PDA

View Full Version : X-Star riding low at PWT


Trig2275
08-31-2011, 12:31 PM
Running some serious weight!

agarabaghi
08-31-2011, 12:36 PM
That seems about right.

Ski-me
08-31-2011, 01:06 PM
I don't know if I'm dreaming or not but when it was here in Colo Springs, Alan said it had 6,000 lbs of ballast in it. Does that sound right or did I not hear him correctly??

Our XStar look just as low as yours...... good thing they have the front cover on!

Trig2275
08-31-2011, 01:08 PM
I don't know if I'm dreaming or not but when it was here in Colo Springs, Alan said it had 6,000 lbs of ballast in it. Does that sound right or did I not hear him correctly??

Our XStar look just as low as yours...... good thing they have the front cover on!

6000lbs sounds right.

Thrall
08-31-2011, 01:09 PM
Yup, the bow cover is a necessity. At the Monroe PWT, it was taking water over the bow all day long.

Ski-me
08-31-2011, 01:28 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v69/nielson2020/Mastercraft%202011%20Wake%20Tour/2011-06-10_03406_DSC_1011.jpg

In Colo Springs

aaron.
08-31-2011, 01:34 PM
mother of god.

I'm in love. these boats are sooooooooooooo sexy.

edit: that first photo with the green flake is amazing. i want more pictures (HI REZ PLZ)

jwardenjr
08-31-2011, 01:50 PM
wow thats is very low in the water !

Ski-me
08-31-2011, 01:52 PM
He might of even said, stock ballast PLUS 6,000 lbs!?! Don't recall though.

(Sorry, I know nothing about ballast.....I'm a ski guy!)

jafo9
08-31-2011, 02:07 PM
so is the middle of the front cover supported somehow? i would think the weight of the water would shred the cover after multiple dunkings.

scott023
08-31-2011, 02:07 PM
Nasty looking boats. Love the way they sit in the water.

76S&S
08-31-2011, 02:18 PM
so is the middle of the front cover supported somehow? i would think the weight of the water would shred the cover after multiple dunkings.

it is supported by a very large fatsac.............:D:D

DemolitionMan
08-31-2011, 02:23 PM
mother of god.

I'm in love. these boats are sooooooooooooo sexy.

edit: that first photo with the green flake is amazing. i want more pictures (HI REZ PLZ)

Only other pic I found.

agarabaghi
08-31-2011, 02:26 PM
I mean, sure they look great sitting in the water, but come on. That boat is barely drivable by anyone but an experience wakeboard driver.

I hope the new hull sits a little better in the water while fully weighted. It just so strange that the boat becomes VERY unsafe with so much weight in it.

bobx1
08-31-2011, 02:32 PM
so is the middle of the front cover supported somehow? i would think the weight of the water would shred the cover after multiple dunkings.

There are 12 people hiding under there......

ricford
08-31-2011, 02:35 PM
I mean, sure they look great sitting in the water, but come on. That boat is barely drivable by anyone but an experience wakeboard driver.

I hope the new hull sits a little better in the water while fully weighted. It just so strange that the boat becomes VERY unsafe with so much weight in it.

According to Mastercraft the boat weighs 4250 lbs and the weight capacity is 1771 pounds. If they are adding 6000lbs plus the driver and spotter then yah, it's only going to be driveable by an experienced driver, and yah it's very unsafe.

MuskokaJ
08-31-2011, 02:41 PM
I've always been surprised at how low the bow sits on the X-Star, even without ballast. I get the idea that it looks cool/stealth/mean, but in my opinion it's a design flaw. If a boat needs that much additional ballast to acheive the wake you want, then the boat needs to have sufficient bow clearance and freeboard to handle it. Pretty silly to be running an X-Star like that, in my opinion.

scott023
08-31-2011, 02:41 PM
According to Mastercraft the boat weighs 4250 lbs and the weight capacity is 1771 pounds. If they are adding 6000lbs plus the driver and spotter then yah, it's only going to be driveable by an experienced driver, and yah it's very unsafe.

Exactly what I was thinking. Seems more than unsafe... seems dumb.

kevkan
08-31-2011, 02:52 PM
When they were in Wichita a couple of years ago the boat was running at low throttle with the bow below the water line. I've never seen a boat take on water like that. I think they drained some ballast after pulling the first rider, as there was a big delay and he rode again.

I don't want a boat with that low of a bow. But I think it would help with visibility. When my X-1 is loaded I usually have to sit on the riser to see over the bow.

tdelong
08-31-2011, 03:07 PM
I've been told that the xstar sits that low in the bow because the hull was designed to be the best wakeboarding hull in the business and designed specifically for a great wakeboarding wake. So basically they must have gotten better results with the belly shaped to ride low.

aaron.
08-31-2011, 03:11 PM
i think it's awesome. i want one.

CottagerGreg
08-31-2011, 03:25 PM
The bow curves down so you have a great sight line driving the boat. Any boat that doesn't have this you would have to sit on the risers to see out.

I wouldn't call it unsafe unless you are going very slow into rollers. Once you ease into the throttle... aka 6mph+ the nose rises up and you get no water over the bow.

I dont dunk the bow even with 4-5 people sitting up there. little throttle before the waves and she goes right over with everyone dry.

scott023
08-31-2011, 03:27 PM
The bow curves down so you have a great sight line driving the boat. Any boat that doesn't have this you would have to sit on the risers to see out.

I wouldn't call it unsafe unless you are going very slow into rollers. Once you ease into the throttle... aka 6mph+ the nose rises up and you get no water over the bow.

I dont dunk the bow even with 4-5 people sitting up there. little throttle before the waves and she goes right over with everyone dry.

I was only refering to the 6K in ballast weight. Not the regularly weighted X-Star.

Ski-me
08-31-2011, 03:49 PM
Does this thread really go in the "ballast" category? Seems like a general post.

Man these thread are becoming harder and harder to find because they are being moved around so much..... :confused:

GT500 MC
08-31-2011, 03:53 PM
Does this thread really go in the "ballast" category? Seems like a general post.

Man these thread are becoming harder and harder to find because they are being moved around so much..... :confused:

AGREED...or when they move a thread, why can't they say to what section it is being moved to? Or has this already been asked in another thread and I just can't find it?

Mods?

Ski-me
08-31-2011, 03:58 PM
The latest comment is use the "new post" button. Well, sometimes that works, other times, not so much. Just depends on how long before a refresh.

I'd say leave them for a week or so and once they die down, start archiving or moving them. Just hard to follow around.....

Miss Rita
08-31-2011, 04:01 PM
According to Mastercraft the boat weighs 4250 lbs and the weight capacity is 1771 pounds.

Does no one else see the obvious? 4250 + 1771 = 6021 lbs

6000 lbs of ballast would sink that boat in a heartbeat.

MIskier
08-31-2011, 04:30 PM
Does no one else see the obvious? 4250 + 1771 = 6021 lbs

6000 lbs of ballast would sink that boat in a heartbeat.

Seriously, you really think that? The CG plate number is based on a volumetric calc. while the capacity for a boat to float is a function of its hull geometry. They really do run close to 6K in the PWT boats, but its being done by someone with lots of experience and in a controlled setting.

josepcedwards
08-31-2011, 10:19 PM
Running some serious weight!

I talked with Travis this morning and he said the "It's a little known fact, but it has an Ilmor 7.4 liter in it. It was the first one made. Well over 500 horses. It's insane!" The boat is a 2011 But the engine and hydraulic tower are 2012.

curtish
09-01-2011, 01:47 AM
Man, that black one is sweet.

damaged442
09-01-2011, 09:03 AM
All...my...friends...own a low rider!

CantRepeat
09-01-2011, 10:01 AM
All...my...friends...own a low rider!

own a low rider (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NkgiFHEm0Y)

CottagerGreg
09-01-2011, 11:54 AM
I talked with Travis this morning and he said the "It's a little known fact, but it has an Ilmor 7.4 liter in it. It was the first one made. Well over 500 horses. It's insane!" The boat is a 2011 But the engine and hydraulic tower are 2012.

I think I am going to have to go down to the boarding school just to hear the sweet symphony of that engine!

krutzmart
09-01-2011, 01:16 PM
With the bow cover on the newer X Stars, wouldn't the water pool up in the middle of the bow cover or does it flow back of the front ?
Looking to get one but need to know the funtionality of it ?
Anyone have some advise or comments on their X star bow covers ? :) or :(

Jerseydave
09-02-2011, 09:46 AM
With the bow cover on the newer X Stars, wouldn't the water pool up in the middle of the bow cover or does it flow back of the front ?
Looking to get one but need to know the funtionality of it ?
Anyone have some advise or comments on their X star bow covers ? :) or :(

I think your best bet would be to put an inflated tube under the bow cover to keep it high enough to shed the water off to the sides.

BlackMV8
09-20-2011, 10:17 AM
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n193/1redtalon/1000000107.jpg
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n193/1redtalon/293341_271859999499998_250615191624479_1119394_193 1903377_n.jpg