PDA

View Full Version : New tower design


vensol
03-14-2013, 05:18 PM
I have a patent for this new tower design. I would love to see one on my mastercraft. If you have any comments on what you like or dont like, I would love to hear them! Thanks!

jeff shelton
03-14-2013, 05:33 PM
My first thought was this but honestly I have to say that I don't like it at all.

vensol
03-14-2013, 05:35 PM
Hah. Awesome. I would really love some feeddback so I can refine the concept. Thanks Jeff.

thatsmrmastercraft
03-14-2013, 05:41 PM
As with all new concepts, something we are not familiar with looks strange. In this case...very strange to me. Nice to have everything out of the way, but how well will this work functionally? The reason for the forward tow point is for mechanical advantage and handling for the boat. Certainly while wakeboarding, handling isn't as important as slalom skiing. Very interesting.

vensol
03-14-2013, 05:44 PM
Thanks. The ski post remains but this gives more air, and the zip line allows for wider range producing more speed into the wake and farther jumps as the line moves with you across the wake.nt Mainly- I am a late in life wakeboarder who got sick of moving everyone out of the way and dragging my board across the deck before and after sets. Solves for allot though it does take alittle getting used to.

jk13
03-14-2013, 05:47 PM
"Zip line feature?" So the tow rope slides back and forth a few feet across the top bar?
Might want to get some riders to test that one out first.

I remember the old outboard tow system where there was a cable that attached to the transom tie-downs and a the tow point was on a pulley that would slide side-to-side behind the motor. I never liked it much on a slalom ski.

Other than personal opinions on looks, the sliding tow point might be the biggest issue.

jeff shelton
03-14-2013, 05:51 PM
As with all new concepts, something we are not familiar with looks strange. In this case...very strange to me. Nice to have everything out of the way, but how well will this work functionally? The reason for the forward tow point is for mechanical advantage and handling for the boat. Certainly while wakeboarding, handling isn't as important as slalom skiing. Very interesting.

I would also be very curious of the effect it would have on the wake, along with head clearance stepping up from swim platform and down to swim platform, I would also think this may affect bow rise.
The concept is definately different.

Ben
03-14-2013, 06:21 PM
This would rule out any option of a forward tow point.
Not sure if that applies to wakeboats anymore or not, I am a skier.
V drives used to have a pylon stub at the front of the rear subpad to ski from.
This may just limit your market a bit.

Dylan
03-14-2013, 06:21 PM
"Zip line feature?" So the tow rope slides back and forth a few feet across the top bar?
Might want to get some riders to test that one out first.

I remember the old outboard tow system where there was a cable that attached to the transom tie-downs and a the tow point was on a pulley that would slide side-to-side behind the motor. I never liked it much on a slalom ski.

Other than personal opinions on looks, the sliding tow point might be the biggest issue.

Agree 100%.

Also moving the tower that far back would render any ski pylon useless.

ahhudgins
03-14-2013, 06:57 PM
Agree 100%.

Also moving the tower that far back would render any ski pylon useless.

And as thatsmrmastercraft stated, I doubt the boat will track the same with the tow point now at the transom.

thatsmrmastercraft
03-14-2013, 07:04 PM
"Zip line feature?" So the tow rope slides back and forth a few feet across the top bar?
Might want to get some riders to test that one out first.

I remember the old outboard tow system where there was a cable that attached to the transom tie-downs and a the tow point was on a pulley that would slide side-to-side behind the motor. I never liked it much on a slalom ski.

Other than personal opinions on looks, the sliding tow point might be the biggest issue.

Making wakeboarders use a bridle rope attachment will be a sure way to get more people involved in slalom skiing.:rolleyes::D:D

Thrall
03-14-2013, 07:37 PM
Aside from looks, not astehtically pleasing to me, having the tow point at the back of the bost would add more "weight" when the line is loaded vs a center tow point, but it would also make the wake change more significantly as the load on the line changed. Not a good thing to have an inconsistent wake, imo.

88 PS190
03-15-2013, 12:23 AM
My initial thoughts.

1: Lever arm from hull to tow point is going to increase for same tow height - regular towers benefit from the fact that the boat, on plane is elevated above water, stern becomes low point. Lever arm increases boarder's pull on boat from higher point. Therefore, the taller tower to get to the same height is going to create more tilt on boat, compared to a shorter tower, forward on the planed hull.

2. Visibility of rider is going to suffer tremendously, with two large blind spots created by tower.

3. While it can be folded, it will HAVE to be folded to ski or use a pylon. Therefore any storage potential, or ability to mount speakers/racks will be negated. Therefore it will have to be "bare"

4. I find the cosmetic poor. It is a heavy looking item in the rear of the boat, the rear is where boats naturally taper off. Consider, the boats have deeper hulls, windows, deeper freeboard etc. midship. By the stern we have cosmetics that naturally taper down to nothing. This design adds components there, making it look back heavy - and in reality this looks like some sort of net laying trawler fishing boat.

5. A mobile mounting point seems both unpredictable and probably dangerous. For one you consider boat stability, for another you consider if it binds and releases, or pops/moves on the cable irregularly. Mechanically you want that to be a fixed point around which the rope pivots fluidly.


6. Finally - I feel like it concetrates too many activities around the platform, consider, you've just dropped a rider, and you turn around to pick them up. They are attempting to board the rear of the boat, while the next rider is trying to also be in the same space to deal with thier board, or manage the line. You have several folks all trying to be around the rear of the boat at the same time. Add in other stern activities, such as hot water showers, or taking a dip, and you concentrate everyone in the stern. In reality folks getting geared up are better served being in the center of the boat, letting the rider climb aboard, and someone tend to the lines easily and with plenty of space.

Justifying increased airtime based on the "zipline" and trying to show reduced injury/boat damage loading boards to racks in the rear, also trying to support that the wakes are bigger, the ride better etc... I just don't think you'll get there. Particularly with the other negatives it evokes.

You're also going to compromise rigidity since you'll have people trying to move through that space, over the stern, meaning you won't have the area to triangulate the tower that you would if you're over a windshield, where folks already don't walk, and can use the tower for assistance if they did need to.

tr6coug
03-15-2013, 01:46 AM
If I understand this correctly, you have a cable strung between the two uprights. Without a rigid beam between the two uprights, they'll vibrate like a tuning fork.

I commend you on your idea and asking for input though. I wonder what percentage of people liked the first wakeboard towers designs when they came out.

Have you tested this design? Any photos?

bcd
03-15-2013, 07:42 AM
A couple of other points not mentioned yet:
1. You're going to need a lot more structure on the top pole to tie the two side beams together.

2. An important concept in wakeboarding is loading up the rope tension. If you allow the rope to slide sideways with you as you are cutting in, trying to load the rope, the rope moving with you is preventing some of the loading.

Also, it's probably only a matter of time before someone adds this one to the ugliest tower award thread.

vensol
03-15-2013, 05:07 PM
Thanks Tr6coug, the patent does have an optional steel support cross bar that cab removed, but I chose to leave out of the drawings. I appreciate the open mind (the first pyolns and towers were hideous). Also- most of the commentary has ben about skiing- so I appreciate that as I dont do that. As for the comments on handling, boats have added tons of shifting weight in the form of ballast to the back of the boat. A little wakeboarder in comparison is not going to make a big impact on modern boats, plus the front ballast can easily offset. I do appreciate every single comment very much though! All of them. Thank you guys so much for taking the time to look and share feedback! At least I know what questions I need to answer out of the box. Thanks again!

93Prostar190
03-15-2013, 06:43 PM
The Bimini benefit is also lost over the driver .... Love the fact that you are trying to innovate, keep pushing!

I think someone should invent a rigid telescoping skylon that disappears when not in use ...... :)

thatsmrmastercraft
03-15-2013, 06:51 PM
The Bimini benefit is also lost over the driver .... Love the fact that you are trying to innovate, keep pushing!

I think someone should invent a rigid telescoping skylon that disappears when not in use ...... :)

Great idea as long as it deploys manually.:rolleyes:

drschemel
03-15-2013, 07:55 PM
Great idea as long as it deploys manually.:rolleyes:

kinda like Viagra for MasterCraft? Would you have to rub it to get it to come up?:banana:

boogie420
03-16-2013, 06:27 PM
You could attach a swing to it!

ski_king
03-16-2013, 06:54 PM
Check out this post (http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/showpost.php?p=76790&postcount=7) dated 7-26-2005. You stole my idea!
http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/attachment.php?attachmentid=514&stc=1&d=1122385734