Articles
   
       
       
Pics/Video
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WAKE WORLD HOME
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-12-2014, 10:31 PM Reply   
My buddy and I have wondered how much weight certain sacs can actually hold since they all bulge to some degree. Today we decided to gather up all our sacs and get some answers. He has a truck scale at his work that we used but please note that the scale goes in increments of 20 lbs so the weights have a error margin of + or - 10 lbs approximately. We filled every sac to where we thought the seams might bust and made sure all the air was out.

In summary we found the Flyhigh sacs mostly held less that they were rated where as the Straightline sumo sacs all held more than the rated capacity.


So first up! The Flyhigh Bow Triangle..... rated for "1000+" and we got 940 lbs in it.
Attached Images
  
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-12-2014, 10:33 PM Reply   
Next up was the Flyhigh 750. We were only able to get 720 lbs in it.
Attached Images
   

Last edited by ryanw209; 01-12-2014 at 10:38 PM.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-12-2014, 10:35 PM Reply   
Then came the Straightline Sumo 750 Brostock edition. We got 800 lbs in it.
Attached Images
   
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-12-2014, 10:37 PM Reply   
Next was the Straightline Sumo 900. We got 1000 lbs in it.
Attached Images
  
Old    Rayprisz (priszkid)      Join Date: Aug 2007       01-12-2014, 10:40 PM Reply   
I think think the weights are off because the plywood got wet, therefore giving you a false reading. Just kidding. It's cool to see someone take the time to measure out and get actuals. Looks like it was a fun day, thanks for sharing your results!
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-12-2014, 10:42 PM Reply   
We also did a Flyhigh 400. We measured 420 lbs in this one.
Attached Images
  
Old    BELEZA (beleza)      Join Date: Mar 2010       01-12-2014, 10:43 PM Reply   
Hmmm pretty cool. I always figured the fly high 750 sacs held a little less than advertised. The 750 sacs have the same dimensions as the old straight line 550 sacs

Last edited by beleza; 01-12-2014 at 10:46 PM.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-12-2014, 10:44 PM Reply   
The last one we did was this Straightline Sumo 300. We got 320 in it.
Attached Images
  
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-12-2014, 10:48 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by priszkid View Post
I think think the weights are off because the plywood got wet, therefore giving you a false reading. Just kidding. It's cool to see someone take the time to measure out and get actuals. Looks like it was a fun day, thanks for sharing your results!

Hahaha thanks for knocking this comment out of the way right off the bat. We brought towels and tried to dry up any water we spilled after each bag switch because we knew some troll would argue that(I know your kidding). Just to double check we measured platform again at the end.....no change.
Old    Rayprisz (priszkid)      Join Date: Aug 2007       01-12-2014, 10:52 PM Reply   
Yep! Had to get it on the forum first to keep it from happening later. Seriously- thanks for all your efforts to show actual weights and benefitting this awesome sport!
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-12-2014, 11:00 PM Reply   
No worries. Trying to get some more good info on this site like it used to be before trolls took over.
Old    Chris (beastmaster)      Join Date: Nov 2005       01-12-2014, 11:09 PM Reply   
Next troll move. Is the scale certified?

That would be a yes. It is checked by weights and measures through the county.
Old    Alex Yermolenko (alexair)      Join Date: Oct 2008       01-13-2014, 1:26 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanw209 View Post
My buddy and I have wondered how much weight
Thank you for this nice info! I think you can make the same with the different wakeboards (not on this scale ) and my guess it will be better make measurements with bindings together and in wet condition and without. That have to show real weight of gear. And maybe we'll see how brands speculate on "the lightest board on market "
Old    Ben R (brichter14)      Join Date: Jul 2010       01-13-2014, 5:57 AM Reply   
You didnt take into account the clarity of the water. I am assuming you used tap water to fill these bags.. If you used my lake water they would all be much heavier because of all the fecal matter and body parts floating in it.
Old    Kevin Kimball (Kjkimball)      Join Date: Mar 2011       01-13-2014, 6:39 AM Reply   
if the fecal matter and body parts are floating, they have less mass than the water they displace. So, in your example, the readings would be lower for lake water than tap water....
Old    MCXSTAR (snork)      Join Date: Jun 2007       01-13-2014, 6:42 AM Reply   
if you put the sacks in a Mastercraft prior to the measurement they would have looked better, heavier and of course would been built better ?:^)
Old    Charlie Zulu (Pad1Tai)      Join Date: Jan 2013       01-13-2014, 7:37 AM Reply   
Great info.... Thanks for the effort..
Old    Cody (loudontn)      Join Date: Feb 2005       01-13-2014, 8:55 AM Reply   
Nice! Reminds me of when there was good info on this site, thanks for the effort!
Old    Adam R (wakecumberland)      Join Date: Oct 2007       01-13-2014, 10:05 AM Reply   
Great info! Thanks
Old    Ben Holloway (BenHolloway)      Join Date: Aug 2012       01-13-2014, 10:22 AM Reply   
Fill them with Beer, that should bring them into spec. If you want the most out of these bags sulfuric acid may be the best bet... it might be a little hard on the bag material though...
Old    Spencer (spencerwm)      Join Date: Feb 2009       01-13-2014, 10:52 AM Reply   
That is awesome. Great work. Goes to show that Straight Line Sumo sacs are helping riders get better results one lb. at a time. HAHA.
Old     (WheelerWake)      Join Date: Mar 2013       01-13-2014, 11:01 AM Reply   
Nothing like empirical testing... thanks for the info. Got to wonder Flyhigh ever did this.
Old    Tim (dezul)      Join Date: Jul 2012       01-13-2014, 11:26 AM Reply   
Could have fit more water in them if gravity wouldn't have been pushing the bottom against the scale.
Old    Timmy! (timmyb)      Join Date: Apr 2007       01-13-2014, 11:31 AM Reply   
Thanks for the research and posting the results, very informative!
Old    Scott (scottb7)      Join Date: Oct 2012       01-13-2014, 1:32 PM Reply   
Ok, it is off topic, but your fill them with beer made me think of this pic I saw recently.
Attached Images
 
Old    Johnny (johnny_defacto)      Join Date: Sep 2006       01-13-2014, 9:40 PM Reply   
Thanks for taking the time to do this and share. I figured that Sumo sacks had higher capacity than Fly highs because I did a side by side test in my Axis with a Fly High 750 vs a Sumo 600 in each rear locker and the wake perfectly symmetrical just as it was with FH 750's in each locker.
Old    D.F.T.R. Josh (downfortheride)      Join Date: Jun 2005       01-13-2014, 10:04 PM Reply   
Good work! So I use a 450 Sumo in the nose of my boat and don't crazy bulge it so seems I really do have 450 in it, LOL. Thanks for taking the time to take notes, pics then post it all up.
Old    Surf Addict (Desi) (phathom)      Join Date: Jun 2013       01-13-2014, 10:46 PM Reply   
I think the weight difference might be because of how the manufacturer does the weight estimates for a gallon of water and the capacity of the sack.
1 Gallon of water weighs exactly, 8.328676 lbs. How they round might be a factor for a few lbs, but the real difference would be how they estimate bag capacity in gallons.

It is more likely that they rate the bag weights in classes like TV sizes are rated, such as 32" class, 37" class, 42" class, 55" class, etc. Where in reality, the actual measurements might be off by a inch or so. You can have a 30" or a 34" that both fall in 32" class. The same goes for engine HP ratings. A car may be rated at 300HP as advertised, but might actually only be 295HP or actually be 305HP, but 300HP is easier to advertise, and of course there are minor differences between each unit produced of any type of product that has a certain rating.
But in this case would be 400lb class, 750lb class, 1100lb class, etc. Just to make it easier for people to compare weights. It is more of an estimate than an exact measurement.
From the measurements you listed, it looks like Flyhigh over rates their bags as assumed you will fill them to 100% capacity to the point of stretching the seams and for the most part and Sumo under rates their bags, or more correctly, rates their bags to the weight without filling them to bursting.

Just my view on the whole thing.
Old    DC (durty_curt)      Join Date: Apr 2008       01-13-2014, 11:20 PM Reply   
Best thread of this new year thus far! Thx!
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-13-2014, 11:54 PM Reply   
Phathom- I agree to an extent. It comes in handy though if your changing from one brand of sacs to another though. For example I used to run with a Flyhigh bow triangle in the nose of my boat. Being rated at 1000+ I always wondered what I was actually getting out of it. I've even heard that you can get up to 1200 in that triangle if you pack it full. Recently I wanted to go away from the triangle and substitue with 400lb of lead and a 400lb sac instead. I was concerned that wouldn't be enough to cover the weight the triangle was giving me because I thought I had over 1000 in it when in reality I probably had 900 or less.

I know for myself the weight starts to get tricky when you really load a boat down so we just wanted to be able to give real, actual measurments so people have a better idea of what they might be getting out of their sacs.

Thanks for all the nice comments everyone. Also thanks to Beastmaster for making this happen! They were his sacs and his work scale. I just did the write up...

Last edited by ryanw209; 01-13-2014 at 11:56 PM.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-14-2014, 12:04 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexair View Post
Thank you for this nice info! I think you can make the same with the different wakeboards (not on this scale ) and my guess it will be better make measurements with bindings together and in wet condition and without. That have to show real weight of gear. And maybe we'll see how brands speculate on "the lightest board on market "
I have been wanting to do this for a few years now... I just don't have access to enough boards to do any kind of accurate test.
Old    Tim (dezul)      Join Date: Jul 2012       01-14-2014, 3:35 AM Reply   
The math is pretty simple to see. I am sure most have done the calculations to see that a 750lb Fly High Fat Sac is only calculated to hold 722lbs.

Dimensions of the bag converted to cubic feet: (50"/12)x(20"/12)x(20"/12) = 11.574 cubic feet

There is 7.48 gallons of water in a cubic foot: (7.48 gal./cubic foot) x 11.574 cubic feet = 86.574 gallons

One gallon of water weighs 8.34lbs: (8.34lbs/gallon) x 86.574 gallons = 722 lbs.

I know there are other variables to consider such as overfilling the bag but I don't see the how they could squeeze an additional 28lbs. out of it.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-14-2014, 8:33 AM Reply   
I've done the math and that's the problem. It never adds up to what they rate the bags at. The fly high 750 measurements come out to 722 and that's about what we got out of it fully bulged. The sumo 750 has the same exact measurements and we got 800 in it so to answer your question, not only can you get the extra 28lbs to make it to 750 but apparently you can get an additional 50 to reach 800 if you have a sumo.

And the math on the fly high 400 comes out to 386ish. Wen you can actually get 420.

Have you checked out the fly high mastercraft xstar walk thru sac? According to the measurements they rate it at 450 but when you do the math it comes out to 365.... That's 85lbs off.

This is what stirred this test in the first place. We wanted to see what the real numbers were since the math is clearly not accurate. And I'm not a fly high hater. All the sacs that I own are fly high


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Last edited by ryanw209; 01-14-2014 at 8:37 AM.
Old    Tim (dezul)      Join Date: Jul 2012       01-14-2014, 8:57 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanw209 View Post
I've done the math and that's the problem. It never adds up to what they rate the bags at. The fly high 750 measurements come out to 722 and that's about what we got out of it fully bulged. The sumo 750 has the same exact measurements and we got 800 in it so to answer your question, not only can you get the extra 28lbs to make it to 750 but apparently you can get an additional 50 to reach 800 if you have a sumo.

And the math on the fly high 400 comes out to 386ish. Wen you can actually get 420.

Have you checked out the fly high mastercraft xstar walk thru sac? According to the measurements they rate it at 450 but when you do the math it comes out to 365.... That's 85lbs off.

This is what stirred this test in the first place. We wanted to see what the real numbers were since the math is clearly not accurate. And I'm not a fly high hater. All the sacs that I own are fly high


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you take any physical measurements of both the fly high and the sumo? I know when I filled up my fly high and sumo 400lb bags this summer, the sumo appeared to be larger even though they had the same rated capacity. Also I had to add a person to the side the fly high was on due to a weight inbalance.
Old    Ryan K (FastR3DN3K)      Join Date: Jun 2013       01-14-2014, 9:37 AM Reply   
I think where you run into issues with the math is how they are actually measured. The dimensions the manufacturer provide will generally be of the seam length for width, height, and length. But that doesn't take into account material stretch and flexibility due to the tension applied to the material from the weight of water. I guarantee that if you were to fill them up and measure them, they would be considerably larger than the advertised specs. Also I feel obligated to chime in on the fluid weight/density topic since this is what I do everyday for a living. The main thing to take into consideration is that the 8.33 lb/gal water weight is based on "100% pure water" weight. Depending on your lake, that weight can vary greatly. Generally speaking, the clearer the water, the more accurate that weight is. The dirtier/murkier your water is, it will generally be heavier/more dense. Without a set of pressurized fluid weight scales available there's really no way to know what your lake water weighs exactly. But I do know for a fact that my lake's water is approximately 8.65 lb/gal. On average, sea water is going to be around the 9.3-9.5 lb/gal area, but that can also vary greatly depending on how close you are to brackish water areas too. So with this info on hand, if I were to use Tim's example above, the FlyHigh 750 sac would actually hold 748 lbs using my lakes water to fill it, and then Sumo would weigh even more. I'm wonder if the manufacturers take this into account too, meaning they can use a little less material (saving money in the big picture) to achieve the desired/advertised weights.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-14-2014, 10:23 AM Reply   
Tim- I took a measurements on a few of them but really it is pretty hard to get any kind of accurate measurement on a bulged out sac like that. I mean where exactly would you measure? Seam to seam? Furthest part of the bulge to bulge?We did measure the FH 400 and 750 dry and from what we roughly measured the 750 is more like 49x16x16 seam to seam instead of 50x20x20 and the 400 was about 42x14x14 instead of 42x16x16. Again these were just quick rough measurements and when filled I'm sure they would stretch to the advertised dimensions and then some.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-14-2014, 10:25 AM Reply   
FastR3- that's interesting about the different weights of water. I was unaware that there was such a swing. These were filled with water out of a garden hose.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-14-2014, 10:31 AM Reply   
Looks like I took measurements on the sumo 750


The length was measured seam to seam


And seam to seam on the width as well



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Old    Tim (dezul)      Join Date: Jul 2012       01-14-2014, 10:32 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanw209 View Post
Tim- I took a measurements on a few of them but really it is pretty hard to get any kind of accurate measurement on a bulged out sac like that. I mean where exactly would you measure? Seam to seam? Furthest part of the bulge to bulge?We did measure the FH 400 and 750 dry and from what we roughly measured the 750 is more like 49x16x16 seam to seam instead of 50x20x20 and the 400 was about 42x14x14 instead of 42x16x16. Again these were just quick rough measurements and when filled I'm sure they would stretch to the advertised dimensions and then some.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Do you think the sumo material actually expands as opposed to just changing the overall shape without changing the capacity? The fly high material does not expand or contract, the sumo is made of a different material and it is difficult to tell. I don't think it expands any. I feel like it just changes shape which does not increase the overall capcity. That is my opinion though.

That is interesting about the fly high sac measurements.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-14-2014, 10:33 AM Reply   



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-14-2014, 11:03 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by dezul View Post
Do you think the sumo material actually expands as opposed to just changing the overall shape without changing the capacity? The fly high material does not expand or contract, the sumo is made of a different material and it is difficult to tell. I don't think it expands any. I feel like it just changes shape which does not increase the overall capcity. That is my opinion though.

That is interesting about the fly high sac measurements.
I can't really say. I've been told that they are made out of the same material except reversed. So the outside of the FH sacs are the inside of the Sumo sacs.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-14-2014, 11:09 AM Reply   
We are going to try and get some ronix sacs to test out too...
Old     (RideGull)      Join Date: Apr 2012       01-14-2014, 11:16 AM Reply   
Good info! Thanks for doing this, I've always wondered actual weight
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-14-2014, 12:39 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by spencerwm View Post
That is awesome. Great work. Goes to show that Straight Line Sumo sacs are helping riders get better results one lb. at a time. HAHA.
Hey Spencer! How about you send us a Ronix 400 and 800 and a pump so we can run those also???
Old    Spencer (spencerwm)      Join Date: Feb 2009       01-14-2014, 4:47 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanw209 View Post
Hey Spencer! How about you send us a Ronix 400 and 800 and a pump so we can run those also???
I'll see what I can do.
Old    Spencer (spencerwm)      Join Date: Feb 2009       01-14-2014, 6:11 PM Reply   
Let's do it. Send your address to spencer@wakemakers.com. I love unbiased testing by riders for riders. Have a great night.
Old    Tim (dezul)      Join Date: Jul 2012       01-14-2014, 6:19 PM Reply   
Do it. I cant wait to see the results.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-14-2014, 9:21 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by spencerwm View Post
Let's do it. Send your address to spencer@wakemakers.com. I love unbiased testing by riders for riders. Have a great night.

YES that's AWESOME! Email sent. Thanks for helping this project out!!
Old    Travis (fman)      Join Date: Nov 2008       01-15-2014, 8:30 AM Reply   
I am running Sumo 600's, did you guys weigh these? From the study on the 900's, the 600's could weigh even more????
Old    Steve Amestoy (stevev210)      Join Date: Feb 2005       01-15-2014, 8:53 AM Reply   
Can the sumos be used with flyhigh quick connect fittings?

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk
Old    Travis (fman)      Join Date: Nov 2008       01-15-2014, 9:09 AM Reply   
The Sumo inlet size is 1", compared to 3/4" on the Fly Hi, I do not think the quick disconnect fittings are interchangeable because of the inlet size difference.
Old    Jason Smith (snowslider76)      Join Date: Mar 2002       01-15-2014, 9:46 AM Reply   
Ryan just for the sake of variables you should weigh one gallon of the water you are using comparing it to 8.33 lbs per gallon of pure water.. I'm sure the scale is accurate if the rating is checked but the will account for that variable too.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-15-2014, 10:45 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowslider76 View Post
Ryan just for the sake of variables you should weigh one gallon of the water you are using comparing it to 8.33 lbs per gallon of pure water.. I'm sure the scale is accurate if the rating is checked but the will account for that variable too.

Good idea. I can't think of a way off hand that I can get that exact of a measurement but I'll see what I can come up with
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-15-2014, 10:57 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fman View Post
I am running Sumo 600's, did you guys weigh these? From the study on the 900's, the 600's could weigh even more????

We didn't have any SL 600's... I'll see if I get one to test
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-15-2014, 11:03 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevev210 View Post
Can the sumos be used with flyhigh quick connect fittings?
Like Travis said the threaded holes in the FH are 3/4" where the SL are 1" so no you can't just screw the flyhigh fittings into a SL bag however they do make adapters to use Tsunami pumps and FH fittings on SL bags and vise versa.

www.wakemakers.com can get you setup with adapters if you need them.
Attached Images
 
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-16-2014, 11:05 AM Reply   
Just wanted to update everyone. We have the Ronix 400 and 800 on the way thanks to Wakemakers and also the Straighline 450, 600 and 650 bow triangle thanks to Straightline/LF.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Old    Tim (dezul)      Join Date: Jul 2012       01-16-2014, 11:24 AM Reply   
Cool. Pending on when they arrive, how long till we see an update on this?
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-16-2014, 1:45 PM Reply   
Possibly this weekend if the SL sacs come by then. The Ronix should be delivered Friday.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Old    Doug Lindsay (sxjunky)      Join Date: Apr 2006       01-16-2014, 4:00 PM Reply   
I'm loving this thread!!! Finally some good info. Ryan I really appreciate all the work your putting in on this. Spencer, Wakemakers , Straightline/LF way to man up with supplying additional gear to test. Ryan just a thought since you have all these bags at your disposal would it be to much to ask for a little write up on say : bag quality of each manufacturer?, who has the thickest vs the thinest material? Any pros or cons about each of the bags?
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-16-2014, 5:33 PM Reply   
Yes I plan on doing that at then end.

*I need to throw this disclaimer out now before this thread goes any further and someone throws a fit. I am a regional rider for LF and straightline is a sister company of LF. Our analysis is completely unbiased which is why I am including detailed pictures of all the sacs full. I even have pictures of the readout on the scale if people would like to see those as well. And as I said before I own 5 sacs and they are all Flyhigh.

If anyone would like certain pictures or info on any of the sacs let me know and I'll do my best to facilitate that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Old    Johnny (johnny_defacto)      Join Date: Sep 2006       01-16-2014, 10:51 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fman View Post
I am running Sumo 600's, did you guys weigh these? From the study on the 900's, the 600's could weigh even more????
I am going to make my prediction now before the test. I predict the Sumo 600's are around 640-650 guessing from personal experience.
Old    Spencer (spencerwm)      Join Date: Feb 2009       01-17-2014, 10:08 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny_defacto View Post
I am going to make my prediction now before the test. I predict the Sumo 600's are around 640-650 guessing from personal experience.
You are going to be correct on the SL bags. I am guessing we will see similar results with the Ronix bags.

As I have seen touched and used all of these bags a lot I can tell you why their is a difference in weight.

History Lesson:
The W707 Fly High Fat Sac measures 48"x16"x16" seam to seam when empty. When completely full they are a perfect 50" x 20" x 20". This has not always been the case. I had a Fat Sac from 2004 and it was slightly larger when compared to a bag from 2011. I am not sure when Fly High made the change but at some point the sacs were redesigned to be exactly the posted dimensions when full. When the Pro X Series Fat Sac was introduced it indeed weighed 750+ lbs. The physical size has decreased but the "750" name stuck.

Straight Line bags have two things going for them. They are slightly larger seam to seam and the material does allow for increased expansion.

At the end of the day this thread is great because it will give everyone a more accurate understanding of the weight in their boat.
Old    Spencer (spencerwm)      Join Date: Feb 2009       01-17-2014, 12:54 PM Reply   
My grammar above was making me feel uneasy.

You are going to be correct on the SL bags. I am guessing we will see similar results with the Ronix bags.

As I have seen, touched, and used all of these bags I can tell you why there is a difference in weight.

History Lesson:
The W707 Fly High Fat Sac measures 48"x16"x16" seam to seam when empty. When completely full they are a perfect 50" x 20" x 20". This has not always been the case. I had a Fat Sac from 2004 and it was slightly larger when compared to a bag from 2011. I am not sure when Fly High made the change but at some point the sacs were redesigned to be exactly the posted dimensions when full. When the Pro X Series Fat Sac was introduced it indeed weighed 750+ lbs. The physical size has decreased but the "750" name stuck.

Straight Line bags have two things going for them. They are slightly larger seam to seam and the material does allow for increased expansion.

At the end of the day this thread is great because it will give everyone a more accurate understanding of the weight in their boat.
Old     (WheelerWake)      Join Date: Mar 2013       01-17-2014, 6:26 PM Reply   
Sea water weighs about 2.5% more than fresh water. Even if flyhigh used this, they still come up short.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-17-2014, 9:16 PM Reply   
Spencer what would be the correct way to measure a sac? Are they measured from the furthest part of the bulge to the furthest part of the bulge or seam to seam when filled? Or seam to seam dry? I would imagine seam to seam either filled or dry would be the most accurate.

Ps. I received the Ronix sacs today. SL sacs should be delivered Tuesday.
Old    Spencer (spencerwm)      Join Date: Feb 2009       01-20-2014, 9:38 AM Reply   
I usually measure them two ways. I will measure seam to seam when dry to get a good idea of the filled weight. When I fill them I am not trying to determine the weight by getting the dimensions but rather trying to figure out where they will physically fit at their full capacity. In this case I go bulge to bulge. The reason being is that we need to know if the bag is going to rest on something that it should not. Most of the time the bag is too large for the compartment so we will drain it into 5 gallon buckets to determine the actual weight per the boat it is in.
Old    Ryan K (FastR3DN3K)      Join Date: Jun 2013       01-22-2014, 2:12 PM Reply   
Ryan I'll see if I can snag an extra set of pressurized fluid scales from work while no one is looking when I head back next week. They will give you a 100% accurate weight of your water that you're testing with. They can be kinda tricky to use correctly, but if I can find a NIB set, it'll come with the instructions too. This way you can head out to your local lake and test the weight and see how much of a difference there is between it and the city water your testing with, then calculate the difference to see what weight the sacs will hold while actually on the water.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-25-2014, 2:48 PM Reply   
We finished the weighing the additional sacs today. I will post up the results and photos by tomorrow evening


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-26-2014, 8:07 PM Reply   
Ok. Sorry for the wait! Lets get back to it!

**Some of the port placements on the rest of the SL sacs may not be exactly accurate as they may have been samples**

Lets start with the Straight Line floor 800. We measured 840 lbs in it. the sac didn't bulge much due to the shape but when full it measured 57"L x 47"W x 10"H
Attached Images
   

Last edited by ryanw209; 01-26-2014 at 8:10 PM.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-26-2014, 8:15 PM Reply   
Next up came the SL bow triangle. This bag is rated for 650 and was the biggest surprise of all the tests for us. We actually got 820 lbs in it!!! As you can see from the pictures it bulged quite a bit due to the shape but we filled it just as firm as all the rest. Measurements full from bulge to bulge were 49" from the nose to the middle of the bottom and 44.5" from bottom corner to bottom corner and 20.25" high at the center.
Attached Images
  
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-26-2014, 8:18 PM Reply   
We also did the new SL Brostock 600. We fit 660 lbs in this one. Measurements full from bulge to bulge: 47" long x 25" wide x 19.5" high

**The white cap you see in the rest of the pictures is a air purge plug that I made to make sure we got all the air out.**
Attached Images
   
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-26-2014, 8:24 PM Reply   
Next was the SL 450. We measured 480 in it. Measurements full from bulge to bulge: 51" long x 20" wide x 17" high at highest point.
Attached Images
  
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-26-2014, 8:42 PM Reply   
Next up was the Ronix Plug N Play 800. We only got 760 in this one. Measurements full from bulge to bulge: 55" long x 25" wide x 20" at highest point. These bags are the trapezoid shape so if your interested the measurements from seam to seam on the top of the end are 16" and the bottom is about 19.5". FYI Ronix advertises 50x26x22 for this bag.

**I had to get an adapter to be able to use my Tsunami pump and quick connects since these bags just come with plugs**
Attached Images
   

Last edited by ryanw209; 01-26-2014 at 8:48 PM.
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-26-2014, 8:47 PM Reply   
The Ronix Plug N Play 400 came next. We got 400 in this one. Measurements full from bulge to bulge: 45.5" long x 20" wide x 16.5" highest point. The trapezoid shape seam to seam measures 13" across the top and 15" across the bottom. Ronix advertised measurements for this bag are 42" x 18" x 14"
Attached Images
  
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-26-2014, 8:50 PM Reply   
Last up came the FH 650. We got 620 in it. Measurements full from bulge to bulge: 61" long x 25.5 wide x 17" highest point.
Attached Images
  
Old    Ryan (ryanw209)      Join Date: Jan 2010       01-26-2014, 10:04 PM Reply   
I was asked to do a little write up of MY opinions on each of the brands so here that goes. If anyone wants to disagree with any of my opinions that's fine with me as they are just my observations.

FlyHigh:
I haven't been in the wakeboarding for a long time but it seems like FlyHigh has been around for quite some time. They are reliable and made from solid construction. I have never had a problem with any of my FH bags and they have served me well. Things I really like about FH bags are the solid construction, variety of sizes and shapes for special applications, color options and the air vent plugs they make.

Now for my complaints.... almost all of them don't meet the advertised weight. Not necessarily a big deal but for example when they advertise that the FH 750 weighs 950 lbs "expanded" when in fact, expanded you can only get 720 in it, that doesn't sit well with me. Also I've always thought their quick connect fittings could use a little re-engineering so they actually lock into place instead of just twisting. I can't tell you how many times I've had the pump pop off during filling or have my bag squirt water everywhere when the cap comes undone after someone leaned on it and we are all scrambling to get it back on. Also just the fact that I almost always get splashed when I'm trying to quickly pull the pump off and put the cap on before too much water gets out. The other big gripe I have about the FH bags is that they haven't updated the ports to 1" like everyone else.


Ronix:
The bags we tested were the "Plug N Play" versions. These are made strictly to be plumbed into a boats ballast system. They only come with 4 1" plugs and no way to manually fill them. I had to find a 3/4" to 1" increaser to be able to use my Tsunami pump and FH quick connects to fill them. I do like the trapezoid shape. I think it's a good idea but in reality I believe these bags will still roll if they have the space to. Also these bags feel like the thinnest between the 3 manufactures. I got the feeling that if you folded these up the same way every time and had a sharp bend in the same spot they could weaken overtime and get small leaks. That being said I feel these bags are just as capable as the rest and I would have no problem putting them in my boat.


Straight Line:
Wow. I wasn't familiar with these sacs before because no one I knew had them but I was quite impressed with them. They are easily as thick and well built as the FH sacs. Things I like about them: they meet or mostly exceed the advertised measurements, 1" ports, variety of shapes and sizes and the quick connect with check valve. I want to take a second to talk about the quick connect check valve. If your filling sacs manually with a pump this feature is worth its weight in gold. Your carpets will still be dry after filling and draining because the check valve keeps the water in the sac and off your floor! I was concerned that the check valve might slow down fill times but I can guarantee you it wont. As far as pump speed goes, the black SL Super sumo was the fastest followed by the Tsunami and then the white sumo pump. The black sump pump also has an inline power switch so you can turn the pump on and off without having to unplug it each time. The things I didn't like about the SL sacs is they get pretty round when stuffed so they are susceptible to rolling. Also the Ronix and SL plugs are not very tall so it is hard to loosen them with your fingers but they have a slot to use a quarter to get them started. Also I wish SL made some kind of vent plug to purge the bags while they are being filled.



**Again I would like to thank Spencer at www.wakemakers.com for providing us with the Ronix sacs and Straight Line for providing us with additional sacs to test.



The end! Now go RIDE!!!!!

Last edited by ryanw209; 01-26-2014 at 10:08 PM.
Old     (JetRanger)      Join Date: Feb 2013       01-27-2014, 12:02 AM Reply   
These sacs would all really go well in MIKEnNC's new MXZ22, that's brand new MXZ22.
Old    Cody (loudontn)      Join Date: Feb 2005       01-27-2014, 10:20 AM Reply   
Nice write up! Really impressed with that SL sumo bow triangle.
Old     (Ttime41)      Join Date: Nov 2011       01-27-2014, 12:39 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetRanger View Post
These sacs would all really go well in MIKEnNC's new MXZ22, that's brand new MXZ22.
Hahahaha I'm surprised he didn't figure out a way to bring up his mxz in this thread yet
Old    Rance Taylor (DatTexasBoy)      Join Date: Aug 2012       01-27-2014, 6:59 PM Reply   
Nice write up guys.

Jet- your going to give Mike a heart attack. He's just SUPER EXCITED!!!!!

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 9:00 AM.

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