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 > Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-22-2013, 1:33 PM Reply   
I have an 06 X2 and have finally decided it is time to upgrade. I have been a mastercraft owner for almost 25 years and planned to upgrade to the new xstar. Went to the winter boat show and actually liked the G23 better. I have 3 kids now and the xstar felt small inside. I still wakeboard and like the biggest wake I can get but the rest of the family also enjoys hanging out, swimming and surfing and I have not heard good things about xstar surf wake. So now they come out with this X46 and (if the wake is like the xstar - i will demo in two weeks) it seems like that fits the bill more for me. Def going to test it and G23 but I am concerned about the weight since MC doesnt put much factory ballast in there. Those back gunnels in the X46 look tiny and since its such a big boat I dont know where you'd put the extra rear sacs? Looks like it will barely hold 400s and that isnt enough for a boat of that size. I am not going to upgrade to a 100k+ boat and have to manually fill sacs. F that noise. I at least need to be able to plumb everything in.

Also I assume since the newer MCs are built for extra ballast the timers arent an issue?

Anyone had any experience with this thing yet or give me any things to consider? Comments / advice?

Thanks in advance.
Attached Images
 
Old    John K (jk13)      Join Date: Aug 2012       07-22-2013, 2:19 PM Reply   
There's a guy over on TT that has had his for a while now. Info begins here:
http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/...=54293&page=17

Pics of it surfing on later pages.
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-22-2013, 2:27 PM Reply   
Thanks. Ive been active on that thread as well but that owner doesnt wakeboard. he said they have some CAD design of bags that will fit in the rear but he is holding off. wasnt sure why exactly.

Hard to see the surf wake from those angles but would expect it to be good since that is what this boat is billed as (surf machine.)
Old     (Orange)      Join Date: Jun 2012       07-22-2013, 8:11 PM Reply   
If you want to stay with MC due to familiarity with the brand, I'd also look at the X-25 and X-30. Both are much bigger than your X-2, have bigger feeling interiors and are more affordablethan the new X-Star, and produce outstanding surf and wakeboard wakes. The general reputation is the 25 produces an outstanding wakeboard wake and almost as outstanding a surf wake, while the 30 is reversed - outstanding surf wake and close to outstanding wakeboard wake. Both are easily big enough to handle a family of 5 plus friends, though obviously won't have as much room as the longer X-46.

I'm not saying there aren't other brands out there that are also good options, but you sound comfortable with Mastercraft and I have some experience on the 25 and 30. I have not been on the 46 for a direct comparison, but have been on the 45. I personally prefer the 25 and 30 to the old 45 as the 45 is just massive... Don't like driving and towing it as much as the other two. But if seating space is your prime need it does have a great wake.

If you have kids, one area I'd look at is low speed wake. I don't believe the 25 makes a clean wake at quite a slow a speed as the 30. This means your kids may have to learn wake jumps at 18 mph on the 25 where they might be able to cut their teeth wake jumping at only 17mph on the 30 (not sure if these are the exact speeds, but the point is the 30 will make a clean, kid friendly wake at a little bit lower speed than the 30).

Good luck. Always fun looking at new boats.
Old    L W (501s)      Join Date: Feb 2010       07-22-2013, 10:03 PM Reply   
Orange is right on the money. I have an X-30 and it has plenty of room. It also has the most storage of any MC, even more than the X-46 or X-55. It will be a while before you can get more owner feedback on the 46. FYI, here are a couple pics of the wakeboard wake on the X-30 with 3500lbs at 22.2MPH.
Attached Images
  
Old    Mason Obray (MCObray)      Join Date: Mar 2013       07-22-2013, 10:40 PM Reply   
Some other threads that might be of use to you, regarding Mastercraft surf wake.
http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=798072
http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=798319
Hope this helps.
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-23-2013, 1:38 PM Reply   
Thanks guys. That X-30 wake looks outstanding but having a pickelfork boat for so long I dont think I could go back to a regular bow. Feels small and cramped. Anyone know if they will redo the X35 soon? Sure sounds like the 30 is pretty close to filling many of my needs though as the 25 isnt enough of a size upgrade.

I am definitely excited to try out these newer boats in 2-3 weeks.

However reading some forums still sounds like people are using lots of extra weight in the seats of MCs and I am bench-marking this against the G23 that it appears between stock ballast and what extra I could add the wake would be great. I am definitely ready to have everything plumbed in and not have sacs all over the floor and seats.
Old     (JetRanger)      Join Date: Feb 2013       07-23-2013, 3:01 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by c640947 View Post
Thanks guys. That X-30 wake looks outstanding but having a pickelfork boat for so long I dont think I could go back to a regular bow. Feels small and cramped. Anyone know if they will redo the X35 soon? Sure sounds like the 30 is pretty close to filling many of my needs though as the 25 isnt enough of a size upgrade.

I am definitely excited to try out these newer boats in 2-3 weeks.

However reading some forums still sounds like people are using lots of extra weight in the seats of MCs and I am bench-marking this against the G23 that it appears between stock ballast and what extra I could add the wake would be great. I am definitely ready to have everything plumbed in and not have sacs all over the floor and seats.
The X25 is the same size inside as the 30. Exactly the same size. Your argument is invalid.
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-23-2013, 3:09 PM Reply   
So how much bigger is the X25 inside than the X2? And if the 30 is the same as the 25 then the 45/46 must be a HUGE leap in interior space.
Old    Tampa Wake (tampawake)      Join Date: Mar 2008       07-23-2013, 3:28 PM Reply   
X20 is the smallest boat at 20ft length and 96in beam
X25 is 21.6 length and 102in beam
X46 is 24.6 length and 102.in beam

Difference in size from x2 - x25 is going to be huge and from the x2 - x46 giant. Just not sure what your looking for in the boat. From the sounds if wakeboarding is a huge priority you might want to think X25. If cruising tubing and wakesurfing then X46. I cant afford either one good luck.
Old     (Orange)      Join Date: Jun 2012       07-24-2013, 1:34 AM Reply   
Obviously the best advice is to go sit in the boats and judge for yourself how much space you need. Only you know how much space is required. The X-25 is clearly a major jump up in space from your X-2, but enough? Your call. Subjectively I did find the X-30 feels a little more spacious than the X-25, but nowhere near the jump in size as going from the X2 to x25.

I'd give the traditional bow a chance and look at he x30. Comparing the two, the x30 has deeper storage bins in the bow than the x25, who's now bins are a little shallow due to the hull shape. The X30 bow is a little longer and sets up very nicely for passengers lounging but mainly looking forward. The pickle fork on the x25 is slighty shorter and maybe not as good for lounging facing forward, but is set up well for two rear facing passengers (watching riders) where the x30 is only set up for one rear facing passenger. The main cockpits seem similar in size, but the x30 has the convertible rear facing seat that is outstanding for watching riders.

I love both boats and would have a difficult time choosing between the two. As is, I stil think the x25 is slightly better than the x30 due to the combination of a slightly better wakeboard wake and the two rear facing seats in the pickle fork. If the x25 had the rear facing seat like the x30 I think the choice would be more slanted toward the x25 for wakeboarders where right now its pretty close. For those not pure wakeboarders, I think the x30 might be a little better as it does have more storage. Most of the time owners of a particular model are pretty one sided about their model being superior, but what's funny about these two models is most owners will openly tell you both are outstanding boats and they had a really difficult choice to make and would have been equally happy with the other. I am frequently on x25s and x30s with about 10 people - mostly adults and teenagers - and both are comfortable. The x30 maybe gives an inch or so more inches between passengers here or there than the x25, but they are pretty damn close in feel. Both boats have ample room for fat sacs inside the storage lockers if you want them. Neither boat needs sacs for wakeboarding, though they do make for an exciting wake. I'll be honest that surf wakes arent my expertise as I don't surf often, but in talking with others, both boats benefit greatly by huge additions of weight for surfing. To be honest, I've never been in a boat that didn't need massive amounts of weight for surfing.

Comparing either to the x45 just for sheer space, yes you will see a large jump in real estate, but I think the difference is bigger in going from your x2 to either the x25 or x30. I would think the x46 is a more direct comparison in size to the G23 if that is your main non-MC focal point. I personally don't care for the size of X45s. Yes, they provide more space, but I rarely go with more than 10 people, don't really want to go with more than 10 people, and don't care for the performance characteristics required to haul that many people. Boats that big just don't handle well, require massive engines, tow like pigs, etc. But...that's how I use them. For some others, more people is even more of a party, so they're glad to have the space. I wish I could give you a comparison to G23s myself but I haven't been on one... Seen themmonnthe water and own trailers, but never set foot in one myself.

So long story short - go check them all out. Opinions like mine are too biased by waht we want from a boat which may not match what you want.
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-24-2013, 9:00 AM Reply   
Terrific information guys thanks. My party currently is going the be three kids + wife + others and lately since more of the riders i go with have kids the boat gets crowded quick with kids and sacs. I am guessing I am in a not common place to desire to wakeboard with giant wakes yet have tons of kids in the boat.

So I had looked at the X25 before and it did seem spacious. But one thing that struck me right away was the lack of space under the seats in the front. More specifically my X2 has a U shaped sac plumbed under the bow and the X25 has these weird walls that prohibit a U shaped sac. So knowing how much weight my X2 needs in the nose to not porpoise i figured there was not way to plumb in enough weight in the front of the X25. One of my requirements was to get a large wake without having to put sacs in the floor. Maybe I am naive in thinking this is possible but it seems like with the old star you could get most of the way there with everything plumbed. 800s in the rears and the wedge sacs in the nose that were prob 300 each plus 1500 stock got you to 3700. So can you ride a big wake on the X25 with things plumbed in? Where does the front weight go?

And yes in the end Ill check em all out but ill definitely need to research on here the integrated sac issue.
Old    Tampa Wake (tampawake)      Join Date: Mar 2008       07-24-2013, 9:25 AM Reply   
I am sure some X25 folk will chime in but the hull on you X2 vs X25 are not apples to apples or even close. No offense but the X2 wake is horrible unless you sink the living hell out of it. I have the Xstar 205 and put 400lbs of lead in the nose as apposed to the bow sack you have which makes a big difference. That would be a solution if the X25 even needs it. From what I have heard the X25 has the BEST stock wake with stock ballast of any MC boat. Remember this is a deep V hull coming from their CSX series. So it sinks way easier than your flatter hull of the X2. The X25 and CC 210 will be my next boat or at least I hope for this very reason.
Old    Tampa Wake (tampawake)      Join Date: Mar 2008       07-24-2013, 9:30 AM Reply   
http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=788004
Old    Dan (hco)      Join Date: Jun 2006       07-24-2013, 10:51 AM Reply   
You really don't need that much weight in a 25 to get the wake huge. If you have the 25 + stock ballast and a boat full of people you really don't need any additional weight. I wouldn't worry about the need to plumb an additional sack in.
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-24-2013, 11:51 AM Reply   
I have heard nothing but good things about the 25. Will have to do a lot of research before test driving - my knees wont be able to handle testing 6 different boats even if they let me.

So no one has mentioned the 35, which is the picklefork. How does it fit in this mix? What is that boat's main selling point?

And for wakeboarding I have to guess the new star is better than the 25 but 50k more expensive? Also probably smaller inside and sucks to surf?

And thanks again for everyone's input. I put a good chunck of hours on a boat every year and these things arent cheap so want to make sure I get the best for my needs.
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-24-2013, 11:52 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by hco View Post
You really don't need that much weight in a 25 to get the wake huge. If you have the 25 + stock ballast and a boat full of people you really don't need any additional weight. I wouldn't worry about the need to plumb an additional sack in.
And when folks (and you in particular) speak of MC stock ballast, are you all assuming plug and play is part of the stock ballast?
Old    Dan (hco)      Join Date: Jun 2006       07-24-2013, 3:50 PM Reply   
No, just the stock hard tanks on the 25 will throw a very impressive wake. I am an intermediate wakeboarder (a few inverts and 360's), and when we had 10 people in the 25 I had my cousin empty some of the ballast out, at that point it was unnecessary.




This is me going out the back at 70' @ 23 with just stock ballast.

Last edited by hco; 07-24-2013 at 3:53 PM.
Old     (Orange)      Join Date: Jun 2012       07-25-2013, 2:15 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by c640947 View Post

So no one has mentioned the 35, which is the picklefork. How does it fit in this mix? What is that boat's main selling point?

And for wakeboarding I have to guess the new star is better than the 25 but 50k more expensive? Also probably smaller inside and sucks to surf?
Good question about the 35. For some reason you don't see many 35s or her much about them... Not sure why. I have not been behind one and can't speak to its performance, but I've sat in them. To be Captain Obvious for a sec, its half way between the 25 and 45 in terms of seating room. The only differentiating feature I recall is the passenger seat to the left of the driver can convert between facing rearward (like most boats) or facing front like a copilot. Other than that it feels like a big 25 or a small 45 (stylistically it reminded me more of a 25...not sure vs 46).

I don't think the price gap between a Star and 25 is quite as large as $50k unless your throwing that out there because the 25 has been around a few years so there are used boats available while the new Star has to be new. I would think the gap is closer to $30K if you were comparing new to new - could be wrong. It sounds from what my friends paid like the 25 and 30 are very similar in cost - clearly close enough you pick the one you like best.

The new Star interior feels slightly tighter than a 25 to me in the main cockpit, but more spacious in the bow. The Star does have that cool convertible rear facing seat the 25 lacks. I think the "Star sucks for surfing" comment is semi-true for the previous Star hull, but somewhere I read the new Star is better... I bet there's a thread on he somewhere about that.

Have fun doing your boat tests! Follow up later and let us all know what you thought when you sat in them and what your impressions are for the ones you ride behind. The tough part on test rides is you never get the time to get used to the wake shape or to play with it in as many weighting conditions and speeds as if you owned the boat. It's a difficult choice.
Old    Eagle Jackson (eaglejackson)      Join Date: Oct 2004       07-26-2013, 8:56 PM Reply   
I have an X-25. This my third season with the boat. I stepped up from an X-2, though it was the 205V based X-2, which is smaller than the current X-2.

One of my initial reservations about the X-25 when I demo'd it was that it seemed huge inside, too big for my needs. I've gotten used to the size and love it. I've had up to 12 people in the boat and it wasn't cramped.

The stock wake is fantastic -- the best stock wake of any MC boat. I wakeboard 95% of the time, and surf the other 5%. The surf wake is very good, though not as good as my friend's X-55.

I have Plug and Plug in my X-25. This adds two sacks to the rear lockers and an X-2 U shaped sack in the bow. I don't ride with PnP that often because the wake is intimidatingly large for a few of my crew, and the stock wake is so good as is.

I've surfed in a friend's X-30 and liked it a lot. I found the interior size comparable to the X-25. The surf wake was excellent -- though not as good as the X-55.

I love the look of the X-25 and I really like the pickle fork.

One area of difference between the X-25 and X-30 is how they handle rough water. The X-25 is a heavy boat, based on the CSX hull (made for rough intercoastal waters) and handles rough water and the chop very well. It's super smooth and I don't hesitate taking out the boat when the water is rough. The X-30 doesn't handle the chop nearly as well. That may or may not be a consideration for you, but for me on Lake Washington, it is.

The X-25 and the X-30 are MC's best selling boats. The X-25 was till the X-30 came out, now the X-30 is #1 and the X-25 #2. You really can't go wrong with either. If your bias is towards wakeboarding or you have rough water, I'd go X-25; if your bias is surfing, I'd go X-30.
Old    Dusty Womack (V8_Killer)      Join Date: Feb 2013       07-26-2013, 10:26 PM Reply   
I've owned 2 new X-Stars and put 1,100 engine hours on combined since 2007. I just switched to the G23. My opinion on the 2013 X-Star vs. the G23 is documented in other threads both on this forum and others, so I won't waste time there.

What I will say is that if you're a wakeboarder first, followed closely by surfing and hanging out, I don't see how the G23 can lose.
*G23 makes a great wakeboard wake from ~17mph on up. You aren't going to get that on an X25 or X30 (I've riden both and seen them at slower speeds for kids / beginners...wake sucks).
*G23 only needs factory ballasts. I'm speaking for 99% of the owners, I understand there's an exception. Yes, you can get integrated Fat Sacs on a MC (had them on my 2010 X-Star, loved them). But the fact is when you fill them up you're giving up all that storage. The G23 has storage for miles and you won't have to destroy the storage by filling above-ground bags. G23 + fuel + 6 people + gear + OE ballasts = almost 11,000 pounds.
*G23 interior is huge as well. If you want to compare it directly to the X46 then I'd say compare the G25 to the X46, seems like a more fair fight. But compared to the X30 the G23 is larger. Its larger than a 2013 X-Star as well.
*G23 surf wake requires no wait time. You can literally wakeboard. Then hit a button and your wife could surf port side. Then hit a button and someone else could surf starboard. Then hit a button and someone else could wakeboard again. The boat is ready immediately and you're waiting on a rider. Thanks to NSS, its truly that quick and easy. You don't have to lean the boat to one side by stacking everyone and the kitchen sink on top of each other. I really expected to see the X46 have an NSS-type system when I watched the debut video. SHOCKED it doesn't since its MC's "wakesurf specialty boat".

I picked up my G23 Father's Day weekend and already have over 50 engine hours on it. I can tell you most of the ins and outs already, and its everything its cracked up to be. I was a MC guy myself, I feel the X-Star is superior to the 210/230 and definitely every other brand. But the G23 just NAILS it. Yes, its imperfect. But that's fine, they can fix the few small things I don't like so I can buy another one. :-)

Best thing for you to do is try them all out with as much impartiality as you can, and go from there. No amount of internet reading is going to compensate for that.

Best of luck,

Dusty
Old    Eric (Fixable)      Join Date: Oct 2012       07-28-2013, 10:35 AM Reply   
I would agree with a lot of that ^

Except the slow speed wake comments. The X30 is not finicky at all at 17mph (at least the new hull), and the X25 is good all the way down to 18. Most beginners wanted to be pulled at 18 behind the X25 that I had, and I never had a problem keeping a clean wake. Trying to do 16-17 was next to impossible though.

The main reason that I wouldn't think this should turn into a G23 thread, is cost. The G is going to be 20-30k more than an X25 or X30. And the X46 base price is 10k over the X25. So it will still be considerably less $$ than a G23. As far as bringing the G25 into the mix- that is another $15k on top.
Old    Jimmy S (JamesHawk101)      Join Date: Sep 2012       07-28-2013, 3:44 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixable View Post
I would agree with a lot of that ^

Except the slow speed wake comments. The X30 is not finicky at all at 17mph (at least the new hull), and the X25 is good all the way down to 18. Most beginners wanted to be pulled at 18 behind the X25 that I had, and I never had a problem keeping a clean wake. Trying to do 16-17 was next to impossible though.

The main reason that I wouldn't think this should turn into a G23 thread, is cost. The G is going to be 20-30k more than an X25 or X30. And the X46 base price is 10k over the X25. So it will still be considerably less $$ than a G23. As far as bringing the G25 into the mix- that is another $15k on top.
Not so sure on that. I got the price for a X-30 and G23 before buying the G23. The X-30 was 10k more.
Old    BELEZA (beleza)      Join Date: Mar 2010       07-28-2013, 4:03 PM Reply   
10k more for an X-30 than G23? What mastercraft dealer was on crack? Around here I can get a brand new X-30 for around 75-80k. G23... 100k +
Old    L W (501s)      Join Date: Feb 2010       07-28-2013, 4:05 PM Reply   
I agree with the above, the X-30 can easily make a great slow speed wake, and the price of an X-30 loaded is about $20-$30k less than a G23.
Old    Eric (Fixable)      Join Date: Oct 2012       07-28-2013, 4:24 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesHawk101 View Post
Not so sure on that. I got the price for a X-30 and G23 before buying the G23. The X-30 was 10k more.
Somebody was trying to take you for a ride.....
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-28-2013, 7:30 PM Reply   
[QUOTE=eaglejackson;1835908
I have Plug and Plug in my X-25. This adds two sacks to the rear lockers and an X-2 U shaped sack in the bow. [/QUOTE]

When I looked at the X25 I could have sworn there was a divider underneath the bow seats such that you could not put in the under seat U shaped sac? The forward storage underneath the bow seats was horrible and one thing that really turned me off on the X25 initially was how to weight the front of the boat.

But it sounds like this may not be the case or you can weight it differently without the bow porpoising?
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-28-2013, 7:35 PM Reply   
[QUOTE=Fixable;1836032And the X46 base price is 10k over the X25. [/QUOTE]

I was under the impression that the X46 was closer in price to the Xstar and G23 or higher....

My comparisons are strange since I am considering boats in a wide price band but I just want the boat that makes sense for me. If that's the G23 so be it or if its the X25 (my wallet is certainly happier) but again so be it.

I have some other things Im working with that affect it. I am on a narrow river so the large boats give me pause but I should be ok. I still want to wakeboard mostly but with a growing family (and aging body) im having to take more to surfing and pulling the kiddie ski. I have a lift that cant handle much more than the X25 so if I go with much else Ill have to change out the lift, etc...
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-28-2013, 7:38 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by V8_Killer View Post
I really expected to see the X46 have an NSS-type system when I watched the debut video. SHOCKED it doesn't since its MC's "wakesurf specialty boat".
Me too so I was skeptical. the guy that has one on Lake Norman, NC says its pretty solid surf wake though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by V8_Killer View Post
But the G23 just NAILS it.
I have said for years when they redesign the star im buying it. sat in it at the boat show then the G23 and I came away wanting the G23. of course like everyone says gotta drive and ride so anxious to do that. just trying to do the internet part so Im not trying to drive/ride 5 boats to decide.

Thanks again for everyone's terrific comments. very helpful.
Old    Eric (Fixable)      Join Date: Oct 2012       07-28-2013, 9:14 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by c640947 View Post
I was under the impression that the X46 was closer in price to the Xstar and G23 or higher.....
AFAIK, with similar options, the X46 comes in about 15-20k below the XStar. It was the same way with the X45 vs previous XStar. Even the X55 is cheaper than an XStar.

A well equipped X25 or X30 should come in around 90-100k depending on options. X46 should come in 100-110k. An XStar is going to be in the 115-130k range. A G23 is also going to land in the 115-130k range. And a G25 runs upwards of 150k if you want anything in it.
Old    Eagle Jackson (eaglejackson)      Join Date: Oct 2004       07-29-2013, 10:02 AM Reply   
There's no divider in the storage area underneath the bow seats of my 2011 X-25. The dealer installed a PnP system that includes a U-shape sack under the bow seats and I believe it's the X-2 one. I also have the trim tab, so I don't get any porpoising. When the sack is full, the seats stick up a bit; if you want the seats flat, then fill the bow sack partially.
Old    Dusty Womack (V8_Killer)      Join Date: Feb 2013       07-29-2013, 1:20 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by c640947 View Post
Me too so I was skeptical. the guy that has one on Lake Norman, NC says its pretty solid surf wake though.
Yeah I wouldn't have a clue about its surf wake excluding the official release video. It looked fine, but since we have 2 starboard riders and 4 port riders that come out every weekend (plus whoever else shows), it would mean drain/fill and everyone on 1 side. NSS is 3.5 seconds to change sides. I'm sure the X46 surf wake is solid, I just have become quickly spoiled to NSS.



Quote:
Originally Posted by c640947
I have said for years when they redesign the star im buying it. sat in it at the boat show then the G23 and I came away wanting the G23. of course like everyone says gotta drive and ride so anxious to do that. just trying to do the internet part so Im not trying to drive/ride 5 boats to decide.
I expected to like the X-Star more than the G23 as well, especially since I had had 2 X-Stars with great success and liked them significantly more than a 210/230. I came away 2nd and 3rd and 4th guessing myself but ultimately settled on the G. After multiple experiences on the 2013 X-Star I'm completely convinced I made the correct decision.

Best of luck,

Dusty
Old    Brett Treiber (pc_sledge)      Join Date: Jan 2006       07-31-2013, 7:45 AM Reply   
Anyone have any 1st hand experience with the wakebaord wake on the X46? How it compares to the X45?
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-31-2013, 9:27 AM Reply   
Dusty Ive read your posts here and other places. Great information, thanks again. I am excited to test the G23 in the next week or so.

One question on gas: how big is the tank and how much gas will you go through per rider fully weighted do you think? I have to carry gas down to the dock and have two 12.5 gallon tanks so I am wondering if I can get by 3-5 riders on 25 gallons of gas?

Brett as far if anyone has ridden the X46 wakeboarding - I havent found anyone yet but I hope to when my local dealer gets one in in the next week or so and will report back. (with pics too)
Old    Craig Emerton (craigtxmc)      Join Date: Oct 2008       07-31-2013, 9:46 AM Reply   
We took out our X-46 this past weekend and really enjoyed the boat. Outstanding handling and the wakeboard wake is waaaaay better than previous X-45. I'm thinking MC hit homerun on this boat. Huge boat and handles like X-30. We surfed the boat with about 1200lbs plus factory rear port side and it was really nice. I apologize for not having pics but i was trying to drive and shuffle back and forth with the kids. Here are some pics of our newest 46 leaving today.

Not to pass around kool aid but the X-46 is a home run. I was thinking the rear storage may be an issue but we had a 450lb sac in each side and it fit perfect. The coffin storage on the port side is the biggest compartment of any boat that i know of. Specs are saying that the boat has almost 10% more storage than previous X-45. Lounge seats in back put you super close to rider and MC's reversible seat is by far the best in the business.

If there is anyone in the Dallas area that wants to grab a ride let me know...
Attached Images
               
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       07-31-2013, 10:13 AM Reply   
Outstanding looking boat. I am definitely interested to see pictures of the wakeboard wake when the boat has plug and play installed. Also how those compartments look with full bags. Wondering how much storage room is lost when plug and play is used?

How does the wake (wakeboard speed, fully loaded) compare to the Xstar and X25 (assuming those are MCs two other premier wakeboard wakes?)
Old    Boat Driver (LYNRDSKYNRD)      Join Date: Sep 2012       07-31-2013, 10:26 AM Reply   
Boat looks awesome ...love the colors, nice rims on the trailer too

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Old    David Curtis (davez71)      Join Date: Oct 2007       07-31-2013, 11:06 AM Reply   
Man that's a beautiful looking boat. We need more pics espically of the wake
Old    L W (501s)      Join Date: Feb 2010       07-31-2013, 11:11 AM Reply   
I like that 46, but I don't think I like the observer's seat, it looks small.
Old    Craig Emerton (craigtxmc)      Join Date: Oct 2008       07-31-2013, 4:08 PM Reply   
Thanks for compliments guys.. I'll get pics of wake for you asap.
Old    Bryce Pool (bryce2320)      Join Date: May 2012       07-31-2013, 4:28 PM Reply   
holy chit that interior is sick!!!!
Old    Dusty Womack (V8_Killer)      Join Date: Feb 2013       07-31-2013, 10:12 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by c640947 View Post
Dusty Ive read your posts here and other places. Great information, thanks again. I am excited to test the G23 in the next week or so.

One question on gas: how big is the tank and how much gas will you go through per rider fully weighted do you think? I have to carry gas down to the dock and have two 12.5 gallon tanks so I am wondering if I can get by 3-5 riders on 25 gallons of gas?


Thanks Andrew, happy to help. I am trying to provide as much non-biased information as I can. No boat is perfect and I am the first to point out the flaws (as I see them) in my G23. I realize this is an X46 thread and I'm not trying to bash on it. Just given your goals it seems like the G deserves a long look. I wish I had stock in Nautique for all the people I've attempted to convert, ha.

The G23 has a 65 gallon tank. We typically run anywhere between half OE ballasts and full. Unless you have experienced riders (at least base inverts) you will have no use for hardly any ballast, much less full. The wake is huge without any ballast, and grows to insane levels.

The most fuel I've used in 1 day thus far is 53 gallons, and that was with 7-8 engine hours. So worst case, at 7 engine hours, I was going through 7.6 gallons an hour. 25 gallons would have given me 3.5 hours. So if you had 3 riders that's 70 minutes per rider, and if you have 5 that's 42 minutes per rider. Sounds like you could have a pretty fun day on 25 gallons. Most people don't run all day like we do (I put 200 engine hours per season on my boat).

I've done a lot of reading on fuel efficiency of different boats and they all come out to be give/take the same gallons per hour. Of course a heavier boat like the G23 is going to use more than a significantly lighter boat. I don't think everyone realizes a G23 with full OE ballast, 6-8 people, fuel, gear, stereo, and misc. stuff weighs ~11,000 pounds. That's a LOT of weight to push through the water.

Cheers,

Dusty
Old    Craig Emerton (craigtxmc)      Join Date: Oct 2008       08-01-2013, 1:12 PM Reply   
Here was our morning adventure on the X-46... We ran factory ballast, weighted, and weighted surf.. I am by no means a photographer and I've been told that if we would have used wide angle lens it would have made the surf waves seem much larger. However, I wanted to show what everything looked like from different vantage points in the boat. Here goes...

Factory filled at 100% with a 150lb driver and me and my 250lbs. Speed at 23.4mph
Attached Images
      
Old    Craig Emerton (craigtxmc)      Join Date: Oct 2008       08-01-2013, 1:17 PM Reply   
OK, we put a 400lb in the bow, put 300lbs under rear chase loungers, and put 750lb and 400lb on rear reversible seat. And factory at 100%. We ran at 23.4 on this arrangement too..
Attached Images
          
Old    Craig Emerton (craigtxmc)      Join Date: Oct 2008       08-01-2013, 1:28 PM Reply   
OK, now on to surf wave.. We ran at 11mph with starboard surf tab deployed and middle tab at 20%. We had factory port and starboard full and still had 300 additional each side under loungers. We also had the big 750lb bag laying on the seat so that we could show what we were using.
We really should have taken someone to surf so that the pics would show comparison of wave against a normal size person but unfortunately we dropped the ball on that. The wave seemed really long and from last weekend's experience, it is very easy to ride.
Perhaps next time it would be interesting to see same wave shot on wide angle lens..
Attached Images
               
Old    L W (501s)      Join Date: Feb 2010       08-01-2013, 1:38 PM Reply   
Those wakes and waves look very clean. Thanks for posting all the pics
Old    Tommy (Tommy1005)      Join Date: May 2013       08-01-2013, 8:26 PM Reply   
That boat is so clean. Wish it was lime green instead of red though
Old    Brett Yates (polarbill)      Join Date: Jun 2003       08-01-2013, 8:37 PM Reply   
Still don't like the weird seats but that boat is freaking sexy. Beautiful lines. As always, great job with the colors Craig. You should start a business where dealers pay you to pick the colors on their stock boats. Seriously, it has to make a huge difference having boats in stock that actually look good. I think my problem with the interior is it just looks a million times too busy. Too many non parallel lines, different shapes, surfaces, etc... That said I am a more is less simple kind of man.

Last edited by polarbill; 08-01-2013 at 8:46 PM.
Old    David Curtis (davez71)      Join Date: Oct 2007       08-02-2013, 6:16 AM Reply   
That is a beautiful boat. If your looking for a nice looking x45 to trade for this let me know. The inside looks like it has alot of space. The x45 is one of the best boats MC has put on the water. Curious to see how the new x46 does. Great boat.
Old    Cory Libka (Fx4210)      Join Date: Feb 2013       08-02-2013, 7:06 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigtxmc View Post
OK, we put a 400lb in the bow, put 300lbs under rear chase loungers, and put 750lb and 400lb on rear reversible seat. And factory at 100%. We ran at 23.4 on this arrangement too..
Wake looks sweet, Is there a way to get that kind of weight under seats/stowed away? It would be a bummer to have to trip all over that to get a serious wake ...
Old    Craig Emerton (craigtxmc)      Join Date: Oct 2008       08-02-2013, 8:29 AM Reply   
Thanks Brett. I appreciate that.


Cory, we purposely left the bags out just so you could see what we did in pics... There is actually a Fly High system custom for X-46 that puts 800 lbs (4 bags) under the seats in the bow and under the loungers. There is a coffin-like storage area on the port side of the boat that is ridiculously huge and would be able to hold whatever you wanted to put in there but i just put the 750 bag and the 400 on top just for sake of pics. I'd say the average intermediate rider would do great with factory and maybe the Fly High kit and maybe plumb in the Super Sac'r pumps so that you could do more than one sac at a time to make it more bearable.

David, the X-45 was our best seller for years. We were doing more than 30 of that model each year for the last half decade or so... We've done about 10 of the 46's so far. They drive so much better and probably have the best wakes from MC to date IMO...
Old    David Curtis (davez71)      Join Date: Oct 2007       08-02-2013, 3:45 PM Reply   
Craig you need to get on the teamtalk website and post some of these pics and review. I haven't seen you on there, you represent MC so good on this site that bashes MC so much. It's all MC love on team talk. I love me some wakeworld but have been disliking a the hate that's been going on.
Old    Mason Obray (MCObray)      Join Date: Mar 2013       08-02-2013, 3:49 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by davez71 View Post
Craig you need to get on the teamtalk website and post some of these pics and review. I haven't seen you on there, you represent MC so good on this site that bashes MC so much. It's all MC love on team talk. I love me some wakeworld but have been disliking a the hate that's been going on.
All you see is MC Love on TeamTalk because it is operated and controlled by MC... dare you say anything bad because a simple click of the button will whisk it away in the interwebz black hole.

Nice looking X46 though.
Old     (JetRanger)      Join Date: Feb 2013       08-02-2013, 6:22 PM Reply   
What's with all the MC love here these days? I have no material to work with here.
Old    Craig Emerton (craigtxmc)      Join Date: Oct 2008       08-02-2013, 9:05 PM Reply   
Thanks David. Gotta have thick skin on WW for sure. I've been dogged plenty of times for not using transom straps.. For only responding to compliments and for posting too many pics. Ha
Old    Rick Hoag (rickB52)      Join Date: Mar 2012       08-02-2013, 9:19 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigtxmc View Post
Thanks David. Gotta have thick skin on WW for sure. I've been dogged plenty of times for not using transom straps.. For only responding to compliments and for posting too many pics. Ha
how many 46s you guys have come in so far? i see your test boat is different from one posted above. does the test boat have a gray hull?

both look great
Old    Craig Emerton (craigtxmc)      Join Date: Oct 2008       08-02-2013, 9:47 PM Reply   
We are getting our third 8/15 ish

Our test boat has black hull.. One used at lake. The other was a pre-sold order u it that already delivered.

I don't necessarily love all of the MC models but this 46 is my favorite. Would I like it to have 5000 factory lbs? Yes. Would I prefer the big kahuna surf wave in 10 seconds? Yes. But does it have more wake with factory than 90% of wakeboarders will ever need? Yes.
Will it surf with 1 bag in the rear storage and be bad a? Yes.. Not ideal, but not horrible IMO.
This is for 90% of wealthy families who want room, comfort, world class wake and wave, and great looks, the best fit and finish (IMO) and you won't have to burn super unleaded fuel if you go big engine. Is it perfect? No. It isn't.

^^^^^ salesman.

Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       08-06-2013, 5:21 AM Reply   
Looks a lot like the old xstar wake. but man tough sale for MC when compared to the G23 that has so much stock ballast. (for folks that want a larger wake of course - i know most cant use much more than stock wake.)

So the Fly High system only adds 800 lbs? That brings the total "stock" (+plug and play) to 2000 lbs? Not much for a boat that big i would think. i know the dry weight is pretty heavy though. Anxious to try one out for myself.

And yes, SEXY as hell on the water! I actually really like the seat config too.
Old    J D (jeff_mn)      Join Date: Jul 2009       08-06-2013, 7:46 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigtxmc View Post
We are getting our third 8/15 ish

Our test boat has black hull.. One used at lake. The other was a pre-sold order u it that already delivered.

I don't necessarily love all of the MC models but this 46 is my favorite. Would I like it to have 5000 factory lbs? Yes. Would I prefer the big kahuna surf wave in 10 seconds? Yes. But does it have more wake with factory than 90% of wakeboarders will ever need? Yes.
Will it surf with 1 bag in the rear storage and be bad a? Yes.. Not ideal, but not horrible IMO.
This is for 90% of wealthy families who want room, comfort, world class wake and wave, and great looks, the best fit and finish (IMO) and you won't have to burn super unleaded fuel if you go big engine. Is it perfect? No. It isn't.

^^^^^ salesman.

I always appreciate your honest, opinion and tact.. If I was in TX - I wouldn't consider buying from anyone else.

Great review Craig.
Old    Craig Emerton (craigtxmc)      Join Date: Oct 2008       08-06-2013, 10:41 AM Reply   
Thank you JD.

Hi Andrew, i appreciate the feedback. I'll say that it is a tough sale against the G. That's one heck of a boat. No question about the wake. It's pro level, tons of poundage, great shape, great surf features. I'll give it to Nautique. They made a hell of a boat.

I'm going to give the credit where credit it due, but it's not like we're comparing Mike Tyson to a golden gloves boxer. I understand the excitement and the support for the G, but it's not like that is the only boat on the planet that produces a great wake. I'm not going to cast stones or try to down the boat because that will only make me look bad and does nothing for the forum. I'll say this..... The X-46 has a damn good wake too. It may not be 2500lbs factory, but again, who really needs that much wake? The factory is way more than most will ever need. No matter how much we like adding 1000's of lbs of ballast, the truth is the typical buyer for a $100+ wakeboard boat doesn't need or want that much weight. Their kids may tell them how cool it is or they may enjoy hearing at the boat show how much weight the boat has, but at the end of the day there is more than factory ballast weight to consider. The G is much like the MC X-35 when it comes to handling. It's football shaped which makes it tough to get the sports car feel. It's physically impossible for the deep V huge boats to turn like the flatter bottom boats (ie Malibu). What you give up in handling, you typically gain in comfort/ride. The X-46 is about the same weight but has a flatter bottom which is going to make it handle much better than the G. Until you drive both, you just can't feel it. WIthout a doubt, the X-46 will turn circles around the G. Without a doubt, you will get a bigger wake from a G with factory ballast. I'll be the first to say that. But again, the X-46 has an excellent wake as well. Much better than the previous X-45. It also has a better layout IMO. The Nautiques still seem to have their boxy, square feel on the interior. I think the MasterCrafts are more comfortable and win that battle. The driver seat on the X-46 is the most comfortable available on any boat for the big guys. It's like a Lazy Boy. I also like MasterCraft's rear facing seat setup. I think it's the best of its kind. I also think the MasterCraft bow area is much more comfortable and just has better overall lines. That's just me... I also do not like the Ed Hardy graphics on the G.
Those are little things that I think come in to play when someone is making the decision to spend $100+ for a boat. In my opinion, I think the layout and the comfort play just as big as the wake when you are talking about excellent vs excellent and then some.
Again, you have to drive both, sit in both, lounge in both, ride behind both, and pay for both so to each his own. They are both incredible boats so you can't go wrong either way.
Bottom line.... I think it's unfair to say that the X-46 is a tough sell against the G. I'm pretty sure I can say the same thing about any boat vs any other boat. They are all tough sells. They are $100k+ !!!!
Old     (JetRanger)      Join Date: Feb 2013       08-06-2013, 3:29 PM Reply   
My personal biggest challenge with the G is that it is hideous to look at and probably the most uncomfortable boat there is (besides of course Tiges). Would it have hurt CC to put some contours in their seats instead of making their entire design a bunch of polygons?
Old    Dusty Womack (V8_Killer)      Join Date: Feb 2013       08-06-2013, 4:08 PM Reply   
Like Craig said, the best thing you can do is to give it your own comparison. Drive, ride, sit, explore both the G23 and the X46 and see what grabs you. When I was going back and forth mentally between the G23 and the 2013 X-Star I literally made a Pro/Con list for both boats. I listed out what was important to me and weighed everything as carefully as I could. Only you know what matters to you and how much it matters, then determine how you rank each one. In my exploration I found things I liked and didn't like with each one that weren't even on my list, so I added them, and then considered how much that swayed me one way or the other.
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       08-07-2013, 11:41 AM Reply   
Craig and others - thanks so much for the opinions. From everything I had heard, read and seen so far I'd say your all comments are right on target. I think at this point I need to get in an x46 and put sacs where i think i could plumb/plug them in and then ride both boats and and see for myself.

Hopefully the local dealer gets their X46 in soon. Ill report back as much as I can when I go.

Andrew
Old    Craig Emerton (craigtxmc)      Join Date: Oct 2008       08-07-2013, 4:19 PM Reply   
Andrew, just a bit of FYI... we got word yesterday that MC was going to offer a plumbed in surf package starting in a few weeks. Waiting on specs but should make it easier to tune wave.. I'll try to get information for you guys when i see it.
Old    Rick Hoag (rickB52)      Join Date: Mar 2012       08-07-2013, 8:01 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by c640947 View Post
Craig and others - thanks so much for the opinions. From everything I had heard, read and seen so far I'd say your all comments are right on target. I think at this point I need to get in an x46 and put sacs where i think i could plumb/plug them in and then ride both boats and and see for myself.

Hopefully the local dealer gets their X46 in soon. Ill report back as much as I can when I go.

Andrew
just a short ride north from Houston to see Craig

They have an X46 ready for you to test....
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       08-08-2013, 8:02 AM Reply   
Well sure seems like MC needs to do something. Huge plus of G23 is the large stock ballast and ease of switching between activities. MC's 1200 ish lbs of weight just doesnt cut it for riders who desire a larger wake. I'd plumb them in myself but many people just want it ready to go off the showroom floor. I do too honestly.

Yep short drive but servicing it if i bought from there would prob be tricky.....
Old    Craig Emerton (craigtxmc)      Join Date: Oct 2008       08-08-2013, 12:13 PM Reply   
We're about to open an MB store in Austin. We'll have service capabilities for all the brands as well. Should be there before XMas.
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       08-19-2013, 9:32 AM Reply   
Rode behind the X46. Drives amazing for a long boat. Virtually no bow rise when taking off, which I hear is quite different from the XStar. I may demo the star soon. Here are pics of the wake with roughly 250 lbs in the rear seats (to mimic the 250 lbs you could fit under the rear seats) and a 400 lb sac in the floor guessing that's AT LEAST what I could plumb in under the seats on the sides. So this was a "what can be integrated" test. There were two people in the boat so that added 500 more lbs (they were big guys.) 24.2 mph, 20 feet of water. 75 feet line length.

Excellent shape to it. From what I remember of the CSX (now the X25 hull) very similar shape. Nice long ramp with gentle but noticeable pop at the top.
Attached Images
      
Old    Chase Tillett (tn_rider)      Join Date: Dec 2009       08-19-2013, 10:39 AM Reply   
That wake seems very mellow. IMO not impressed. It is very clean though!
Old     (Orange)      Join Date: Jun 2012       08-19-2013, 10:52 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by tn_rider View Post
That wake seems very mellow. IMO not impressed. It is very clean though!
Agree. Long smooth ramp and decent height, but looks almost too ramps without "bite" at the end. Look how far back the wake is smooth behind the rider at a claimed 75 ft... How sure is the previous poster about the speed? This almost looks like the boat is going faster than the claimed 24mph or like the boat wants much more weight in order to justify that speed. I'd love to see the same set up but a little slower to get the wake to stand up a bit more.
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       08-19-2013, 11:09 AM Reply   
100% certain of the speed. They started me at 23.5 but I sped them up a little and felt this was a better setup. Also certain of rope length: 75 feet. I do left like I could have backed up to 80 without a problem.

I do think it would have been much nicer with more weight but as I stated before I was trying to hold my test to what I thought I could plumb in only. I definitely wanted to throw a pair of 750s in the floor and get after it. it wanted (and felt like it could take) more weight.
Old     (Orange)      Join Date: Jun 2012       08-19-2013, 1:40 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by c640947 View Post
100% certain of the speed. They started me at 23.5 but I sped them up a little and felt this was a better setup. Also certain of rope length: 75 feet. I do left like I could have backed up to 80 without a problem.

I do think it would have been much nicer with more weight but as I stated before I was trying to hold my test to what I thought I could plumb in only. I definitely wanted to throw a pair of 750s in the floor and get after it. it wanted (and felt like it could take) more weight.
Out of curiosity, what did you like better at 24.2 vs where they started you at 23.5? It looks like you "overran" the wake and by speeding up you put yourself in a more mellow spot on the wake. Or was it that 24.2 is the speed you like for how the board feels on the water but they didn't have an 80 ft rope? From the photos is looks like it would have been better at a lower speed, more weight, or a longer rope.
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       08-19-2013, 1:58 PM Reply   
Yes I agree based on the pictures that the slower speed was probably better or move the rope out. I had very limited time to test and was trying a couple of different things to get the best result.

Definitely more weight would have been key but again i was limiting to "under seat extra integrated only." I do really want to sack it out and go to town - great shape and felt like it could handle a TON of extra weight.
Old    Chris Gawenda (ToPHeR35)      Join Date: Jul 2011       08-19-2013, 2:05 PM Reply   
Is MC going back to wood swim platforms?
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       08-19-2013, 2:12 PM Reply   
its always been an option. I have teak on mine and would like it on my next one.
Old     (Orange)      Join Date: Jun 2012       08-19-2013, 2:44 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by c640947 View Post
Yes I agree based on the pictures that the slower speed was probably better or move the rope out. I had very limited time to test and was trying a couple of different things to get the best result.

Definitely more weight would have been key but again i was limiting to "under seat extra integrated only." I do really want to sack it out and go to town - great shape and felt like it could handle a TON of extra weight.
I hate testing wakes for that exact reason. I don't feel like I really understand a wake until I've A) had time to play with different weights, rope lengths, and speeds to see what works best, and B) have enough time behind the boat that I learn that wake instead of always comparing it to whatever wake I am most familiar with.

I have a theory that we put way to much importance on wake and board shapes and forget the real purpose is having fun. Any time your talking about high end wakeboard boats and boards using current technology, you can't go wrong. They all work and you will have a blast behind whatever you grow accustomed to. In the end what you want is hitting your budget, easy to use, and is reliable. Nail all those and you'll enjoy whatever you have.

What else did you end up testing?
Old    Andrew Davis (c640947)      Join Date: Jan 2005       08-19-2013, 3:06 PM Reply   
I agree testing sucks. But I assume if I compare apples to apples (other tested boats) i can at least know the worst it would be. You always optimize things. I wanted to get a sense of shape and size gauging then how much extra weight I would have to add and seeing how much space under seats there is to add it, etc. Knowing that the 46 wake was unoptimized with not much weight I was very impressed. I do believe I would want more people or sacs in the floor though. For 99% of the riders out there it was likely great. Not that I am good but I do like a big wake that a lot of less experienced riders arent comfortable with.

I also looked at the G23. My testing is likely not done though. I may still look at the Xstar. And honestly I loved the 46 overall. Driving that thing was fantastic. And it looks amazing on the water. Less blingy than the xtsar but with the same awesome styling.
Old    Dusty Womack (V8_Killer)      Join Date: Feb 2013       08-19-2013, 4:06 PM Reply   
24.2 is pretty fast for ZeroOff GPS speed from my experience. For PP, no, because its not a true 24.2.
We run my G at 22.4 (OE ballasts) and I ride 70'. A couple others ride 23.0 and 80'. I hate going any faster than I "have" to, a couple MPH faster hurts exponentially more when things go wrong.

My friend's 2013 X-Star had to go very fast as well to get that perfect wake. Slapped the crap out of myself on some spins trying to deal with the unexpected line tension. Seems the new MC's have to haul ass to get a perfect wake from what I've seen on the Star, this X46, and another friend's X30.

I'm not impressed with that wake for OE ballasts + the sacs + people you had in it. I think its a good all-around wake, but I also know there's better.

Forgive me if I come across as hating, its not my intention. Like I've said all along you need to get what's best for your needs and wants. My comments aren't aimed at you, just the X46 in general from what I've seen thus far.

On a brighter note, was that a nose 360 or 2 separate tricks?
Old    John K (jk13)      Join Date: Aug 2012       08-19-2013, 8:42 PM Reply   
Glad you finally got behind one and thanks for the review.

Sure looks like you are getting some decent pop in the second and third pic. Nice riding.
Old    L W (501s)      Join Date: Feb 2010       08-19-2013, 10:29 PM Reply   
I can't speak for the X-46 but on my X-30 I prefer the wake much more at like 21.8-22.8 than at higher speeds. The wake stays very clean at these speeds even with a ton of weight. The pics I posted near the top were at 22.2. My experience with my 2 X-30s it totally different that was dusty mentioned above. I do agree with him though about preferring to ride only as fast as needed.

I would also like to see that wake on the X-46 at about 22.5 with all that weight.

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 9:33 PM.

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