say that you ride at 70', does that mean 65' line + 5' handle?
Everyone is talking about total line length....handle included

Next time you head out try 70ft and 22.5mph with the same weight... I bet you like it more.
Old     (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       08-06-2012, 9:30 AM Reply   
I'm with Jarrod 100%. I also ride with Conor and he presented this idea to me so I thought I'd give it a whirl. I've been riding 80ft for awhile now so I figured I'd take it into 70ft right away so that way I could pick apart the differences and find a reason why not to like it. I left all the weight but slowed the boat down 1-1.5mph and everything was easier. Now I usually only ride w2w but I had just as much "hang time" at 70ft as I did at 80ft and I had a lot less line tension. For the first time I landed all my spins back to back to back to back one after another.... no more missing the handle. Also the wake was more like mid thigh high rather than knee high. I've had all my friends try out the shorter line and not a single person has gone back... Just give it a honest try and see what you think....
Old     (HighWater)      Join Date: Apr 2012       08-06-2012, 10:55 AM Reply   
75' with handle @ 23.7mph on Supra Launch w/ 3k ballast.......and........ 75' with handle at 24mph Axis A22 4k-5k ballast
Old     (tranner)      Join Date: Aug 2003       08-06-2012, 11:44 AM Reply   
I use 70' line + 5' for handle at 23.0 mph behind my 2006 Malibu VLX w/ 3,000 lbs ballast (3 people inside boat, no wedge).
Old     (ettowake)      Join Date: Oct 2009       08-06-2012, 3:57 PM Reply   
i use a 75ft line with the handle counted.. and the wake above my kness at 22.7mph
but when there are lots of peeps in my boat i can use a 80ft (with handle) so the wake stay above my knees too! with 23.2mph
i have like 2650lbs of just water and brik ballast with more 3 buddies is 3k+ lbs but when there a the full 6 budies a lot of weight to my boat
almost sinking, a nautique 206 ( copy of it). Its a pretty good wake to me.. and the fall does hurt a lot more in the 80 feet
Old     (ryan_shima1)      Join Date: Sep 2002       08-07-2012, 6:29 PM Reply   
A few years ago, I tried going back to a shorter length (75ft) and slower speed (23.5) but I hated it. I felt rushed to the wake and actually found the landings much harder. Maybe because it felt like at that speed, the board "stuck" to the water more. However, I will shorten my line is if I ride a smaller boat (under 20ft) with a small wake. Otherwise, I will ride the same length and speed no matter what the boat.

For me, riding longer and faster feels better and much easier on the body. But everyone tends to find what feels good to them. Keep on riding everyone!
Old     (alanp)      Join Date: Apr 2001       08-07-2012, 7:42 PM Reply   
20.3-20.8 mph 65 feet. nautique team edition with additional 400 lbs lead. most ppl that ride long lines and 23-24 mph are just wasting gas and fighting unnecessary line tension. to no fault of their own their buddies told them that was cool or they heard thats what pros do, ridiculous nonetheless.
Old     (andy_nintzel)      Join Date: Sep 2004       08-07-2012, 8:45 PM Reply   
I have been watching this thread for a while. Tonight I went out and took a set at with my regular set up. For the last maybe 5 years I have been riding at 80-85 feet depending on the boat, behind my X-star I am out at 85 feet at 27.5 mph. I rode and felt great with my rego set up. Then I went out and took a set a 70 feet running at 24 mph. The first thing I noticed was the wake was not as wide, and I could go wake to wake with about a 5 foot cut with ease. I started trying to do a typical pass and was just blasting into the flats. I know that everyone has their own opinion on this but I felt there was more line tension and way less set up time for me to adjust as I approached the wake. I only noticed the line tension when I was spinning past 360 or trying to pass the handle upside down. So then I tossed the line out to 75 feet. Same thing. I know that a HUGE part of this is in my head, just not fully believing that I would like riding a shorter line. But I still felt like there was crazy line tension and I was rushed. Personally for me I feel like with my long line I can cut out parallel to the boat and generate a ton of speed on the way into the wake with out compromising body position. Some tricks you need (at least I do) need to be standing more upright. Take a Backside 5 for example. I just feel like at 85 feet I can get the speed I want and need without compromising my body position. The line length has more to do with body position for me than line tension.

But at the end of the day there in no right way to wakeboard. I did re-learn the one wake roll to revert on the longer line and with the slower speed so that was a bonus of the experiment.

good thread!
Old     (Readyaimfire)      Join Date: Jun 2012       08-07-2012, 11:39 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by alanp View Post
20.3-20.8 mph 65 feet. nautique team edition with additional 400 lbs lead. most ppl that ride long lines and 23-24 mph are just wasting gas and fighting unnecessary line tension. to no fault of their own their buddies told them that was cool or they heard thats what pros do, ridiculous nonetheless.
20 is too slow. No consistency in the wake at that speed. Minimum should be 21.5-22mph. Unless u r a total beginner that is.
Old     (cwb4me)      Join Date: Apr 2010       08-08-2012, 6:34 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Readyaimfire View Post
20 is too slow. No consistency in the wake at that speed. Minimum should be 21.5-22mph. Unless u r a total beginner that is.
I've seen Alan Plotz ride and he is a very good rider.I told him he should compete at local contests because he has so many tricks in his arsenal.He hits them one after the other and makes them look easy.A very technical rider.
Old     (Gnargnar)      Join Date: Aug 2012       08-07-2012, 9:04 PM Reply   
We do 70ft 21mph...definitely too old to blow out a knee but still get the pop
Old     (boardman74)      Join Date: Jul 2012       08-07-2012, 9:30 PM Reply   
I ride about the same and second the too old!! 85 ft @ 27.5 mph seems insane to me. The face plants hurt my body bad enough at 21-22 mph.
Old     (alanp)      Join Date: Apr 2001       08-08-2012, 6:10 AM Reply   
im not a pro but i do have 13 inverts all learned at that speed or slower. i guess i'd be better if i rode at 21.5-22? wth??

on a different note i had a very well known teaching pro spend a week with me and he rode his set at 19.8 and absolutely crushed it.
Old     (bhyatt_ohp)      Join Date: Oct 2007       08-08-2012, 6:31 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by alanp View Post
im not a pro but i do have 13 inverts all learned at that speed or slower. i guess i'd be better if i rode at 21.5-22? wth??

on a different note i had a very well known teaching pro spend a week with me and he rode his set at 19.8 and absolutely crushed it.
Your speedo or perfect pass must be off. Have you GPS calibrated it? If your running a super sport nautique I could see a slower speed making sense, but not that slow.
Old     (Readyaimfire)      Join Date: Jun 2012       08-08-2012, 2:57 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by alanp View Post
im not a pro but i do have 13 inverts all learned at that speed or slower. i guess i'd be better if i rode at 21.5-22? wth??

on a different note i had a very well known teaching pro spend a week with me and he rode his set at 19.8 and absolutely crushed it.
I meant no disrespect, but 20 seems too slow. One of the issues with this forum is you really cant tell whos a newb and whos a seasoned veteran. I bet your speedo needs to be calibrated. My '09 xstar says I'm riding 28, but I know that I'm actually riding 22.5. It camethat way from the dealer. But I've always rode 22-23mph, so I knew immediately it was off.
Old     (brett33)      Join Date: Apr 2011       08-08-2012, 6:43 AM Reply   
Check that speed with a GPS. I'm riding an 02 Team Edition with 3,500lbs at 70ft doing 22.3-22.7
Old     (wakebordr11)      Join Date: May 2001       08-08-2012, 7:08 AM Reply   
^He's only running an extra 400#s on top of 440 stock... I can believe less than 21 with a 65 foot rope... I wouldn't do it, too short of a lever arm with the short rope, I prefer 70-75 but that's my personal preference, nobody told me to think that way btw... 21 too slow
Old     (brett33)      Join Date: Apr 2011       08-08-2012, 7:22 AM Reply   
Yeah I can believe ~21 with a 65 ft rope lightly weighted, but 19.8?!? That seems super slow for a skilled rider, unless you're practicing new tricks on the skate.
Old     (axeman)      Join Date: Aug 2009       08-08-2012, 7:49 AM Reply   
I've got a 220 Team Edition. Run a 65' rope with hydrogate down and the wake is perfect (when it's just me and my wife). Add a couple of buddies and the wake just gets steeper as long as they are sitting in the right locations. Falls already hurt at that speed. I can't imagine riding at 27mph. That's insane!
Old     (wakebordr11)      Join Date: May 2001       08-08-2012, 10:39 AM Reply   
I bet its off too. On another thread in the boats section I asked a guy about his speed, he said 22, wake looked narrow, he was going 24... However, with 400lbs, if he keeps it in the nose so the boat is weighted 50/50 I bet it stays clean at 20... Now I couldn't ride that slow, it'd be a lot of work but maybe?
Old     (ryan_shima1)      Join Date: Sep 2002       08-08-2012, 10:54 AM Reply   
I was thinking the same thing, are their speedo's and/or PP even calibrated correctly??? Because a lot of riders will tell me their speed from their boat, then come with me and it's not even close to actual speed, they find out that they are riding faster than they think.
Old     (durty_curt)      Join Date: Apr 2008       08-08-2012, 3:26 PM Reply   
Is it just me then... Or does anyone else feel that at lengths of 70 or shorter that double UPS just aren't as fun? I E the rope is short enough that it pulls you down, possibly sending lower body into Railey mode and not getting as much height? Cuz that's one of the main reasons i ride at 75. Just enough for an ideal speed and no restrictions on dubs
Old     (brhanley)      Join Date: Jun 2001       08-08-2012, 3:31 PM Reply   
I think there is merit to the short line, slower speed, less ballast approach. I've done quite a bit of experimenting over the years. That said, I've read all sorts of posts by A. Plotz in the trick tips section and I'm sure he's a very good rider, but a bit presumptuous to say that it's "ridiculous" to prefer the longer line and more ballast. While I'm pretty sure I can do most, if not all, of my tricks at 20 mph and less ballast, I am also pretty confident those tricks feel better and bigger with more ballast. I agree that there are lots of riders who probably do not need the bigger ballast and longer lines, and that it acts as a crutch, but I'm also pretty sure that you're sacrificing air time under those conditions and that there is merit to riding that way. It's certainly not ridiculous.
Old     (Bill_Dad)      Join Date: Apr 2010       08-08-2012, 3:59 PM Reply   
the best advise i ever gave to Harley was dont ride a long line, ride shorter with less speed wake is bigger. go wake to wake dont go out into the flats, eespecially if you want to be in the sport for a long time, some might think it gay not to go out into the flats but weigh it up against maybe a knee injury I know what i would prefer .
Old     (brhanley)      Join Date: Jun 2001       08-08-2012, 4:11 PM Reply   
That is good advice -- wake-to-wake is so much easier on the body. That said, Harley does quite a bit of blasting out into the flats too...darned kids! Out of curiosity, how much ballast does Harley put in his boat? I'm guessing 5K+.
Old     (Bolo)      Join Date: May 2011       08-08-2012, 4:49 PM Reply   
I thought Harley shortened his rope because the new xstar's wake was washed at his normal riding length.
Old     (mofreestyle)      Join Date: Jan 2006       08-08-2012, 5:45 PM Reply   
^^ Had to go there. Lol

There has been some good ideas on this thread and as much as I love riding at 80ft, I'm going to try some different lengths next time out.
Old     (Bill_Dad)      Join Date: Apr 2010       08-08-2012, 5:15 PM Reply   
ok in fact Harley did shorten his line by i think 18inches, he did this as the tower on the new boat is in a different position compared to the old boat, he runs alot it goes like this fill it up till it cant get on the plane and then empty some out, no only joking im just not 100% now as he changes it all the time. I wont go into the wake debate again but i can tell you this harley loves the wake on the new xstar. Most of the team riders will have boats really soon, so im sure you will see some really great footage soon.!!!!!!!!!
Old    LR3w8kbrdr            08-08-2012, 6:52 PM Reply   
We ride at 38-39.5' off...woops forgot this is the wakeboard forum nevermind

But please god please...dont let this turn into another Xstar debacle
Old     (alanp)      Join Date: Apr 2001       08-08-2012, 8:19 PM Reply   
my ridiculous assertion is aimed at newer riders. you dont need tons of ballast, speed or line length. i personally find it ridiculous when i see someone struggling with their wake jumps in those circumstances described above. similarly when im playing golf and i see a 20+ handicapper playing from the tips with an 8 degree stiff shafted driver that he slices over and over.
didnt think to check my perfect pass tonight but i doubt my speedo is off. ill check it for sake of argument next time im out. ive been riding around 20 mph for about 7 years and know immediately if im riding at that speed.
Old     (alanp)      Join Date: Apr 2001       08-08-2012, 8:22 PM Reply   
that being said i really dont care what anyone rides if guys wanna ride faster slower with more ballast with no ballast whatever i dont really care.
Old     (alexair)      Join Date: Oct 2008       08-09-2012, 2:12 AM Reply   
empty boat
no any ballast 21-22 speed 73 rope 1/3 fuel 3 people w/driver.
sorry - not pro editor

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 4:40 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2012 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us