Wake 101
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > >> Wakeboarding Discussion Archives > Archive through December 22, 2005

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-08-2005, 7:15 PM Reply   
What do you guys think.....Does the wake get smaller or bigger the longer you ride?

I thought it was and is elementary till on a different thread few people disagreed.

I'm not talking about the shape b\c the longer you ride the steeper\lippier it is,talking about the sheer size of the wake.

Obviously I think it gets smaller the longer you ride!

SAY..... 70' to 80'

What do you guys think?
Old     (poodle)      Join Date: Oct 2005       12-08-2005, 7:24 PM Reply   
the wake does get smaller, but at the same time you can pick up more speed coming at it because of the line length so it does get smaller but longer is better you will get more hangtime
Old     (ak4life)      Join Date: Nov 2003       12-08-2005, 7:29 PM Reply   
it may vary a lot by boat, but if my memory serves me right, in almost every boat i've ridden behind, the wake is taller with 70ft-80ft line than 60ft-70ft...

would you say that behind your x-2 the wake is taller at 65ft than at 75ft?

(Message edited by ak4life on December 08, 2005)
Old     (phil06140)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-08-2005, 7:46 PM Reply   
i'm with you i do think that the wake gets smaller. i ride at 70' feet and have tryed going to 75' a few times but did not like the wake because i normally speed up the boat some.
but i dont think that the wake gets steeper, but maybe i'm on crack...
Old     (bigshow)      Join Date: Feb 2005       12-08-2005, 7:53 PM Reply   
My wake is mellow near to the boat, gets a better lip as you go back and then the lip begins to crumble. I've heard that you want the line just long enough so that you're crossing the wake just before it begins to crumble.
Old     (wakedoctor)      Join Date: Dec 2004       12-08-2005, 8:12 PM Reply   
It rises and falls on every boat. It is called gravity. What goes up must come down. If it is bigger behind you then you need more rope. I know what your talking about Big Ed, I seen the post that guy made. He must just be confussing himself with the wake getting lippy. Which he said that he was only at 70' too so he is just riding on to short a rope.
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       12-08-2005, 8:21 PM Reply   
Well, the wake actually does get taller up until a certain point. I think 75' is where the wake peaks in height for 23-25 MPH in my opinion. This can all depend on the boat, the speed, and the amount of weight. Allen was riding at 90' for a while I thought the wake looked like crap back there. It doesn't really matter to Allen though. Also on Malibus the wake seems to be cleaner and maintain its height futher back. Just my opinion. I've been riding 82". I don't think the wake is as clean and hard there, but I like the lip and the distance w2w.

(Message edited by jarrod on December 08, 2005)
Old     (twakess)      Join Date: Mar 2002       12-08-2005, 8:25 PM Reply   
Ed yes it dose get smaller further out. Past the 70 mark.
Old     (thane_dogg)      Join Date: Jun 2002       12-08-2005, 8:50 PM Reply   

The wake is not smaller or larger from section to section. If you could compare the volume of water of the wake section from 60-65' and the volume from the 70-75' section, I would predict the volumes to be identical (given the boats, weight and speed are consistent); therefore, the sections would not contain more or less mass, or volume, than one or the other.

Exhibit A:

look at the wave, it gets taller as it nears the break, and it is the tallest right where it is breaking.
Old     (thane_dogg)      Join Date: Jun 2002       12-08-2005, 8:51 PM Reply   
when you ride longer the wake is the same mass, or size, but it seems bigger because it sends you higher because you're hitting it where it's steeper.
Old     (hyperlitenrd)      Join Date: Jan 2003       12-08-2005, 8:52 PM Reply   
that is a nice wave, I want to ride it!!!!
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-08-2005, 11:50 PM Reply   
Thane,That is not a true measurement b\c the force is identical on the entire lengh of the wave in the pic,the wake behind the boat generated the force comes from one end to the other....I hope that made sense.(not sure if you are familiar how waves are formed)
Old     (troyl)      Join Date: Feb 2002       12-08-2005, 11:58 PM Reply   
I see a SCION B in that wave....I better go to bed.
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-08-2005, 11:59 PM Reply   
Tho I will say that if you get TOO close to the boat I believe the wake didn't have a chance to form so it might be smaller.

Thane,pic and your statement don't really agree.1st you said it's the tallest right where it's breaking but then you stated is the same mass or size???

Reread Craig Cox's post....he got the right idea!!

Gravity...1st it rises then falls!

(Message edited by big_ed_x2 on December 09, 2005)
Old     (wakedoctor)      Join Date: Dec 2004       12-09-2005, 5:46 AM Reply   
If we are going to argue this is think it is best we don't compare wakes to wave. A wave is produced by movment under the water and that produces a swell, ect. A wake is produced on top of the water by an object displacing it. They are a little different from one another. Waves also have and undertow which I would think would affect its shape and break.
Old     (eubanks01)      Join Date: Jun 2001       12-09-2005, 6:44 AM Reply   
Big Ed - I think there is a point where the wake is at its maximum height...or whatever you want to call it. I completely agree with J-Rod on what he said. I never said that moving back in 5' sections that the wake would always CONTINUE to increase in size. The point was that there are rope lengths where the wake may not be completely formed yet to it's maximum height...meaning it would be bigger farther back.

And the comment was made that 70' is too short. I agree that I could ride fine at 75' and sometimes do, but working on new things it's nice to be able to coast in and not have to worry about casing the wake. As I said before, I would ride at 80+ behind other boats but the LSV has a really wide wake. I'm sure most would agree with that.
Old     (thane_dogg)      Join Date: Jun 2002       12-09-2005, 7:54 AM Reply   
just because it's taller doesn't mean that it's bigger. Bigger is a subjective term. When a wave breaks, it gets taller and falls over. It doesn't increase in volume.


the force is identical on the entire lengh of the wave in the pic

if that were the case then the wave wouldn't be breaking in one direction. It would just break all the way down the line at the same time. A wave isn't linear.

A wake no matter where you measure it will have the identical volume. Where it is tallest, is where you would want hit it for optimum height.
Old     (thane_dogg)      Join Date: Jun 2002       12-09-2005, 7:57 AM Reply   


there are rope lengths where the wake may not be completely formed yet to it's maximum height...meaning it would be bigger farther back.

a very accurate statement. Keep in mind, that once the wake reaches it's maximum height, it's then that it begins it's descent.
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       12-09-2005, 8:08 AM Reply   
To wakeboarders, taller IS bigger. A wake that is three feet wide with no height would be referred to as a small wake. I understand your arguement about volume, but I don't think anyone is concerned with volume, just shape, which right or wrong, we use size to describe.

I don't think that wakes work like waves either, but, you're right about both peaking in height just before the curl (or break) at which point they both reduce in height.

On my boat, at 24 mph, this happen at about 75-80 feet. The wake is definitely smaller after that point.

(Message edited by jarrod on December 09, 2005)
Old     (fox)      Join Date: Jul 2002       12-09-2005, 9:51 AM Reply   
There is a point of dimishing return. This is effected by the speed of the boat and the water it displaces. The "sweet spot" is where you like to ride based on you preferece for shape and to another degree size. For most, we "tune" speed and ballast to get that spot at about 70' back. The wake right behind the boat is pretty tall and steep...less steep the further back you go, but a little taller as the water builds itself into a "wave". Then past the sweet spot the water tries to settle itself back to flat so the transition gets longer and the height is reduced. That's how I see it.
Old     (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       12-09-2005, 12:44 PM Reply   
The fact of the matter is that a wake or wave begins to break when it has gotten too steep for it's lower mass to hold the mass at the top together. My opinion (& this is why ed made this post in the first place) is that the wake is the largest right where the wake is beginning to crest. It may be at 50 feet or 90 feet depending on your weight and speed. Think about a wakesurf wave, that is basically a wake, where is it biggest? Right where it's barreling. When you wakeboard you basically take this same wave and elongate it. I would argue that the similarities to an ocean wave & wake are very similar, obviously they are created differently but he principle is the same. It can't support the mass above and it topples over at its peak. I'll ask my fluid engineers when I get home, they are nerds. Thane, I got your back dog.
Old     (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       12-09-2005, 12:47 PM Reply   
Ed, if the wake gets smaller the farther back you go then why does Randy Harris ride at 90+ feet and go bigger than anyone? Answer: it's all relative to speed/weight.
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-09-2005, 2:50 PM Reply   
Answer to your question is not the size of the wake but the speed he is riding + as you said he is riding at 90' which is gonna give you the most hang time and speed is what generates pop more then a BIG WAKE.I'm not gonna get too technical but do me a favor and next time you riding more concetrate on the wakes behind the main wake that you are actually jumping and it is a litle more noticable to see the decrease in size and mind you it works the same.

If the wake when you are wakeboarding started from the propwash out then you can compare the wakesurf to the wake.

And the wake gets smaller before it starts crumbling.
Old     (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       12-09-2005, 2:55 PM Reply   
like I said on the other post, agree to disagree. I'm ridiing tomorrow I'll let you know...
Old     (rmack)      Join Date: Jul 2005       12-09-2005, 2:59 PM Reply   
If you ride 110 ft line at 22 mph, the wake is choice
Old     (dakid)      Join Date: Feb 2001       12-09-2005, 3:01 PM Reply   


If you ride 110 ft line at 22 mph, the wake is choice

yeah, you have 4 wakes to hit.
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-09-2005, 3:37 PM Reply   
Didn't Parks ride once at 120' and did the worlds biggest W2W?

I thought I read that in a mag couple years back.

Big,I'm riding tomorrow to and will pay close attention and will tell everybody in the boat to pay attention as well.
Old     (rmack)      Join Date: Jul 2005       12-09-2005, 3:42 PM Reply   
once at band camp a stuck a flute.... I mean I rode 200 ft line at 16 mph and did the best bunny hop
Old     (dakid)      Join Date: Feb 2001       12-09-2005, 4:24 PM Reply   
ok, so i'm curious...

if you learn that the length you're riding isn't at the "biggest" part of the wake, are you going to change your riding length?

(Message edited by dakid on December 09, 2005)
Old     (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       12-09-2005, 5:28 PM Reply   
I'm just gonna put a couple pics up here. To me in all these pics the wake looks biggest right in front of where it is cresting. Notice how I'm riding right in front of that. Thanks to Mr. Shawn Wilson for providing the dope V210 and his wife Lori for snapping the pics.

Old    walt            12-09-2005, 5:57 PM Reply   
(the wake looks biggest right in front of where it is cresting)

It doesn't look bigger to me just steeper. (shorter transition)
Old     (wakestar8878)      Join Date: Oct 2003       12-09-2005, 6:04 PM Reply   
Ah yes, that was a great day. Stephan you should seen it a couple weeks ago with another 600lbs!
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-09-2005, 6:33 PM Reply   
If you look at the 2nd to the last pic and draw an imaginary line where the through is you can clearly see it get smaller.....How the hell do you draw lines on this crap!??
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-09-2005, 6:34 PM Reply   
And you are going big you Bastage.
Old    walt            12-09-2005, 6:36 PM Reply   
yeah he is !
Old     (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       12-09-2005, 10:39 PM Reply   
haha thanks, I put all the credit on Shawn's incredible ability to sink the biotch. I just crash into the wake, it does the rest...
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-10-2005, 8:55 AM Reply   
How come I can't crash into the wake like that?

Shawn,can I ride behind your boat?
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       12-10-2005, 8:59 AM Reply   
Technique, Big Shizzle.

Learn to go as big as possible wake to wake.
Old     (wakestar8878)      Join Date: Oct 2003       12-10-2005, 12:38 PM Reply   
Any time Ed, but you knew that!
Old     (wakedad33)      Join Date: Oct 2005       12-10-2005, 12:59 PM Reply   
I think a lot depends on your riding style & what kind of tricks your doing. A lot of the tech Mobe trick are more consistent W2W then out in the flats. The other qualifer is distance between the wakes. Nautiquas tend to be narrower, X-star, Tige a little wider. I know my son and a lot of others riders adjust line lenght for contests depending on the boat they draw. Alex rides 75 behind the X-Star & 82 behind the Nautiquas.
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-10-2005, 4:21 PM Reply   
Just came back from riding and whoever thinks the wake is the biggest at the crest is smoking some good sh*t and NO I don't want any.
Old     (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       12-10-2005, 5:26 PM Reply   
Not at the crest, right in front of it. Before the whitewater.

I recently smoked some ahi tuna, are you sure you don't want any? It's really good...

It was perfect glass up here, how about you? My bro stomped Switch BS 3 for the first time and Switch BS Indy 180's. It was pretty sick. Me I sucked...
Old     (twakess)      Join Date: Mar 2002       12-10-2005, 5:59 PM Reply   
I was also out there with ed and yes he is correct.

Heavy at that part of the wake I think its more lippy. I don't like that part because it grabs your board on the take off.

To me I like it a little further in like 5 feet closer. But I ride a shorter line yes let the shorter line cracks come. But I am riding for my self now and had a fun time out there today.
Old     (trojanman)      Join Date: May 2002       12-10-2005, 9:35 PM Reply   
As long as its BIG who cares.. have fun and ride for yourself..

Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-10-2005, 10:24 PM Reply   
Definetely had butter ALL day and I also rode pretty good,I was happy!

Yea I hear you Joshua but can't we discuss??
What is your opinion since you wanna just jump in there?

I think some people are looking at the wake differently and I mean that by.......Look at the last pic posted and see how Joe is riding almost straight down towards us,well that is where the wake is starting to go up and you can draw a line straight down from the tip of his board and that is where the wake is starting but at 50',judging the wake from the flat part to the transition.Now the wake is approx.knee high if he was riding on the bottom of the pic,the wake would be almost hip high.....Don't you see that???
Old     (dakid)      Join Date: Feb 2001       12-10-2005, 10:38 PM Reply   
no, it's not hip high at all, because the bottom of the pic is closer, thus looking bigger. using your logic would be like saying i'm half the size of the last mountain in the background.
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-10-2005, 10:43 PM Reply   
well thats why I say almost but over exaggerated a little. But as you see still Bigger!
Old     (dakid)      Join Date: Feb 2001       12-10-2005, 10:44 PM Reply   
bigger doesn't always necessarily mean better. what if the wake at that point is super soft? then i don't care how big it is...that would suck ass.
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-10-2005, 10:46 PM Reply   
agreed shape is everything but the question is size...

So you agree???
Old     (dakid)      Join Date: Feb 2001       12-10-2005, 10:52 PM Reply   

it's a combination of shape, size, cleanliness, and how solid it is.

80' behind san = steep, big, clean, super solid
80' behind vlx = semi-steep, big, clean, not as solid
80' behind x-2 = semi-steep, big, clean, solid
80' behind tige' 21v = steep, big, not as clean, semi-solid
80' behind centurior air warrior = rampy, not big, not clean, not solid

you get the picture...
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-10-2005, 11:01 PM Reply   
Agreed but I think you got a little of the subject.

I was talking about wake characteristics period,yeah they all differ like you pointed out which I agree,the question is when the wake is the biggest and I say it is ALWAYS biggest right after roostertail give or take 5' and then it gradually gets smaller as gravity is wanting the water to go down.
Old     (dakid)      Join Date: Feb 2001       12-10-2005, 11:06 PM Reply   
i guess i did!
Old     (dakid)      Join Date: Feb 2001       12-10-2005, 11:09 PM Reply   
the wake just might be bigger right after the rooster tail, but how much speed can you really build that close to the tow point to pull off tricks? so not to disrespect, but who cares how
big the wake is right after the rooster tail.

i guess to me, i don't care where it's bigger. i'm much more comfortable with a longer line. as long as the wake is nice and big at 75-80 feet, then i'm a happy camper.
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-11-2005, 12:21 PM Reply   
Totally agree but this thread came up b\c Kevin posted that the wake was bigger behind him and I said that was NOT possible and a few other people jumped in supporting a false statement made by Kevin.

That's all
Old     (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       12-12-2005, 9:36 AM Reply   
Hmmm now that I read your last few posts Ed, I realize we are comparing apples to oranges here. Never did I think to include the wake next to the rooster tail, why would I? No one rides there so I really don't care what the wake looks like anywhere short of 75'. I still agree with my original post.

The wake right before the whitewater may be more lippy(my preference) and it is also the tallest. You can't use the arguement you used on Joe's pic because the perspective is messed up. I'd look as tall as Yao Ming if he stood 45 feet behind me and you took a picture. But who needs height, I got got mad b-boy skills...
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-12-2005, 10:23 AM Reply   
Big,The wake is the lippiest but definetely not taller.

The further back you go it gets smaller but steeper until it whitewashes out.

There is people that ride alot closer then 75' and pretty close to roosertail.

I realize that the perspective is a little off but the main thing to concetrate on is where does the transition start and pull the same line down the wake and it clearly shows how it gets smaller.
Old     (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       12-12-2005, 11:49 AM Reply   
agree to disagree
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       12-12-2005, 12:07 PM Reply   
You guys are still debating this? You have both posted the same thing repeatedly.
Old     (trojanman)      Join Date: May 2002       12-12-2005, 12:50 PM Reply   
Sorry kids.. i gotta agree with Ed on this one..

The wake where Joe in is riding in that pic looks to be at its biggest point. If you check it out, a couple feet behind him it is starting to curl..

Personally, i think the wake gets a little bigger where Joe is, then starts to get a little smaller and then crumble over.. just what it looks like to me. Also, when i ride, i dont want to be "right" at the point of the curl, but a couple feet in front of it. Not sure how the physics or any of that stuff come into play, as I could care less. But I'm sure all of us have logged in enough hours on a wake to have our own opinions.
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       12-14-2005, 9:53 AM Reply   
I think I'll have to agree with ed too. Look at these pics. This is a very slammed SANTE.

(Message edited by jarrod on December 14, 2005)
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       12-14-2005, 9:55 AM Reply   
look at the last shot (raley)
Old     (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       12-14-2005, 10:26 AM Reply   
BOOOYAAA...perfect shot....Thanks J.

Old     (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       12-14-2005, 1:29 PM Reply   
Then why does a wake break?


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 12:39 PM.

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


© 2019 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us