Hull Shapes and Ballast Placement

So this year I’ve been working on improving my surfwake with some success, though not what I was expecting. The Centurion Enzo and Avalanche are probably good gold standards for what you’d want or can expect from a wakesurf hull, though I have seen some very good looking wakes posted online behind Tige’, VLX, 247, and I think Entrust’s Moomba boat's.

Previously I made a little experiment filling in the spray pockets on my 04 Lighting. The experiment was a matching pair of Styrofoam inserts duct tapped in place. The experiment stayed in place for about 10 to 15 minutes before the duct tape gave up. The wake seemed better without the spray pocket fillers.

Since then Jeff Walker pointed out what I’m calling a middle feature in my surf wake. I think that the middle feature is caused by the Lightning’s hull extension. It would be interesting again to figure out if this is in fact the cause without making a permanent change to the boat. So I’ve built up a couple more Styrofoam bricks to fill in the hull extension, but only on the port side, the side that I surf. I’ll try them out this evening.

Last time when the duct tape gave way we had to go and recover lots of Styrofoam chunks. One thing that I did different this time was that I duct taped all the way around the entire foam core. So hopefully when the tape gives way I’ll only two big chunks to retrieve.

To get a good surf wake on my boat I need a really good list, the rub rail really needs to be kissing the water. Often the only way to pull this off is to have someone hike out board. Well Kevin Baugh scolded me when I posted a picture of one of my crew hiking out. On the Lightning it’s really hard to get ballast way out board, the top of the hull has a sharp angle which keeps ballast away from the gunnels. I think there are two features of the Lightning that perhaps make it the model for a less than spectacular wakesurf boat 1) spray pocket and hull extensions and 2) upper body V.

I made a tower mounted weight holder this weekend to try to get more ballast outboard and to try to appease Kevin. Here are a few drawings and pictures.




Outboard ballast rack on my work bench

Mounted on tower without weight

Mounted on tower with weight

Hey Ed, you have some great ideas and I love the diagrams. Some time ago, I was reading about air flow, figuring that the way a boat moves through water would be similar to the way air moves around an object.

http://www.swe.org/iac/LP/cycling_10.html

In that airflow test they show air moving around a tennis ball, compared to a bowling ball. The result is a more pronounced "wake" with the tennis ball due to drag. Can we assume that drag is what causes the larger wake on our boat hull? If so, would something like taping a rough surface to the side that is being "listed" improve the wake, or do we just end up with a washy face?

I'd be interested to know if the leverage you obtain by placing the weight up on the tower aids in the wake development. Got a ten foot pole with 200 pounds of lead weight at the end?

Ed,
What about putting a sac on the swim deck to get the weight more to the back. No that would not be me, Jeff.
Dennis

Just got back from riding. I hit 50% on these experiments. Just like filling in the spray pocket, filling in the void around the hull extension was a bust. The tower mounted ballast seemed to work out pretty well.

I built the hull extension in two pieces, 1) lower and inboard and 2) upper and out board. I surfed with the extension filler; I could free ride but the wake just didn’t develop. The lower and inboard filler pulled away fairly quickly, but the outer and upper hung on.

The key ingredient for building a good surf wake on my boat seems to be developing a strong list, rub rail in the water. The additional filler added bouncy on the side of the boat that I’m trying to drive down deep in the water. So I expect that the additional buoyancy of the filler works against adding to the list and building a good surf wake.

On the other hand the tower mounted ballast worked to develop a good list, and made a worthwhile improvement on the surf wake, the best I’ve had all season. I only had two crew onboard when I was wakesurfing, both under 140 lbs. I didn’t have my 300 lb buddy hiking out board to generate a good list. So I met my goal improving safety by not having to have riders hike out board. Oh, Dean arrived late, by the time we rigged for goofy surf, that’s another 300 lbs.

Jeff, it’s getting a little late here, I’ll take a look at you link but I’ve got a busy week with kids school events; so it might be a while before I can really get to it.

Dennis, I’m probably at or maybe over the maximum ballast that I should have on board. I replaced my 180 lb hard tanks with 750 lb Fly High fat sacks, I have a 230 lb built in center ballast tank, 270 lbs of home made pop bags, and 80 lbs of barbell weight. When surfing I only fill the surf side wake fat sack, so that’s over 1300 lbs on a 21 ½ foot boat. We have to be careful not to burry the nose of the boat in our own wake heading back to pick up riders. In our current setup we often need to put weight forward to try to lengthen the surf wake, putting more weight on the swim platform would probably shorten the surf wake. When wakeboarding I can’t get the boat up to wake board speeds with full ballast!

The hull extension

My fillers

Fillers installed - I should send pictures to Red Green


Out board ballast mounted

Can you see how hard the list is? Kory is still learning to surf

man i wish i had that much time on my hands

my XLV throws an enormous wake and it has spray pockets.

i have 2 theories on spray pockets, i've been told that spray pockets can cause the wake to be softer, which is why MB filled them on the newer b52 boats. so one theory is that the spray pockets do soften the wake. now my xlv has pockets and the wake is solid, the other theory is that the spray pockets allow the boat to sink down in the water easier creating a good wake. to me both ideas make sense. i do know that the XLV was designed as a wakeboard boat not a ski boat like your lighting maybe have been

Hey Ed, it looks like you accomplished two things. The first seems to be cleaning up the face of the wake...I don't see that "secondary lip". Also, the weight on the tower has proven to be a viable method of ballast. It seems, due to leverage?, that less weight is required off the tower compared to weight closer to the waterline to effect the same change in the wake.

Jeff, the hull extension fillers are not installed in the picture with Kory surfing, so I’m not sure why the secondary feature didn’t appear this time. I have video from when I was surfing with and without the modified hull, maybe if I get time this holiday weekend I’ll post a short video on the Wakepics site. That should show the difference.

One pound of ballast one foot off the centerline generates 1/10 the moment that one pound ten feet off the centerline generates. So your 200 lbs on a 10 foot pole would be the same as moment as 2000 lbs one foot off the centerline. I don’t think I’d want that kind of load on my tower.

The 2x4 and dowel set up I made seems pretty sturdy. The outboard ballast holder handled a monster wake from a LSV at boarding speeds with out any sign of difficulty. I don’t think that I’d want to put any more weight on my wooden holder for barbell ballast. Perhaps you could put more on a more sturdy metal version.

When we were wakeboarding we put one pair of weights on one side and the other pair of weights on the other side. If I was only going to wakeboard I might not keep the weights on the tower rack. Just lake board racks, one nice thing that these racks do is they get equipment out from under your feet.

For the purpose of developing a list, I’ve said that moving one pound from starboard to port is the same as putting two pounds on the port. We used to move wakeboards from one rack to the other and move seat cushions as well. It gets to be a lot of work re-rigging form wakeboard, to regular surf to goofy surf. Jeff, not all of us rig for regular surf and only regular surf

Ed,

I'm sorry that you haven't learned the error of your ways. As indicated here:

"Jeff, not all of us rig for regular surf and only regular surf."

If you'd like help breaking the evil, nasty goofy problem you're faced with, just call. I have a proven 12 step program: Ridding yourself of goofy'ness.

Just for the record, I give Dennis at least one (27 second) ride on "that" side of the boat every time he joins us.

I want to clarify something, because I'm not the mechanical genius you are. When you are referring to "moment" above, basically the further away from the centerline of the boat, the greater the impact on the list of the boat, right?

I ride the regular side - but just about everyone I ride with rides goofy, so I've made an effort to accommodate the dark side.

Right - moment, the further out board the greater the effect. Try picking up a broom; hold it in the center, close to your body, aligned vertically, pretty light and easy to do. Now hold the broom at the very end, extend your arm, and hold the broom straight out horizontal to the ground; that will be pretty difficult. Putting ballast near the centerline of the boat won’t make the boat list much, move the same weight further outboard and the boat will have more list.

Behind my boat there’s a wake shape between a dead stop and settling in at 10 mph surfing speed that’s just amazing. The problem is that wake shape only exists for a moment in time, I wish I could hold that shape and surf it. I wonder if it has to do with a different thrust from the prop while getting on plane. I’ve read online somewhere that the Switch Blade uses the prop thrust to help generate a better surf wake. I’d like to know how that works.

I'm sorry to hear about your Dark Side accomodation issues.

Part of the wake enhancement is ballast weighting the boat down into the water, part of it is the list and part of it is the balance of the ballast forward and aft. And it would seem the optimal combination is significantly different from boat to boat.

I read that the wakezup's switchblade did a combination of drag and prop wash shaping. Taco Metals is the wholesale distributor, Pivotal Designs, Inc. is the manufacturer and I do believe WakeZup is the DBA for Pivotal. Beyond some superfical discussions, even on the WakeZup home page, I haven't read anything about the device and it's operation.

Everyone calm down, I never thought of Goofy and Darth Vader as one and the same. Next time out Jeff, I think I will just take my one ride and make it all day. Besides I have Judy on my side and I'll tell her what you have been saying. Maybe we can rig up a trapeze like on a Hobie Cat. Get my Ballast out there that ought to list the boat.

Go to Wake pictures to see a before and after hull extension video.

http://www.wakepics.com/view_single.php/Hull-Extensions-and-surf-Wakes_wakeboarding-photos.html?medid=19089

Ed, great vid. Are you moving to Hollywood soon? In looking at the video, AFTER the hull extension fell off, the face of the wake noticable improved, but...it looks like there is a very discernable spray coming from the corner that is listing. Is that the case?

I don't know how much flotation the hull extension actually provides, but it really looked to me like the boat needed more ballast with the extension in place. Is that what it felt like to you? Theoretically, it would make sense, that if that side of the boat had more bouancy, it wouldn't sit as low in the water and so would need more ballast comparatively speaking. So, if that therory holds true, spray pockets would actually AID the formation of a surf wake, right? Is that what you are concluding?

Right, the second that the lower piece floated away the wake got better. The larger piece stayed in place, the lower piece was closer to the prop thrust which probably washed it off. The spray that you saw in the corner is from the swim platform.

I’d guess that the inserts displaced 3 to 4 gallons of water, that’s about a 30 pound difference in the very back of the boat. The increased bouncy pushed up the aft which should have changed the pitch of the boat (front to back) and the increased bouncy also reduced the yaw (left to right pitch), reducing list and making the wake foamy; that’s two bad effects.

I did run a separate spray pocket experiment with pretty much the same result and conclusion, increased buoyancy works against developing a good wake. This experiment was focused on squaring off the hull extension, right, but the result was the same, the hull was better as is.

One thing that I’ve read is that the deeper V of the Avalanche and Enzo hulls make better surf wakes. It seems that the spray pocket and hull extension are a type of stepped hull with a resulting effect of having a stepwise deeper V. Since I have less stuff to push down the Lightning goes deeper in the water and makes a better wake (apparently).

I’ve been talking to one of my crew about prop thrust. We started discussing what the switch blade might be doing with thrust and how there’s that brief moment in time between a dead stop and coming to surf speed where the wake is really nice. It would be interesting to know if the switch blade is improving wake partly by directing thrust. If thrust figures in to the good performance then high starting thrust might also explain why the wake looks so good for a short moment while the boat is coming on plane. Once you’re at surfing speeds the engine slows and less thrust is developed. Does anyone else see a good starting wake that fades after reaching surf speeds?

If prop thrust is important there might be some reasons why a hull extension might improve a surf wakes. So I’m thinking about a few other thrust management ideas, and there might be some more crazy posts to come.

Ed, Last year I was owned a 2005 Typhoon which has the extended transom and found the same thing as you. The wake gets a big cut down the middle of it and makes the sweet spot quite small. I tried everything last year and finally sold it to buy my new Enzo which goes without saying throws a nice wake. But in my quest to make the Typhoon work last year I was given a name of a dealer in Texas by the guys down at Fineline and he had a great fix. He told me to basically install a kind of wakeplate on both sides right where the pockets are which would lenghthen out the hull and fill that void. He said you could either make a fixed plate or install a ram to make them adjustable. He had done this on a couple of boats with fantastic success per him. I hope this helps and if you would like any more info just let me know.

Marc, I've speculated that left and right mounted trim tabs would be helpful. I'm not sure I want to invest $750 on trim tabs, but I would like to talk to your dealer, my email is in my profile.

Buy the way, nice boat!

Thanks!

I have almost the same boat. My dealer has talked me in to a 4 blade prop(acme #579)just for cleaning up the surf wake. I haven't trying it yet. I've been waiting for the debris to clear out of our lakes.

I don't believe it is the hull extension or spray pockets. I also think, Ed, that you do NOT want the gunnels to have a vertical orientation, anywhere they will contact water when listing (ie below the rub rail). Check this picture of an '04 Enzo looking at the transom. My '03 Tige 23V has the same outward angle of the gunnels.

Jeff, please clarify, “I don't believe it is the hull extension or spray pockets”.

I'd like to see a more dead on photo of the Enzo transom, something like the attached. The reason I wanted to straighten out the gunnels is to move ballast more out board. An alternative would be ballast tanks that fill the outer bounds of the hull. I have thought about some hull shapes and other hull appliqués that I'd like to try but I don’t have the time right now to experiment. I'd also like to see an Enzo up close, I don't my dealer has one in stock, heck I’d like to ride behind one too.

Hey Ed are you back at home? I need to ship those boards out, ASAP.

Dennis got us a new Epic to test and it had the EXACT SAME step in the wake that your lightning produce - only BIGGER. The bottom rear corner is "virtually" a right angle, JUST like the Epic.
That is where the step started from.

On that boat, it is SO tall...the swimdeck was almost 6-7 inches out of the water when running and most of the transom too. You can clearly see that sharp right angle as gouging the water and starting the step or secondary lip on the wake.

I think the hull extension can mess up the wake - ala X-star, but isn't the deal killer. That right angle in the rear corner is what, IMO, screws up the wake shape and creates that screwy secondary lip like you had.

My Tige has spray pockets and my wake is fine, no secondary lip AND no right angle at the rear corner.

Back home - can't wait to go to work to rest and recoup.

The Lightning hull extension has two steps, one bounded by the exhaust pipes, and the other bounded by the swim platform mount brackets.

I'll still contend that spray pockets don't help, but I don’t think they play a part in developing the middle feature. I was blaming my hull extension, but if the Enzo has the same feature I may be all wet. Did the Enzo that your were riding behind have a trim tab or a switch blade? A trim tab IS a hull extension.

The Enzo had a Switch blade, but I've experienced the same effect with just the trim tab and the Epic is as square as a shoe box in the back and had a bennett trib tab.

Also, my '03 Tige 23V as mentioned above has Spray Pockets AND a Trim Tab, referred to as TAPS...which would be a hull extension, as you noted. I have no instance of the "middle feature" I'm liking that term now. Can't wait to use it in a sentence like: That boat creates a middle feature on the darkside.

Jeff,
Why is the "darkside" always used in a negative sentence? I believe the middle feature was worse on the correct side.

There was NO negative connotation associated with my sentence. You goofy stance people are so sensitive. You never hear anyone say - "STOP referring to it as Regular side, there is such a prejudice about regular side riders! We want our own special name too!" Althought "correct" would satisfy that criteria, wouldn't it?

On the Epic, the middle feature was VERY present, but...we still had all that bow weight too. I believe the bow weight had a great deal to do with that middle feature.

So as you’re riding behind these two boats (Epic and Enzo) can you see where the seam of the middle feature begins? On my Lightning there are so many shapes on the back of the boat it's hard to tell which one might be associated with the middle feature. The boat has a swim platform, a wake plate, the lower part of the hull extension and the upper part of the hull extension (not to mention spray pockets).

The Tige' TAPs is a two part system, 1) the hull is convex and 2) the wake plate, right? Running from bow to transom the Tige’ hull has a convex shape. Running from port to starboard does the hull shape have a shallow V, leading to angled sides or does it have a flat spot at the bottom, a shallow V'ed surface followed by a deeper V (the sides)?

On the Epic there are two primary surfaces in the water, the port gunnels and the bottom surface (ignoring the starboard surface in a regular setup). Maybe each of these surfaces generates one part of the surfing wake? If so I’d expect to see the seam of the middle feature originate from the corner of these to surfaces.

On my boat you can see three streams of water coming together right behind the boat; one stream from the port, one from the starboard and one directly from the center. Do you see three streams behind the Tige’?

What is interesting on the Epic is that MOST of the transom is out of the water when at surfing speeds. The swim step is maybe 3 inches from getting wet and you can clearly make out the rear corner GOUGING and PLOWING through the water. Most of the other boats I have surfed behind do not provide this clear visibility. The freeboard on the Epic seems to be a foot taller than my Tige and I thought my Tige was tall.

On the Epic, the corner splits the wake into two part, as Chris Anthony proposed there are two running surfaces. So you end up with, almost, two wakes divided at the middle feature. Which, logically makes sense.


This is a view of teh Epic transom, you can see the angularity of that corner.



On the Enzo, when you speed that boat up, with the extra ballast afforded by something like the Enzo Sac, the middle feature becomes part of the lip, it's as if the water wraps around and flows UP towards the lip...if you slow the boat down, that middle feature shows up again.



My Tige doesn't offer a clear view, but has a number of places that impact the water flow. The swim deck, the Fresh Air Exhaust, the TAPS plate and then both "corners" created by the spray pocket. Now on my boat, there are no less than 5 streams and the water seems diffused as it creates the pocket and also the lip of my wake is typically not as clean as say the Enzo at speed. It does have a V at the transom, although not as "deep" as the Enzo, or for that matter the Epic. The Gunnel Walls are about the same angle as the Enzo (though not stepped) and are substantially more angled OUTWARD than the Epic.

Hi guys,

This is a pretty interesting forum on weighting the boat and Jeff that wake is very impressive. I was surfing behind my friends Malibu 24/7 and the only word that describes that wake was "stunning". The wake was steep, fast and recovery was very easy and if you can get behind a properly weighted 247 I highly recommend doing it. I will try to get some pics when I head up to my lake house this weekend.

Also if you guys have any tips for weighting my LSV let me know.

No tips on the LSV, maybe someone else? I have ridden a 247 - HUGE boat, but as you pointed out tends to be steep. I, personally, would prefer a transition that is as wide as the wake is high...as I ride surfstyle. So to me a more "rampy" wake is my preference. I also like a LONG pocket and would prefer that to height. While I think that 'bu is a nice boat, I prefer the Tige 24V and Centurion Enzo to the 'bu. Just my 2 cents - not saying the 'bu is bad!

Ed going back to your original outline of the hull, I think you are on target with that "large" angle where the V hull meets the sides.

I rode behind the 23 foot LSV this year - didn't like it at all. I've since spoken with Jeff Page at Inland Surfer. Jeff Page said that the LSV makes a better wake with the wedge up.

I outlined my transom photo to make the top sketch - it should be a pretty accurate representation of the transom. I think the angle from the rub rail to the vertical sides is deeper as you move forward from the transom.

I rode behind the 23 foot LSV this year - didn't like it at all. I've since spoken with Jeff Page at Inland Surfer. Jeff Page said that the LSV makes a better wake with the wedge up.

I outlined my transom photo to make the top sketch - it should be a pretty accurate representation of the transom. I think the V is deeper as you move forward from the transom.

I've seem photos of the 247 wake, I'd like to ride one, but I'd have to agree with Jeff, in that I want a long pocket not a short steep one. When I have too much weight aft my wake gets steep. When it's steep boards tend to slice in the wake and disappear or riders bury the nose of the board.

The pocket on the 247 was massive and steep. I had a 2003 Enzo and my wake was not even close.

John, what do you mean by massive. This weekend I had a total boat weight at about 7,600 pounds on my 21.5 foot boat. That wake was massive and at times hard to surf, so I'd say as a descriptor massive is not always very helpful. The wake was much better for surfing when I put a few bodies in the bow. By better it wasn't as tall, it was less steep, and the pocket was longer.

What do you mean the wake wasn’t close, which was better the 247 or the Enzo?

The 247. I will run down to his house this weekend and get some photos of the wake. I will also get his setup.

I'm with Ed, steep is not equivalent to good. Especially if it breaks/curls. Unless the tube is large enough to fit in, the start of the curl is the END of your pocket and effective surfing area. Those pictures of the wake with the tube that starts almost at the peak is one of the most limiting wakes I've seen. IMO, far more limiting than a small wake.

Ed, we did a little wakeboarding yesterday and I got the chance to use Bill's wakeboard. He has a creation from a company called Tubelite Wakeboard. It is a frame of 1 inch aluminum with a clear plexiglass bottom pop riveted to the frame that provided the running surface and the attachment point for the bindings and fins. It was interesting, in that you could see the waterflow and the disturbance that the fin made in the water, you could also clearly see how the flow around an object pushed into the water created a trailing wake AND the shape and size of that trailing wake. Could the concept be useful for modeling?

Hmmm... A glass bottom boat. It would be interesting to see what the prop, ruder, and hull features are doing below the water line. I imagine that prop disturbances have been well studied.

Some small scale modeling like I think you described in another post would probably be useful but you wouldn't see the other under water disturbances. I’ve got a fluid dynamics reference text, I would be interesting to look at a marine hull design text. I doubt that traditional boat building attempts to achieve in hull design what wakesurfers desire.

One of the guys at the boat club just got a CC Team 220, last weekend it was sitting next to a small Gecko. The difference in size was dramatic, the Team 220 is huge. The back end of the Team 220 looks very much like the Epic, I bet the Team and Epic boats have similar surf wakes.

247 surf wake pics here: http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/268482.html

This is the only wake I've seen that is similar to a friend's ~99 Tigé 2300V (which has spray pockets). Not sure if the 247 does or not.

Yeah, I think that is pretty typical of the 247. You can get waist high, but that break is the END of the pocket. It has an effective length of like 8-10 feet. Nice if you want to sit on your butt like that one pic, but not much else. Once your trailing leg is in that break, you can't do much else but try and pump out of it.

Once you speed the boat up to lengthen the pocket, that wake is unremarkable, it's not as large as the Enzo at speed and it never gains a decent ramp.

Maneuvers such as this pictured below require more pocket length than steepness and height. I think the 'bu is a nice boat, but it isn't the 'king of surf'.

Johnrodgers, proof me wrong, please I'd love to see a 247 that tosses a waist high, 20ft long pocket that isn't vertical.

Should I step down off my soapbox now?

I personally have an 05 X2 but in my buddys 1999 malibu, we have all the left ballast full, a 500 on the left, and a 300 up front, and the wake is almost shoulder height and is loooong.

That's a little difficult to believe, why don't post a picture?

Shoulder High???? Yeah, I don't believe that.

Shoulder high for a 5 year old maybe. Even in an enzo i have not seen sholder high.

So Ed, What was (or is) the purpose of those "spray pockets' or hull extention in the first place? Do any other boats have them?

Spray pockets and hull extensions are ski boat features. My Lightning is one of the original wakeboard boats. The hull is a ski boat hull reconfigured for wakeboarding. The Lightning v-drive configuration predates the “Big Three”. It make a pretty good wakeboard wake with comparatively low amount of ballast.

Spray pockets on a ski boat hull force the water, the spray out to the side and away from a slalom skier. Competitive skiers keep shortening the rope as they go through a slalom course, right…

I believe that a hull extension keeps a ski boat from porpoising, basically a permanent trim tab. Changing from d-drive to v-drive moves weight in the back makes for a better wakeboard wake, but also makes ski boats porpoise.

Neither of these features are found on most designed from the ground up wakeboard hulls. The X-star is a notable exception, it has a hull extension. I heard that the first few X-Stars (not X-1 X-Stars) proposed badly.

How do you increase pocket size?

How to lengthen the pocket; generally, not in every case and IMO: Specific hull shape, longer boat, more weight up front, increased speed, or set the trim tab down.

Some hulls are supposed to be better than others. I’ve surfed behind my Centurion Lightning, a Supra 21SV, a Malibu VLX, a 23 foot Malibu LSV, a Centurion Avalanche, a MC X2 (now X1) and an slightly older Malibu D-drive. Most of these boats were not maxed out for wakesurfing. So far I still prefer my Lightning surf wake over all of the others I’ve surfed. However, the VLX and Avalanche seem to be easier to set up than my boat.

I’ll have an opportunity to surf behind the Avalanche this week. The owner’s have dialed in the surf wake since my last ride. I’m looking forward to the ride, should be better than the Lightning. Centurion is bringing a 23 foot Enzo to the NWL National Wakesurf Championship, in Dayton, Ohio, next week. That will be my first opportunity to surf an Enzo, I can’t wait. By many reports the Enzo is one of the best, if not the best, surf wake hull.

It makes sense that a longer hull would scallop out a longer divot out of your lake, making a longer surf wake. I can imagine that pulling a stick through the water won’t do much. Who knows if there a limit to the boat length effect.

I use the trim tab to compensate for too much weight in the aft. However, the faster I go the more I want weight in the back. So at 8.5 to about 9.5 mph with tons of ballast I set the trim tab down. From about 9.5 to 10 or 10.3 I set the trim tab to 50% or less. Above 10.3 I set the trim tab up (0% down). If I were to go faster I and I could move weight further aft I would.

If the pocket looks short, tall and steep we move people to the bow. We haven’t done that much lately. That’s because I have 270 pounds of steel and a 400 pound sack in the bow.

Increasing speed always increases the length of the pocket. However, the height of the wake falls and it can be quite difficult to surf at high speeds with small boards. I’ve surfed as fast as 14.7 MPH on a Trick Boardz Mojo. With all of my ballast 14.7 mph was also WOT, not something I recommend.

At slow speeds, 8.5 to 9.5, my wake can be washy and hard to surf. When we set the trim tab down the wake perks up and becomes surfable. Does that make the wake longer, don’t know. I think the important issue is the pitch and roll. The best wake must be at a specific pitch and roll. The trim tab helps lift the aft if it’s too low, that fixes the pitch.

Thanks, Edward, I've noticed the wake being much better behind my 2003 (210) Natique since I have increased the speed to 10 and added 250 in the bow, but I still have problems performing spins and airs. It is more likely I am inexperienced but will continue to experiment.

Ronnie, ya, I'm in the same boat. I can almost get air and I can spin a 3 or a 7 but I can't spin without losing the wake. Keep at it. Jeff Walker and Sean Ward have posted a number of tips for 3s.

I heard that the new 210 hull is a pretty good surf hull.

Good luck

Ok, I am new to wake surfing and could use some help on boat setup. I just bought a new Malibu VTX (20'). The boat has two 200lb ballast tanks in the rear, one 500 ballast tank in the middle, one 450 ballast tank in the front, and a wedge. I would appreciate any help or suggestions.

Thanks

Congrats on the new boat, the VTX looks sharp.

Let me have your boat for a few weeks and about 200 gallons of gas, I'll give you a full report

Seriously though, if the VTX is anything like the VLX you should be able to build a good surf wake. To start I’d plan on putting a sack in the back locker. I think Malibu has a warranty disclaimer that says you can only put 80 pounds of gear in the back. For the 2006 Scioto Wakefest the Malibu rep dropped off his boat and told me to load it up. We put a 400 pound sack in the back locker and a 800 pound sack on the floor. Should you put a sack in the locker – your call.

Go out and play with the set up, move people fore and aft, figure out what you think you like then post some pictures and comments on what you think your setup strengths and weaknesses are. Then we can make some suggestions.

Do you have a wedge?

Edward,

Yes the boat does have the wedge. I understand all the weight needs to be on the side of the boat the rider is on, but I'm not sure if the wedge should be up or down or if there should be water in the front ballast.
Thanks

Jimmy,

Since the VTX is a new hull it's hard to say what works. However, assuming the hull is VLX like you should have a very good starting point.

I expect you'll want weight in the bow, maybe start with a half full bow tank. I don't know a lot about the wedge. Some are more automated than others. I've read that wakesurfers set the automated wedge to something like 50% for surfing. You're going to have to experiment.

Sometimes when we try a new setup we run without a surfer. We look for a wake that looks good to us first, then we put a surfer out behind the boat. You may not know what to look for at first but you’ll figure it out.

Good luck

Hi Jimmy,

Most of us with Malibu's ride with the wedge down. If it is a power wedge, you might play around with the adjustment and put it around 50 - 75% down.

You'll probably want to fill the center ballast full, and then the front ballast 1/2 to full as well depending on how much weight you get in the back... from what I understand the VTX puts out a short (rather than long) wave, but with some weight in the bow you will help lengthen it.

Since you have a Bu you'll want to check out www.themalibucrew.com as well -- a forum for Malibu owners. Lots of great info there. You can do a search for VTX and surfing. I think there are a few threads on it there.