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 Archive > Archive through March 15, 2006

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    lan1201            03-02-2006, 2:03 PM Reply   
I was looking at Tiges and i saw that they dont use ballast tanks, instead they use that TAPS thing. Any comments on the brand and how the wakes are without ballasts.
Old    Kevin (premierwake136)      Join Date: Jun 2005       03-02-2006, 2:12 PM Reply   
i love it
i have had it for a year and i have never had any thoughts on adding ballast
i take alot of my friends behind it who normal ride malibus of master craft and they all think it has tons of ballast
the extra space is great. i dont even use a board rack
also with taps u can change the shape for different tricks or just different prefferences
but if u were to get one it would have to be 22 ft or over. the 20v and the i models dont cut it
good luck on getting one
Old    schooledrider (rmcronin)      Join Date: Aug 2002       03-02-2006, 2:20 PM Reply   
My friend and regular riding partner bought a new one last year. I hate to say, but I'm not impressed. The wake is fine, but fit and finish seems below Moomba. If he got a great deal I'd have a different attitude, but it cost more than a comparable Supra.
Old    Show (bigshow)      Join Date: Feb 2005       03-02-2006, 3:23 PM Reply   
On the web site ballast looks to be an option.
Old    Kevin R Baugh (krbaugh)      Join Date: Mar 2002       03-02-2006, 4:26 PM Reply   
"they dont use ballast tanks, instead they use that TAPS thing"

If you buy one you WILL need ballast Taps can shape the wake that it!
Old    Eddy Celis (bughunter)      Join Date: Nov 2001       03-02-2006, 4:58 PM Reply   
I had one for more than six years and was very happy with it. When we looked to replace ours we tested the 20V and it was great, but because I tend to never buy a new model the first year and they did not have the 22V at the time, so we went with another brand. You will need ballast though, if you have intermediate to advanced riders.
If you are in the Austin area, the dealer is great (Ski Dock).
Old    joe lendahl (joe1975)      Join Date: Jan 2006       03-02-2006, 7:21 PM Reply   
Hi Lane,

Glad to see that you are interested in Tige. I guess i am biased, (cause i work for them) but they are a great boat. The guy that posted that moomba point, well, i have to disagree! Tige offers a great alternative to ballast, with their hull and taps system. I know that people on this website will argue that TAPS does this or doesnt do that, so let me beat them to the point and share what i think it does.

TAPS offers a nice alternative to ballast by changing the way the boat rides in the water. A boat that sinks down low in the water produces a larger wake, and a boat that rides on top on the water produces a smaller wake. All this is controlled by the flick of a button on the throttle (similar to trim on a I/O). By eliminating 1000's of pounds of ballast we are able to have better fuel economy, more storage space, and better performance. This shouldnt be argued, if you have any boat, Nautique, Mastercraft, Malibu, and you eliminate 1500lbs (or so) you will notice better performance.

Another nice point about the TAPS system is what was mentioned above, how the rider can adapt with the boat. A younger, or inexperienced rider doesnt want or need a steep wake to cross. This can be remedied by putting the boat in the Slalom mode. As that rider gets better change to the wakeboard mode and watch the rider cross steeper, wider wakes. Which brings up another point, Tiges, even V-drives, put out some of the nicest waterski wakes around.

I might catch some heat on this post, but dont take my word for it or anyone else's, please ask your dealer for a test drive. Or you may want to try the Tige forum at www.tigeowners.com it is a great resource~ it lets you talk to people that own Tiges.

Hope this helps.
Old    Delta Force (wakebordr11)      Join Date: May 2001       03-02-2006, 8:28 PM Reply   
taps alone is not = to 1500 lbs of ballast in any comparable boat. I own tige and love the boat but if you are an intermediate level rider looking to advance, you know you need weight, and yes in a tige you need weight...
Old    Kevin R Baugh (krbaugh)      Join Date: Mar 2002       03-02-2006, 8:32 PM Reply   
Joe

Nice to see a manufactures rep to post on the web site!
So just so I understand a couple of your points.
Tige’s taps system is equivalent to 1000 – 1500 lbs of ballast?
It is good to not have that extra weight in a any boat because it improves fuel economy and performance.
Tige V drives with tapes have “some of the nicest waterski wakes around”
Old    dtw. (notsobueno)      Join Date: Dec 2004       03-02-2006, 9:50 PM Reply   
Lane,

We've had our Tige 22v for a couple years now and couldn't be happier. You may need additional ballast depending on your needs. We are not pro type riders by any means and it works fine for our family. However, I have a friend that likes to surf...which I'd like to have ballast for. Awesome boats and very happy with our dealer as well. Take it for a test drive and see for yourself.
Old    joe lendahl (joe1975)      Join Date: Jan 2006       03-02-2006, 11:09 PM Reply   
If you have "CC MC or Bu and eliminate 1500 lbs you will notice better performance"

Doesn't Tige weigh about 1500 lbs more than a MC, CC, or Bu.

Ok maybe less than 1500 lbs. of difference, but I recently saw a post stating that the extra weight of a Tige hull was an advantage?

I'm confused, as usual...}
Old    Machew (mbrown)      Join Date: May 2005       03-03-2006, 12:06 AM Reply   
You asked...


Nice to see a manufactures rep to post on the web site!
So just so I understand a couple of your points.
Tige’s taps system is equivalent to 1000 – 1500 lbs of ballast?
It is good to not have that extra weight in a any boat because it improves fuel economy and performance.
Tige V drives with tapes have “some of the nicest waterski wakes around”

To answer your question (and i dont know if you are being sarcastic or genuine but i will give you the benefit of the doubt )
#1 I am not certain if Tige has put a weight equivilency on its TAPS?Convex V system... i can find out

#2 Um, regarding the extra weight, yes i will stand behind that statement (feel like i am setting myself up here but if you are gonna say that our boats are heavier to begin with here is a quick reminder that since we went composite our boats are not significantly heavier than other manufacturers, sometimes less sometimes more but dont forget that even if we are heavier our hookless hull equalizes that extra weight we carry around!)

#3 Yes our vdrives have nice waterski wakes. In fact our 20v hull is C-class rated for tournaments. But the 22ve is nice too!

I am glad to post here, this is a great site. Hopefully i can contribute some decent stuff.

PS- Tige isnt opposed to ballast- it is an option available on all models if the consumer feels he needs it we offer it- but i also dont think it is the final answer

PSS- I started a new thread cause i didnt want to hijack the nice post Lane had going and sometimes that can happen when people start talking...

PSSS- Nice boat Kevin, i have sold many a cyclone in my day.

Old    Flight007 (poser007)      Join Date: Nov 2004       03-03-2006, 12:16 AM Reply   
What do you think about the 24v? The only thing I have noticed about Tige I do not like is they seem to have always come out with ugly towers, kinda like Nautiques. Im not bashing the boats...just saying I have always thought most Tige and Nautiqe towers were frigging ugly.
Old    FoxrepDC (foxrepdc)      Join Date: Oct 2005       03-03-2006, 7:41 AM Reply   
I have a 2000 21V and it rocks! It was "Wakeboard Boat of the Year" for a few years, and still throws one of the funnest wakes out there IMO.

DC
Old    Brad (spoonman)      Join Date: Aug 2005       03-03-2006, 7:52 AM Reply   
DC, How are you weighting that hull? I have a 21i and have almost pulled my hair out trying to weight it.
Old    FoxrepDC (foxrepdc)      Join Date: Oct 2005       03-03-2006, 8:50 AM Reply   
50 lb sacks of horse feed when I do weight it. It's a hassle so, I don't do it much. I was talking about that on the "Redneck Ballast" thread last month. Honestly...it's just as much fun to me without the extra.
Old    Kevin (ctrider)      Join Date: Apr 2003       03-03-2006, 9:03 AM Reply   
I had a 98 Tige Pre2200V for 5 years and loved the wake it did not have the spray pockets on the side every one talks about on the older Tiges. TAPS was great for shaping the wake but that is it you still needed extra weight. I always put between 800 and 1000 lbs in the boat when I had it. I would have purchased another Tige but there is only one dealer here in CT and they are not close by and they have not been around long enough.
Old     (will5150)      Join Date: Oct 2002       03-03-2006, 9:42 AM Reply   
Hey Joe 1975, I know you work for Tige and all- and I own a 2001 21V which I LOVE- but come on, The TAPS system does NOT = extra weight in the boat. Tiges- at least when I bought mine- outweighed Malibu, Mastercraft, Supra and almost everyone else size for size by almost 1000 LBS. That alone, makes the wake better- but fuel economy is the same or worse with the Tige. That's OK though- because you get a great wake without ballast, a MONSTER wake with it, and tons of room and storage in a really tight boat. The killer for me though- and If i'd known this before I bought the boat I wouldn't own one- is the trailering weight of the boat. Unlike Malibu and others, you can't shed the weight when you're pulling the boat and when I lived in Washington, going over the pass to the columbia was a killer on the gas mileage. I'm not knocking Tige and if I were going to buy a new boat today, it would be one of my top contenders.
Old    joe lendahl (joe1975)      Join Date: Jan 2006       03-03-2006, 10:39 AM Reply   
Heys guys,

You are all right, our boats were much heavier in the past, but with our all composite hulls we are in the same weight ranges as the other manufacturers.
Old    Kevin R Baugh (krbaugh)      Join Date: Mar 2002       03-03-2006, 10:54 AM Reply   
Joe

I am very curious about my questions that is why I asked them.
First let me say Tige makes a great product with many improvements over the last few years. The dealership in my are does a great job.
I do have a huge problem with giving taps any weight equivalency. My opinion and the opinion of most people both tige owners and owners of other brands, that taps is a great tool to tweak and adjust the wake. It is no substitute for ballast.
I thought that you where saying that it was equivalent to 1000- 1500 lbs of ballast.

“ TAPS offers a nice alternative to ballast by changing the way the boat rides in the water. A boat that sinks down low in the water produces a larger wake, and a boat that rides on top on the water produces a smaller wake. All this is controlled by the flick of a button on the throttle (similar to trim on a I/O). By eliminating 1000's of pounds of ballast we are able to have better fuel economy, more storage space, and better performance. This shouldnt be argued, if you have any boat, Nautique, Mastercraft, Malibu, and you eliminate 1500lbs (or so) you will notice better performance.”

The other thing that struck me was the argument about weight. Current Tige’s all weight 800 -1000 lbs more than a comparable boat in most other brands.

I don’t see any v drive tige’s on the awsa approved list?
http://www.usawaterski.org/graphics/downloads/2006AWSAApprovedTowboats.pdf

Don’t mean to discourage you from posting! All Manufactures should answer questions! Thanks again.
Old    Machew (mbrown)      Join Date: May 2005       03-03-2006, 2:16 PM Reply   
I demoed a tige' and have to say it is a very nice fit and finish boat, but as far as wake quality, boat performance, weight, fuel economy I kinda feel the facts are getting a little warped in this area.
Old    Kevin R Baugh (krbaugh)      Join Date: Mar 2002       03-03-2006, 3:12 PM Reply   
Warped? So how are the warped?
Old    Machew (mbrown)      Join Date: May 2005       03-03-2006, 3:36 PM Reply   
First they're heavier, now they're the same weight as other boats, their taps is fuel efficient, now they're the same as other boats, since they are lighter without ballast they handle better than MC BU CC, no ballast means more storage, how so! I mean BU has tanks below the floor. Wake gets bigger with taps, no just better?

Can you see all the hype about Tige kinda turning out to be a lesson in duplicity. I just can't keep up, or even interested at this rate.
Old     (will5150)      Join Date: Oct 2002       03-03-2006, 3:54 PM Reply   
Machew- In 2001 when I bought my Tige, the 21V outwieghed Malubus, CC, Mastercraft, Supra- Almost everybody by almost 1000 lbs. TODAY- the OTHERS have gotten heavier- Tige has stayed the same, even with the material changes. ALSO- Ballast tanks used to be IN the storage lockers on either side of the engine and still are for most boats. Nautigues have virtually no storage in the lockers along side the engine when you get one with ballast. If you use the boat like MOST people do- which means you board, ski, hangout, play with the kids on it, etc storage is everything. We bring a 10 foot Bongo trampoline out on the water with us sometimes and I can get this in the locker ( deflated) when we're not using it. The only reason I even mentioned fuel consumption is because you have to consider the gas you burn GETTING to the water too. Once the boat's in the pond, I really don't care what the gas consumption is as long as I have lots of it in the boat. TAPS- wakes don't get bigger with taps- but they do change shapes and that makes them better. I also Slalom ski behind my boat and have run 22 off through a course at 36 mph and got 4 bouys behind my 21V boat- which is hitting the guide bouys going through the course! Sorry - enough said- they're great boats, they've changed a ton in the last 5 years, and I'd buy a new one tomorrow if mine wasn't so great!
Old    joe lendahl (joe1975)      Join Date: Jan 2006       03-03-2006, 4:03 PM Reply   
Kevin,
this link http://www.usawaterski.com/graphics/downloads/ApprovedHistory83-06.pdf shows the 2004-2005 20v under the 'awsa recreational towing' which i believe is class C. We use the same hull on the 2006 but didnt want to pay for the certification.....sounds like a stretch huh?!

I also have to disagree with the statement that Tige's weigh roughly 800-1000lb more than comparable boats. When i get some more time i will put together a good weight comparison charts, choosing apples to apples boats.

I just want everyone to know that i enjoy this site tremendously, and like everyone else i love boats and the water sports associated with them. Whether you are in a Bu, Centurion, Tige, it doesnt matter to me, obviously i will try to promote Tige whenever i can and i will answer questions accordingly.

Kevin- dont worry about discouraging me from posting! This is nothing! But here is a question for you, do you believe the wedge has a weight equivalency to ballast? If so can you elaborate?

have a good friday everyone...See you at the Sacramento Boat Show next weekend at Cal Expo


Old    Kirk Johnson (akdoc)      Join Date: Feb 2004       03-03-2006, 4:13 PM Reply   
I have a 2004 Tige Switch V, I also ride behind a 2005 22v a lot, bottom line is that if you want a big wake, you have to add ballast.

We run 2000lbs. in our switch v and the wake is mediocre at best.

The guys that own the 22v run 2600lbs in it, now that wake is huge.

I will say that Tige makes a solid boat. We used the switch V on a very busy lake and it held its own. The new Ve models are really nice. My family is actually upgrading to a 2006 24ve, and we are putting in 1800lbs ballast via rival industries setup. Good luck with your decision.
Old    KG (iagainsti)      Join Date: Apr 2004       03-03-2006, 4:17 PM Reply   
All I know about the wedge is when we test drove a 06' VLX the wake was truly bigger and thicker deployed. This was with only 2 peeps in the boat and no ballast filled. It also changed the shape making it more rampy, but most certainly bigger. Now Im not sure if Bu's claim that its equal to 1-1.2k lbs of ballast is altogher accurate.
Old     (will5150)      Join Date: Oct 2002       03-03-2006, 4:20 PM Reply   
joe- i looked in the brochures from 2002 that I had for the following manufactures and here's what the weight was reported for each- all are v-drives between 21-22 feet.
Nautuque- 3190, MB- 3150, Supra 3050, Tige 4030, moomba- 2950, mastercraft- 3300( maristar)
Old    Michael Littman (scmarketing)      Join Date: Dec 2005       03-03-2006, 4:29 PM Reply   
FWIW:

A 2006 Supra 21 V weighs 3,400 pounds.
A 2006 Mobius LSV weighs 3,300 pounds.
A 2006 Supra 22SSV weighs 3,050 pounds.

Old    Machew (mbrown)      Join Date: May 2005       03-03-2006, 5:30 PM Reply   
Ok for the second time, Tige' makes a nice boat. I've been in a 05 22v, great boat and it's qualities speak for themselves when you drive it and board behind it. But that is not what is being stated here. Please just come with the facts and not the folklore. Tige' is the heaviest sport boat in every length class, they need ballast for intermediate to advanced riders in order to compete with conventional wakes from other boats, they are as fuel efficient (or inefficient) as other boats, they have as much storage as a Bu, the wake changes shape not size with taps, and they cost more in fuel to tow.

Now I feel some truth has been shed on the subject.

Note to reps: State the advantages of your products as facts that can be proven. For example CC comes with a PCM engine which has an alternator that puts out more amps than Indmar (100 vs. 90).
Or state disadvantages as facts, example: Tige' does not come standard with ballast.
Continue to post, if you're gonna hype then use "IMO" or "as far as I know". I'm looking forward to that weight chart.
Old    stillstandin            03-03-2006, 5:44 PM Reply   
They are OK...just way overpriced. I saw a 22v for almost 60. I see Tige the same way I see Centurion. A good boat, for a good price. But not the price of a MC, CC, or BU. You can get a Supra, or Sanger for less money, and IMO (opinion only) they are both nicer.
Old    Show (bigshow)      Join Date: Feb 2005       03-03-2006, 6:19 PM Reply   
I've already given Joe a pretty good table on another thread. I’m with Machew, if your reping a brand you better bring the facts. I guessing the smartest thing to do is just speak to your brand and avoid talking about others. Here's a repeat of my table that I built from surfing 2006 web sites.

A better comparison:
Epic 22’9” and 4,300 lbs
Tige’ 22 V 21’8” and 3,945 lbs
CC Air Nautique 226 22’ and 3,860 lbs
Malibu VLX 21’6” and 3,600 lbs
Calabra Pro V 21’ and 3,500 lbs
Mastercraft X15 21’8” and 3,425 lbs
Moomba LSV 21’ 6” and 3,300 lbs
Supra 22 SSV 21’8” and 3,050 lbs
Centurion Lightning C4 21’6” and 2,900 lbs
Old    Kevin R Baugh (krbaugh)      Join Date: Mar 2002       03-03-2006, 6:30 PM Reply   
Just a quick check of websites
Tige 22v 21' 8" 3945 lbs
MasterCraft X 15 21' 8" 3425 lbs
Supra launch 21 V 21" 2" 3400 lbs
Moomba LSV 21" 6" 3300 lbs
Correct craft 21' 2" 3320 lbs
Centurion Avalanche C4 22' 3200 lbs

Malibu did not list weight on the web site
(The Correct Craft 220 is a beast at 4070lbs :-() )

So I should have said 500-700 lbs more. But clearly they weight more


A Recreation boat is not a class C boat that is why it is not on the list http://www.usawaterski.org/graphics/downloads/2006AWSAApprovedTowboats.pdf .

Upload


I do understand the not spending the money on the test thing Centurion did not retest the T5 this year




The Wedge and Switch blade use a hydrofoil to pull the back of the boat farther down in the water. ( I am sure you are aware of this) They will meet beginner to intermediate riders requirements without additional weight.
Many people love the wedge and Switch blade and add even more weight especially to the front of the boat. Some riders just can’t get a big enough wake. My estimate in weight equivalence is 800 – 1200 lbs IMHO
Old    joe lendahl (joe1975)      Join Date: Jan 2006       03-03-2006, 10:31 PM Reply   
If i am reping a brand i better bring the facts, well i agree with that statement, and i will try my best to bring the facts. Here is what i have been doing for the last few hours!

application/octet-streamUpload
Boat weights.doc (25.1 k)


mbrown and bigshow, I am fine with using the IMO and as far as i know.... and such, but regarding boats that i know a lot about (and have first hand experience with) like Tige, Centurion, Sanger, Supreme...well i will comment on them all day long.

So whatta think about the chart?
Old    Kevin R Baugh (krbaugh)      Join Date: Mar 2002       03-03-2006, 11:41 PM Reply   
I like mine better..... go figure. it breaks the boats down in size. The only weight to figure Pounds per square foot and have it mean any thing is to include the depth of the boats.
This is an interesting exercise! This of course is only as accurate as the Manufactures web site info which is notorious for being shall we say WRONG.
Like I said in my other post 800-1000 was wrong it is more like 500-1000 lbs
Until you get to the bigger boats then MasterCrafts pickle forks are HEAVY! Of course they are bigger boats, not longer but more cubic inches
application/octet-streamUpload
boats.xls (17.4 k)
Old    Show (bigshow)      Join Date: Feb 2005       03-04-2006, 8:24 AM Reply   
There's some merit to the lbs/per sqft figure, you need less weight if you have a more narrow beam. I would have sorted the list by weight, Joe's list is kind of all over the place.

Kevin my lightning is an 04 – not a C4. The weight that I have for my Lightning shown in both the 04 and 05 catalog and the 05 web site is 2,900 pounds. Centurion clams that the composite hull design and the walk through cooler, allow them to make a very strong lightweight hull. I haven’t ridden in many other boats, but this one feels much more sturdy than my old I/O did. The 04 and 05 catalogs show 2,900 pounds for the cyclone, Lightning, and Lightning C4.

They are threatening to put restrictions on wakeboard boats on my favorite riding spot, I’ve posted. If they do I might need a ballast-less boat. Without ballast I may not be able to wakesurf any more :-(
Old    Kevin R Baugh (krbaugh)      Join Date: Mar 2002       03-04-2006, 8:39 AM Reply   
Yeah the old Lightning is no more
Oh I agree the walk thru cooler is key to how solid a Centurion is! It allows a light weight construction but still offers a stronger hull. Get in a Centurion and try to flex the decks walk thru then do the same thing in any other wakeboard boat!
You will be amazed at the flex in some of the HIGH end boats


The pounds per sq foot thing would be great if it took into consideration the square footage of the sides of the boat. obviously a deeper boat is going to have more weight but it also has more square footage of fiberglass. The way Joe did the figure it did not take the depth of the boat into the equation
Old    Show (bigshow)      Join Date: Feb 2005       03-04-2006, 8:59 AM Reply   
By depth, you mean the height of the gunnels, right? The only way I can see that the height of the gunnels figures in to wake development is that it becomes a limiting factor on how much ballast you can put in the boat. As you add weight you lose freeboard, the amount of the gunnels above the water line. So a boat with more depth in the gunnels will have more free board and can therefore take more weight, right?

All other things equal, then a deeper boat should have more surface area, and so yes have more glass, but I’m not sure where you’re going with that.

I think the issue is how much surface area of the hull is supported by hydraulic force while the boat is underway. If the area is small the boat should sink deeper, and make a bigger wake. However note the obvious cases where this is not true, a hydroplane has virtually no part of the boat in the water and does not sit deeply in the water at all. You can make a similar case for a bass boat running with WOT. So I guess you have say the smaller the surface area the better, as long as you’re not on plane.
Old    Kevin R Baugh (krbaugh)      Join Date: Mar 2002       03-04-2006, 9:10 AM Reply   

We have been talking about the weight of a boat and why Tige's weigh more than other boats. Joe thru into the mix his pounds per square foot number not taking into account the depth of the gunnels. So a 22' 100" beam boat that has gunnels that are not as deep as another boat will weigh less because there is less glass. This all goes back to Joe's statement.

“ TAPS offers a nice alternative to ballast by changing the way the boat rides in the water. A boat that sinks down low in the water produces a larger wake, and a boat that rides on top on the water produces a smaller wake. All this is controlled by the flick of a button on the throttle (similar to trim on a I/O). By eliminating 1000's of pounds of ballast we are able to have better fuel economy, more storage space, and better performance. This shouldnt be argued, if you have any boat, Nautique, Mastercraft, Malibu, and you eliminate 1500lbs (or so) you will notice better performance.”

And this one

“#2 Um, regarding the extra weight, yes i will stand behind that statement (feel like i am setting myself up here but if you are gonna say that our boats are heavier to begin with here is a quick reminder that since we went composite our boats are not significantly heavier than other manufacturers, sometimes less sometimes more but dont forget that even if we are heavier our hookless hull equalizes that extra weight we carry around!)”

I was not saying one way or the other how it affects the wake just the weight of the boat

(Message edited by krbaugh on March 04, 2006)
Old    joe lendahl (joe1975)      Join Date: Jan 2006       03-04-2006, 9:42 AM Reply   
Boy i just cant win! All that research for nuthin'!!!

I hope this thread is about to die....but i also hope that maybe people reading it can see that the newer Tiges, while still on the heavy end are not like the older Tiges that were 1000lbs plus heavier than the average boat.

I just want to be loved by all....
Old    Kevin R Baugh (krbaugh)      Join Date: Mar 2002       03-04-2006, 9:44 AM Reply   
This site is all about the love
Old    sunrider            03-06-2006, 2:49 PM Reply   
It appears this post has been fairly well beat to the ground, but I had some input that I had to offer. I did some pretty extensive research before getting my 22V because I too was confused by Tige's opposite approach to wakeboarding, but my salesperson did a really good job of getting me to understand their concept. Everyone here seems hung up on the concept of weight equivalency and the idea that weight is the only way to get wakes. I was in that group too, but my sales person explained it differently than I had ever heard before. Here is the gist of his explanation:

First you need to agree on the following three points:
1. Assume that hydrodynamics and aero dynamics share similar truths.
2. Operating a towboat or an airplane, one wants to go up or down. For a towboat the goal is to ride high in the water for skiing or deep in the water for wakeboarding. However this is acheived, as long as the hull rides deeper in the water is the desired result.
3. Manipulation of an airplane or a boat can be acheived through design.

If you can agree with these statements then:

An airplane could go up and down with the use of ballast and they do in emergency situations have to unload weight to stay in the air, but the safer and more efficient method to acheive this goal is through design of the wings and fuselage and the use of flaps to manipulate the plane. Tige, through design, operates the same way. The hull has been designed, in it's natural state, to ride deeper in the water than a traditional towboat. With the use of flaps (TAPS plate) the boat can rise out of the water. Of course, there is built in limitation to how deep the boat can ride, therefore, for advanced riders, additional ballast may be necessary to push the boat beyond it's designed limits.

Ok, I know it's kind of a stretch, but the analogy worked for my way of thinking. I know that there are many that won't get it or will refuse to open their mind to the idea, but hopefully it will help a few of you to grasp the concept.
Old     (will5150)      Join Date: Oct 2002       03-06-2006, 3:11 PM Reply   
hey devon- that's pretty good- and I agree that in order to slalom, the boat needs to ride higher and for boarding, go lower. I like the TAPS system and it works to lift the rear out of the water and displace less water when you're skiing. It also helps shape the wake when the boat's riding low for boarding. weight is also a part of this- and I think most manufacturers are figuring this out, as you can see most wakeboard boats are getting heavier- matching or even exceeding what Tige started. Bottom line- most of the wakeboard boats out there today are heavy, produce good to great wakes, have terrible gas mileage, and are totally the coolest thing on the water.
Old    Show (bigshow)      Join Date: Feb 2005       03-06-2006, 4:08 PM Reply   
The analogy works for submarines.
Old    Bill Bierbower (monstertower)      Join Date: Mar 2003       03-08-2006, 8:32 PM Reply   
Loved our 22V, and the 24V is even better. Great wake, insane storage and great for crowds and lots of gear.

We keep 800 lbs of lead in our 24V which is all most riders want and filling the factory ballast (rear tanks only) adds about another 7-800 lbs which intimidate all but the really good rider.

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 12:05 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