23 Foot Enzo Goofy Wav/?Wake

***Keep the "should have bought another boat" to another thread***

What have you done to improve the goofy wave on your 23 foot Enzo. Posting pictures would help all of us trying to dial it in. The regular side is pretty easy to dial in. Lets see specifics on weight amount, placements and modifications (wake plates, switchblade etc).

Read the other thread. Nothing I've tried works.

Sorry for hijack.Hey Show are you done for the season?I'm thinking of going Sunday the docks still in down there?

Don't know if the docks are still in. That never stopped me though. Just launch the boat and the guy driving the truck has to be careful walking over the slime on the ramp.

I'm done. Kind of early for me but I'm busy at work right now.

Saw the other thread. I am hoping your not the only guy on WW that has experimented. Plus the winter only stops part of the country Dont quit now, suit up.

Hey Brad,
I can hijack the thread also. Are you coming to the wakesurf event in So Cal this weekend?

Its been a year scince I had my 230 Iv got a 240 now. Filled one port side tank back.250 lb filled both tanks stb side and added 2 260 bags put tab on first mark and rode at 12.7 with gps speed

Dennis,
I wish I could. Between my kids soccer games, Sacred Craft (www.surfboardshow.com) and www.rainbowsandals.com/battleofthepaddle my weekend is very full. I look forward to seeing the reports from it.

OK, let's get back on track here...

I copied a couple of Robbie's pictures from the Water Worlds thread. One is the worst regular wake I've ever had - Which is a really, really good regular wake. The wake had a little spray from having set the wake plate all the way up.

The other is a typical goofy wake that I see behind my boat.


Nice!


So who would brag about this wake?


(Message edited by Bigshow on October 07, 2008)

It takes alot of work to get my goofy wake on my 23 foot enzo to be good. I took out the factory ballast on the starboard side and replaced it with a 750 pound under the seat. We then put 750 in the back corner and another 750 on the starboard seat and line the starboard side all the way up to the front of the boat with people. It works but is not nearly as clean as the port side. I'm a goofy foot and hate it. My buddy has an X-80 and it's easy to get a good wake on both sides. I am seriously considering going to the X-80 next year.

Save some money, try a new Sanger 237, or a Avy, or a Tige.

Not helpful. I've got an Enzo. I think that got a smoking deal on it. In this economy there's no way I'm buying another boat.

I was responding to matt's comment, about buying an x-80. I should have made it clear I was addressing his comment.

When will all the "experts" ( Drew, Troy Mann, Jeff Page, et all) help Show and the rest of us setup our Enzo's so that we to, can have a "King of surf" boat? The so called experts all say thing like "switchblade will cleanup the goofy side" " a little weight". How about real help for real people who cannot enjoy their investment because it only works on one side for them. Enough " the best wakesurf boat period" Real help with real pictures.

Amen Guido.

Well to start with the 2007 Merced Calif World Wakesurf Competition used SV230s. It would be interesting to know how the Pros set them up as I would assume that they would want the wave the best it could be.
Don't know if they used switchblades or not.

At worlds the switchblade was used but the weight was withheld. I heard a rumors of nearly 3000 lbs, and there were a few lead plates visible in the boat, but the rest was all concealed.

(Message edited by wakesurf_ohio on October 09, 2008)

I was at worlds in merced, and I know they borrowed some lead from my buddy for the goofy boat, they needed more. It was very heavily weighted. I have no idea though if it was right surf, or with a blade.

Packrat,
Same boat not helpful though. The used a reverse rotation boat for the goofy side. The problem seems to be the goofy wake on a regular rotation boat. They also used a switchblade.

Ahh, the elusive Enzo goofy wake. I have installed the Enzo sac so I mostly ride regular or switch backside.

But it can be done, just don't expect equal results. I put 2 v drive sacs from fly high in the rear, filled factory starboard tank, and a side sac under the drivers seat along the side. We even filled up the bow filler sac.

With the blade all the way up we were going 11.5 which is about 1.5mph faster than we normanly ride regular.

http://www.wakesiderides.com/rides/index.php?page=out&id=1236
There is a pic of the wake with this set up at the above addy.

It seemed to help clean up the wake by driving a very slight arch. The wake was not as tall as the other side but still better than almost all of my friends regular wakes! There is some spray at the front of the pocket, but the sweet spot is nice and clean. Once we all learned to ride farther back, it became a lot of fun.

Even in the above pic my friend was too close to the boat. The good stuff is just ahead of the curl. I will look for some better pics later.

good luck, hope this helps.

Jason that one looks outstanding compared to Show's goofy wake he'll be glad to see this post thanks for sharing!

Thanks Jay, a few more notes, I have never GPS'ed my perfect pass so the speeds are not actual and the guy in the pic is 6'4" so he makes the wake apear smaller. At least that is my story!

I’d say Jason’s goofy wake looks acceptable for recreation. I’d have to see that wake first hand to determine if it would be acceptable for a competition. I really feel that it’s important to level the playing field.

Jason, that's with a switch blade, right? While the SB is available after market, I won't have the funds to add such an expensive option. Specially in this market.

Other than the SB I'd estimate that Jason’s set up was similar to the one I had at the Lake Norris Season Extender, i.e. the picture above.

When we set up the goofy side at Lake Norris we tested it first. To start we had 750, 400, and I think 150 barbell weight in the back locker and a 750 FH on the bench. The wake was very bad and the boat was clearly struggling to get to an operating speed. We tried shifting weight around and I hiked out to see if we could see any improvement. Hiking out helped and moving two big guys forward helped. We clearly had too much weight aft.

So then, we added a 750 FH to the bow foot well. That improved the wake a little and let the boat come up to speed more easily. We didn’t hike out again.

I have an additional Enzo sack for my new SV230 which I am going to put on the starboard side for a goofy wake. Not sure if I will have to change it out if I want to wakeboard but I guess I could partially fill the port and starboard enzo sacks and go from there.

Hey Ed,

"I’d have to see that wake first hand to determine if it would be acceptable for a competition."

In that picture of Jason's boat (btw - Hi Jason! Sorry we missed MN this year, hope to see you again next summer! ) I believe that he's turning. That won't always work in a contest environment. (Trying to prepare for the regular side riders that protest the darkside riders got a longer run due to the arc ) The rules we have developed indicate that the wakes need to be within 80% of each other. I don't think we contemplated "quality" of the face as one of the criteria, nor would I begin to know how to assess that. Are you contemplating a run that would allow for the arc, as in the picture that Jason posted?

SD, you know that at 2007 and 2008 Nationals we've had balanced and stellar wakes on both sides from Avy's. I’d be disappointed to not have the same for 2009. There are so few Enzo in my neck of the woods and I doubt any are Right Surf equipped Enzos. I can’t see a reasonable possibility running comps with Enzos.

Griggs is only 300 feet across in places. If we run an event there again there’s no way you could do anything but go straight. When driving you feel the pressure to drive well. When I drive I worry about throttle overshoot and speed setting time. Adding driving in an arc to the mix would not help.

I have trouble with the 80% rule unless everyone understands that it’s completely subjective.

The impetus behind the 80% rule, originally, was two-fold. One was an instance where we used two identical boats, one weighted regular and one weighted darkside. The resultant wakes were close - about as close as we could get, but they were NOT exactly the same. The rule was designed to protect an organizer that made a concerted effort get the wakes for both sides close.

The rule also protects contestants. There was one contest where an organizer did not provide a weighted darkside boat. When a few contestants complained that had they KNOWN it was regular only, they would not have made the trip or entered. In response, he launched an unballasted boat for the darkside. Certainly not within the 80% rule/guideline. That situation wasn't good for the sport, riders or the local sponsors.

I'm confident you'll get the darkside boat selection worked out before the '09 season.

The rule also protects contestants. There was one contest where an organizer did not provide a weighted darkside boat. When a few contestants complained that had they KNOWN it was regular only, they would not have made the trip or entered. In response, he launched an unballasted boat for the darkside. Certainly not within the 80% rule/guideline. That situation wasn't good for the sport, riders or the local sponsors.

I agree that this is extremely important. I know that Exile Skimboards (which sponsors a lot of the best skimboarders in the world) refuses to send riders to the WWSC because the one time they did (2005?) the boats were only set up for regular (and almost all their riders are goofyfoots) It only takes one bad experience to sour potential sponsors on the sport

When I read the OP I thought the point was to get a goofy foot wave out of a regular Enzo, not pull 2 different groups at a tourn with one boat.

The pic on that profile is shortly after take off. We don't drive in a constant arch! When I said "very slight arch" that's what I mean. Driving in an arch is only a temporary fix, the lip will curl if you keep turning. Also turning makes it harder for the rider to keep up. You have to ride down the line more and can't turn out as far away from the wake. I found some more pics of the wake while driving straight. They need to be resized, so I will post them later.

To the original poster, sorry this is all old info as I have not set up googy in my boat in over a year. I was really hoping some one would post their tips or what they have tried, or at least have something to say about the actual topic!

We have the enzo sac installed so all we do is hit the swithes and go. All my goofy footers have decided they would rather ride a bigger, better wake backside than ride a smaller wake frontside.

Oh well, the season is done here in MN so I will just have to try again next season. Good luck!

You can run a tournament with one boat but you couldn't run many people. Locally I'm unlikely to get an Enzo with Surf Right.

Many of my regular crew ride goofy and I just can't get what I think is an acceptable goofy wake for them. I feel I've put plenty of effort in to goofy wake experimentation without a favorable result. I'm at a point where I won't bother setting up for goofy unless were trying something new.

My inclination is that ballast placement alone won’t meet my standards. I’m winterizing tomorrow. Maybe I’ll find the recipe next year.

Loc over at Centurion Crew says it's about weight. Somewhere in this thread he talks about 3,000 pounds vs 1,500 pounds for the regular side. I think this is what they did at the TWC, but don't quote me on that.

I can tell you from experience that 3k on the regular side of an Enzo throws a SICK wake. Super long and good height. Sorry no comparison of the goofy, we never got the chance before dark to switch. I could see where 3k on the goofy side would throw a pretty good wake

SD the goofy side pic above is with about 3k.

Wow, Ed. Well there certainly isn't any consistency in the numbers vs wake, plus it would still be highky dependent upon the "people" ballast. Maybe they have another ton of people on top of the ton and a half of water.

Ed, I know this may be a longshot, but the Epic we just took out came from the factory with the dual rudders not aligned (and subsequently the wake had a problem) and that got me thinking. Is it possible that something underneath a few of these (most?) Enzo's is having an impact? Misaligned rudder or tracking fins, maybe?

Oh...see my CC post. No sense repeating here.

Short answer I'd like to try trim tabs some time. With the market the way it is I really don't want to spend money on more experiments. Maybe next spring it will be a whole new word.

It's been almost a month now. So the experts have not chosen to help out the Enzo owners. If you experts can't help Enzo owners get a good goofy wake like you all say is easy then don't post about how great the Enzo is as a surf boat. Centurion must know that they have a problem or why would they come out with the Surf right model.

Man am I glad I have a Sanger.

Me too. I love my Sanger V215 only trade I would make is for a V237

The folks over at WO.com seem to have something figured out. I could be wrong, but I believe that these are behind a 24' Enzo with a wakeplate - two physical differences between the boat in the picture and what Show has.

I believe that Loc over at CC.com indicated they use 3K of water ballast, but I am guessing the people ballast and location of said folks is a significant part of the equation, too and from some of the pictures may not be "doable" in all jurisdictions.

Thread at WO.com is here

These aren't bad looking darkside wakes if they are, in fact, from the WO's Enzo.

Just thinking so ignore this if you want. What if you added a second fin to the port side of the existing rudder. Sort of a biplane affect. Installation would be easy and would not have to be permanent. A squared C shaped piece of stainless screwed to the rudder could work.
My thought is that a rudder effect further to port, or in cleaner water might help when the boat is listing to port heavily. I've never tried anything like this but the Sanger rudders are offset significantly to port. Obviously alignment would be tricky because the forces would be pretty high on it.

Our normal crew is all regular, for the most part the only times I have loaded our 2008 Enzo SV240 on the goofy side is for the Texas Wakesurf Championships - Showdown at the Secret Spot and Grassroots Stop competitions here in Texas that were hosted by WakeOutlaws.com which I'm a founding member of. This past weekend we had the Halloween Wakesurf Slashing which brought out some goofy riders that do not normally ride with us. Since we had the boat loaded goofy I made sure and took some extra pictures of the wake to share.






In the pictures above the 2008 Centurion Enzo SV240 was loaded with the factory bow sac full, the front center ballast full and a Enzo sac on the goofy side as full as it gets with the wake (trim) tab all the way down at approximately 11 mph. On this day we had 9 adults total, 1 riding, 8 in the boat. The 9 adults consisted of 6 males and 3 females.





In the pictures above the 2008 Centurion Enzo SV240 was loaded with the factory bow sac full, the front center ballast full and a Enzo sac on the goofy side as full as it gets with the wake (trim) tab all the way down at approximately 11 mph. On this day we had 7 adults total, 1 riding, 6 in the boat. The 7 adults consisted of 4 males and 3 females.




In the picture above the 2008 Centurion Enzo SV240 was loaded with the factory bow sac full, the front center ballast full and a Enzo sac on the goofy side as full as it gets with the wake (trim) tab all the way down at approximately 11 mph. On this day we had 7 adults total in the boat. The 7 adults consisted of 4 males and 3 females.

From what I read on this site and seen on my boat, if that the wake tab is the key to a good goofy wake on the enzo and other boats. All the way down diverts the prop thrust off the face of the wave. This should however make the wave smaller, because it it also forcing the nose down. Great info!

Duffy

i agree that the problem with the enzo must be a prop rudder alignment caused proble. The enzo hull does not differ much from other v hulled inboards such as the avalanche and many other centurions, supremes, sangers ext which produce a good darkside wave.
The avanche has a known problem with the port wakeboard wake (talked about in the boat forum) which in one case was fixed with modifing the rudder. Starting O8 centurion started using a new rudder with a built in adjustment tab, it seemed that with a the correct adjustment the issue with the port wake was curred.

I assumed Ed was the darkside master as i own the same model as his olde hurrican and gave up on the darkside wake years ago. If ed can't get it to clean up then their is a serious issue.

I do know that the first enzo's (04') had a differnt transmission and so used a diffent prop (3 blade). I have never heard if these boats also exhibited a poor darkside wake.

From my experiance working at a centurion dealership is that their boats all seemed to track differntly, tracking fin alignment, and rudder adjustment was need on some new boats to make them track straight. My guess the enzo possesses an alignment issue (tracking fins or rudder) that washes out the port side wake.

As Ed has found before it is not only the amount of weight needed to clean up the darkside of a centurion, but also a nessacary amount of lean or list. Ed used over 2000# plus a trim tab to create a good darkside wake on his Hurricane which is 21.5" long and under 91" beem at the water line. The enzo is a lot more boat and so will need a lot more weight to get it to list at the same degree. The rotation of the prop causes the boat to list to the regular side so dark side surfing requires much extra weight compaired to the regular side. All good centurion surf wakes require the boat to really list to the surf side. My prediction is that if you lean the enzo over enough it'll clean the wave up.

(Message edited by masonwakerider on October 28, 2008)

@duffy

The wake plate down usually flattens the top of the wave. On my boat, I have the wake plate (taps) up most of the way to keep the wake steep. But sometimes to clean up the wake you have to bring it down some, but the more you bring it down it usually has a negative impact on the height/steepness of the wake.

'08Wakedoc provided some useful info. Those darkside wakes look good to me. Interpreting what I could from the first picture, I gather that the ballast requirements for the darkside wake on a regular rotation Enzo would be, as follows:

Water ballast

Enzo Sac 1,450
Bow Sac 800
Front Center tank 250 (?)

Total water ballast 2,500

People Ballast

Men average 200 x 5 1,000*
Women average 140 x 3 420

Total people ballast 1,420

Total ballast, @ 3,920

* assumes one male was riding.

Figuring there is gear and beer not calculated, maybe that accounts for any people ballast average deviations? It also seems that the wake plate/trim tab is a necessary component of this - that was one item missing from Show's Enzo.

Possibly also, the difference in the hull length, I believe that Show has a 23 and '08Mon has the 24.

man that is a lot of weight. I can't imagine the size of wake I could get with that much weight.

Yeah - but at least it's doable! As WALove predicted, toss enough weight at it and it cleans up. It would appear that Ed is just short about 1,000 pounds and 1 trim tab.

Keep in mind that this is based on one of the WakeOutlaws.com 08 Centurion Enzo SV240’s, same one that was at the 08 Worlds. The only big difference is, Ed’s is not an 08 and does not have the hydraulic wake plate that this 08 does.

Water ballast:

Enzo Sac 1,450 [we had approx. 1250 lbs. I don’t fill it to the bursting point]}

Bow Sac 800 [the sac in my boat I am guessing is approx. 250 lbs.]

Front Center tank 250 [agree]

Total water ballast 2,500 [approx. 1750 all filled by switch and under the seats]

People Ballast

Men average 200 x 5 = 1,000

Women average 140 x 3 = 420

Total people ballast 1,420 [agree]

Total ballast, @ 3,920 [approx. 3,170 lbs.]

So a little over 3,000 lbs. ballast including people

* assumes one male was riding.

Wow, I can't imagine that the 170 pounds weight difference is causing the washed out wake that Ed has compared to the '08mon's wake. Ed has said that the picture that shows Noelle is his boat with 3K of ballast. Is it possible that it's all in the adjustable plate, the extra 1 foot of length and whatever hull changes there were from Ed's year and '08?

I think it has a lot to do with the hydraulic wake plate on the 08 and not so much the 08 hull. When I was playing with our 08 over the weekend if I raised the hydraulic wake plate the wake would wash out like Ed's I am pretty sure that the fixed just doesn't extend down as far as the one on our 08

I would think that would be an easy test for Ed before dropping the money on an adjustable tab. I realize that you are mostly just a jerk to ME, but do you think you could measure the deflection from horizontal on your TT in the setting that you use most often. Either in degrees (not temperature ) or inches? Perhaps noting any other useful info like the dimensions of the tab itself.

If Ed could adjust his manual tab to that setting and observe the results, he should be golden. If that does the trick then retro-fitting a TT is fairly easy, I would think, for a handy guy like Show.

I am a jerk to you Jeff? LMFAO! You started that the first time you met me in 08 at the Texas Wakesurf Championship...remember??? Good thing that I don't hold a grudge huh?

As far as Crazy Ed goes, he said on CenturionCrew.com that he has put his Enzo away for the winter, I would be happy to supply Ed with what every Ed needs but, will not happen anytime soon since last weekend was our last time out for awhile.

08 Jeff 08

I seem to remember a dialog PRIOR to the TWC in which you insuated several unflattering and UNTRUE things about me. I would presume that your selective OR lack of memory is the true basis for a grudge omission, if that in fact is the case.

You know what you can do with your 08!

It would be helpful for others, I'm sure, if you could post up the details of the hydraulic tab: deflection, dimensions etc.

Have no idea what you are talking about but, I am sure you do since the old are said to be wise.

I know what you did with 08, gave it to someone...

I will post a follow up

Call me Ed and we can discuss sometime.

Well, this has been a busy day for this thread!

WA, that’s about right - after a fair amount of work I was able to develop a good wake on my ’04 Lightning/Hurricane. Strong list was everything on that hull.

SD, the manual trim tab doesn’t seem to have much range of travel. I’ve had the MTT neutral, all the way down, and all the way up. The photo of wake with Noelle is with the MTT all the way up. Clearly all the way up is worse. I suspect the BTT has a greater range of travel.

Doc, does the SV240 have a front tank and a center tank? I didn’t know that there was a center tank option. I thought the stock options we pair of mid-ship tanks, pair of back locker tanks, and bow sack.

The shape of the MTT and BTT is also slightly different. The corners of the MTT are rounded while the BTT corners are square. I think the MTT is about 7 ½ inches deep and about 9 to 12 inches wide. I would guess the BTT is about the same size.

The BTT is hinged while the MTT is a hinge-less flat plate. The BTT sides extend upward by about ½ inch along the side and back edges. So, the BTT is a flat plate at an angle relative to the hull. The MTT is a deformed of bent sheet, it’s curved. I would think that a curved shape would be more efficient or effective than a linear (flat) shape. Try rolling a ball down an angular slope and down a parabolic slope. Parabolic is faster, the ball travels further.

I’m curious about what James Harold has done with his cyclone. No, I’m not planning on adding a SB. However, one thing he did, or a friend did for him, was to extend the length of his trim tab. He said that eliminated SB spray. A longer MTT might do the same for my wake.

If I’m putting trim tabs on my boat it won’t be a singular tab down the center, it will be a pair, one on each side. I don’t think that Sanger jumbo tri tabs will mount properly on an Enzo hull. A pair of 12 x 9s should be pretty good.

I haven’t considered an offset rudder. I don’t think I’ll be the first to try that one but I’m interested.

About the ’09 Avy, at Worlds Kurt Greber said that they’ve changed the standard prop rotation on the Avy. The change in prop rotation is supposed to clean up the starboard wakeboard wake. Does anyone know if they did make the prop rotation change? I wonder what the regular surf wake is like?

I’m definitely done for the season. I winterized the Mighty Enzo already and I’m taking her the fair grounds for winter storage Saturday. We'll see what next year brings – maybe trim tabs and low gas prices.

What did Centurion change on the Enzo from 06 till now? They seemed to have the goofy wake dialed in at the last Boardstock in 06 The Sellers always had a good goofy wake on their boat

JL both of those boats (Rich Sellers boat and the Boardstock darkside Enzo) are/were reverse rotation. The issue in this thread is the regular rotation Enzo and weighting the darkside.

It seems the formula is double the regular side ballast and you need a trim tab.

Jeff I think you are missing my point, in the pictures we are using the same weight on the goofy side as the regular side the only difference is that the regular side we run with the trim tab all the way up. The pics below were taken the same day with the same people and same weight only difference from side to side was the trim tab setting, on both sides we are only around 750 lbs. over factory ballast, not including people in the boat.

There is no doubt that the regular side is better but, we had zero complaints about the goofy side from the riders that joined over the weekend.


08

Show, they did make the change on the '09 website is offers left surf as an optional feature on the avy and on others too, but not the enzo's.

I didn't catch that '08mon. You're running 1750 of water ballast all the time? However, it doesn't require that to generate a clean wake on the Enzo, regular side. I know that the Enzo Sac alone will generate a clean wake at what 1250 water plus a driver and an observer, so about 1,500 pounds or so total. Will the darkside shape at 1,500 alone, or does it require the 3K of ballast to shape? My understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong '08mon, minimun ballast for the regular rotation Enzo regular side is 1,500 and 3,000 darkside. Right? Not Right surf or I guess Left surf now

I am saying that last weekend the goofy wakes in the pics above were created with 1750 lbs. of water weight + or - a little with the hydraulic trim tab all the way down + the people weight. On the goofy side we made a point for most of the people to sit on or towards the goofy side, while on the regular side we really didn't worry about.

04 + 04 = 08

Nice math. 3K and 1.5K

Have you ever tried to shape at 1.5K darkside? I know you have a huge crew, so you may not even have so little weight. I'm just trying to determine if the BuTT would make that much difference? That would seem to be a better option for folks than R or L Surf, if it makes that much difference. On my Tige the TAPS has almost no impact on the wake.

Show was unable to shape a clean darkside wake at 3K, but as noted he doesn't have the BuTT, just the MuTT.

Is it possible to shape the darkside of a regular rotation Enzo with as little as 1.5K ballast and the BuTT properly adjusted, in your exceptionally math talented opinion?

Just letting folks know what is working for us, I will try playing with the shape more next time we are out.

Y2K8

Also, WakeDoc... Thanks for the pictures and info.

How about this goofy wake?

oops Sorry It was late and I thought I was posting to the Sanger debut thread and posted here by mistake.

Wakedoc,
Thanks for the post. Your detail is exactly what I was waiting for.

Now I'm really confused. '08mon do you run a different setup than your partner/twin boat?

Loc posted here the following details:

Enzo sac full, tab @ 100%, 550lb behind driver on enzo sac, 550lb in bow, bow sac full, center full. As many people as possible.

That would be:

Enzo Sac full 1,450
550 behind driver 550
550 in bow 550
Bow sac full 250 (from above)
Center full 250 (from above)

Total water ballast 3,050

That's a 1,300 pound difference! Am I just not understanding Loc's description above? It would also be consistent with his statement earlier in that post of:

"For the sake of the discussion it does take us 3k goofy vs 1.5k reg, significantly more."

This is what I have heard, rather than the 1,750 you are indicating, plus the 1K of people, so that the darkside would require 4K total ballast, plus the BuTT. This would also seem to be consistent with Show's findings.

surfdad your numbers look right. Double you reg. side weight to get your dark side. I have also been keeping track of weight placement from the stern to the bow and it seems like the magic ratio for centurions is 3:2:1 stern:midship:bow. Seems to follow locs specs 1500 stern 1000 ballast and people mid ship and well 750 in the nose. I use the same ratio to create the best weight in my boat as well.

Thanks WALove - I thought I was losing my mind. The big question mark in the details above are the weights of the various genders. I think I'll just leave it be!

Great guidance on the 3:2:1, I know that my Tige hates bow weight - so the 3:2:1 formula is simply and straightforward for the Enzo folks.

i find that the 3:2:1 works for all centurions, maybe other v hull boats too. As it seems that the more hull in the water the longer the sweet spot, explains why longer boats make longer waves. Surfdad what happens to your tige wave with the addition of bow weight? Less height, steepness, or does it get washed out.

Too much weight in the stern is bad for my boat. It doesn't help the regular wake and you can tell that the engine is really working. Move weight a forward and the wake perks up and the engine doesn't have to work as hard.

On the regular side I get a stellar wake with a 750 in the rear locker, filled midship tank and a 750 in front of the midship under the bench seat and partly under the clamshell. That’s a fairly even distribution, more like 1:1:1.

For a while I put two 750s in the back locker, filled the midship, put a 400 in front of the midship and 270 in bag weight in the port bow. That’s more like the 3:2:1 ratio. I like 1:1:1 better.

Lots of different configurations for the Enzo! WAlove on my Tige, the addition of bow weight just knocks the height of the wake down, and I don't gain any length.

I know that Bentone uses bow weight and swears by it on his Tige, but he also runs a LOT more total weight than I do. I'm sure that I'm under 2K water and people combined on either side.

So Ed, you are running about 1,750 water + people on your regular side Enzo?

I don't know how big the midship tank is but I guess it's the same as my Lightning tank at 180 pounds.

Since I have Side Swipe the back locker tank doesn’t fill all the way. Also, the front 750 doesn't fill to capacity under the bench. So let's say we're running 1,500 in ballast. With that weight and a crew or two to eight the wake is really good and you don't have to worry too much about where people sit.

Jeff, I described EXACTLY what we did to achieve the goofy wake in the pictures above. I am not making comparisons to other people, other boats, other brands, nor was I looking for an argument. I am explaining how I weighted our boat and supplied pictures to show others what the wake looked like, I am not going to argue with you about it.

O-eight

Not arguing Ken, trying to understand. Which is why I asked.

Ed, when we had access to an Enzo...I want to say a 23, but it may well have been a 24. It seemed to be more sensitive to weight placement. Well, maybe I am not describing that clearly. Side to side was very critical, but not so much lengthwise on the boat. On your Enzo, weighted regular, can you place people on either side say for example: two behind the driver, and a total of three folks on the bench seat without an effect on the wake? I mean would that configuration be the same as 5 on bench seat weighted regular?

Generally we place people on the port side. But it doesn't seem to matter much when we have a bigger crew if several drift over to the starboard side.

I have toys and along time until spring. My local boat dealer had an old I/O in basically for salvage. He had me come over and pull the trim tabs and pump off the old boat for cheap. So I'll have an opportunity to see what trim tabs will do for the Mighty Enzo

TOYS! I love TOYS! Be sure to post up the retro-fit for us.

niiice =)