Jump to content

1999 Ski Nautique... wake questions


SocalWaterSki
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have a new to me 1999 Nautique, closed bow. I've been shortening up the rope lately getting more comfortable behind the boat, but I've noticed that the wake at 15 and 22 off seems actually really large. Granted I've been skiing behind a super light, super flat boat for the last few months. I ski at 34-36, and the bump is very noticeable at 15-22off with the nautique.

I also ski behind a 93 Nautique, and the wake there is very flat.

 

Is there something I'm missing? This one has a tower, which I hate, but makes the wife happy. Can a tower effect the wake that much?

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Not sure on the hull changes between the two models, but here are some things to look at:

Any item added to a tourney ski boat (weight) can have detrimental effects on the wake, so look around, particularly in the rear, for things that are different between the two and eliminate any uneeded "stuff" on the 99, including fuel, seat cushions, etc. To answer your question, yes a tower can affect the wake simply due to weight.

 

Note: many tourney boats actually benefit from ballast at the front and ballast to balance the boat side to side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I think we might need a little more information:

What propeller is on the boat? Size and brand.

What kind of RPM does it run at your ski speeds?

How much weight is usually in the boat when you ski ?

Monkey bars will have a impact also on the wake with that boat.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, lots of great info here!

 

Sorry I didn't include more information. The prop is the original 4 blade OJ 14x16 cupped (I think...)

I can check again, but I believe I'm running around 3600 rpm at ski speed.

I usually have 3 people total in the boat, when one is skiing, there are only 2... 180 or less on each.

http://www.planetnautique.com/vb3/attachment.php?attachmentid=19433&d=1349231131

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I agree the tower needs to go.

The wife can get over it... maybe I'll buy her a boom...

Now comes the hard part... filling the holes for the tower... should I just make a plate for it?

Here's what I'm dealing with

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b9/Removeb4flight/D4C4E46B-9976-4924-8A4F-E4A8406ED85D-10331-00000A59F7CE7BE3_zpse45e6624.jpg

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b9/Removeb4flight/05C68611-2DBA-4536-89FE-E92C3C471D63-10331-00000A59FE779155_zpsbfcc6501.jpg

I was thinking about having an aluminum plate made for it... but have no idea who to talk to about it.

 

I ski behind a 93 SNCB...and a 74 avenger barefoot queen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I have patched gelcoat before. You can buy the exact color match and do it yourself. Just need some different wetsand paper grades, some polishing compound and a buffing wheel..

 

I had a '99 SN and the wakes were fantastic at any length. Maybe a little bump at 22, but no rooster tail like some of the other top brands.

 

I am not sure why the tower would cause a problem, if anyhting weight in the front would flatten the boat on the water and have an even flatter wake, right? I am just guessing, but I wonder if it sat on a bad trailer or dock or something and picked up a warp in the bottom??

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Seems reasonable SWS. Maybe for now, just mount all the boards angled going down in front, so they act like a spoiler to push the nose down.. jk. I would sell the tower and buy new slalom stuff. Seadeck is great. I retro fit my 2007 sanopad with grey faux teak. Really like it!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless the tower is very heavy, like 300 plus lbs. I don't see it making a difference. The wind resistance against the tubing is going to pretty minimal. Gear, people, fuel will make a bigger difference. I keep my fuel tank at a half or less usually. Post up a video if you can. Are you sure you Speedo are correct. Speed make a big difference as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

thanks for the thread. I have a 97 SNOB and sometimes I consider putting a tower on it so I really want to see you get to the bottom of this.

 

I agree that for the sake of experimentation, just pull the one bolt out using an allen wrench and leave the mount intact to see if that is actually the problem before you go to all the hassle of putting new gelcoat on the boat.

 

Also, I like your diagram. the course where I ski has a dock in front, so I could take the boards off before running the course. Do you not have somewhere to put the boards while you ski?

 

Still, it's so hard for me to imagine it making THAT much difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
It looks like there is a fair amount of lift created by the boards on the tower. Don't forget that the streamlines will actually angle up over the windshield which will create lift against the underside of the bimini cover. You could try rotating them nose down, removing them and also opening the center window to test the effect. Lift on the tower will also create a pitch rotation (tail down) assuming the CG of the tower cover is ahead of the boat's CG.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SocalWaterSki As a fellow aero guy, I understand your concepts of lift and drag but if the tower and wakeboards are generating lift, it's not going to be more lift than the extra 1-2 people sitting in the boat, even at 36mph. I ski behind a 98-99 CB nautique and it is by far my favorite wake, I've ever skied behind. I can tell when an extra 400 lbs of weight is in the boat but it's not enough to change my skiing.

 

I'd really look into that prop. My guess is that's causing some weird stuff. I bet if you sold the tower, you'd have plenty of money to buy a nice machined 3 blade prop from Acme or OJ. Does this boat have a wakeplate installed on it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This pic is a wakeplate. I'm not exactly what prop your specific boat takes. Acme and OJ will definitely help recommend a prop for your needs if you call them or you can search on correctcraftfan.com for first hand experience.

 

edit: For clarification, I recommended looking into the prop just because it's very possible that the wakeboarders who owned it before you could've really pitched the prop down to better accommodate wakeboarding speeds and ballast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

So have we skied the boat with out the Monkey Bars?

Keep in mind the boat has a torque engine GT-40, ACME 422 or 668 will work stay away from the 1868 or 654 these would run to many revs. As usual I prefer the OJ product 428 13X15.5 Have had nothing but great revues on the wheel and it will work on a broad range of reduction Direct Drive Correct Crafts. It helped out the rooster on my ski partners 206 with monkey bars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
The 206 that we did the prop change on had monkey bars and all the bells and whistles. We came close to removing the playground equipment until we decided to try a prop change. I have been running the Oj product on my personal Nautiques for a few years so we decided to pull the prop of my 07 196 and try it on the 206. I can say it did not eliminate the 22 off rooster but went a long way to changing and or moving it as to have less of an impact on the skier. Still not a 196 but improvement none the less. shorter line lengths really not an issue with that boat no mater what prop is on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I'm glad you got it figured out and you wouldn't really hear me complain about removing my wakeboard tower if I had enough skiers to go with. However, the simple physics just don't add up. A round tube isn't going to create lift and those things don't weigh enough to cause weight issues. If a tower created the issue of a poor wake, a bimini top would create the same problem only worse. Any chance people in the boat weren't balanced properly originally and they were properly placed after the tower was removed? Are you 10-20 gallons of gas lower this time than last?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I have skied and driven 4 or 5 in the '97-01 range, without passengers and with 2 guys that together push 500 pounds, which would approximate your tower plus a few small kids or smallish wife, all with OJ's, and and aside from noticing a little more wake substance with the full camera crew vs no riders, the wakes are awesome.

 

Unless someone changed the strut angle or very badly aligned shaft and rudder or skegs, there has to be a structural issue on the hull or something to cause what you are saying. We put a 4 blade OJ on a Hydrodyne and it softened the wake some, and was all around smoother than the stock 3 blade, but did not have a night and day change. What you are describing is night and day different from the 4 or 5 boats I have had experience with with that hull configuration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two 196's I've skied with - one has a tower and another did not. Absolutely no difference whatsoever in the wake to me - each one we've had loaded almost every imaginable way.

I've commented to friends that it seems a 196 can't make a bad slalom wake no matter what we do.

 

I just can't get my head around a tower causing such a significant issue here.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Only way to make a 196 struggle is too much weight far passenger side such that it digs the stern corner and throws spray from that side. Other than that...killer wake/spray. I never drank SN kool aid until just had to buy one b/c of the deal available. Great hull.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Having been in on the ground floor of tower development at Correct Craft in the 90's we found that a tower had a far more impact on running then one would think. First off it took over 2 mph off the top end speed and this was with the early small tube towers. Wakes were impacted at Higher speeds because of the down force it created on the hull. I Remember doing some testing with Bruce Neville where we were testing side load effects on the hull during with slalom and jump process utilizing a tower, It was noticed across the board that the wake was impacted with the addition of the tower. Bruce loved the lift he got off the ramp with the tower however he said it was real hard to stay down during the cut process getting onto the ramp. I think I was the first water skier to slalom with a tower, being on the CC design team I was also utilized as a guinea pig. Their were some their at the time that thought the tower would revolutionize waterskiing, they already knew what it would do for wakeboarding.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I gotta say, I've been lurking on this thread for a week now, and I think the tower has a very minimal, maybe undetectable difference in wake. I had a closed bow 20 foot Calabria and put a tower on it,.. no difference in wake. I have a Moomba now, and while I have never had the tower off, it seems to have a fine wake.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Ballers.... it's been a while... some fun quick stats since I was last here....

98 - Number of hours I've put on the boat

9 - Number of lakes I've been to

288 - Bouys I've rounded on the EZ-slalom

12 - minutes it takes me to setup said ez-slalom..

39 - new favorite barefoot speed.

35 - new personal record on the syndicate...

719 - Gallons of gas... used on the trip... OUCH

692 - Miles I've put on the Cervelo while I was road tripping with the boat (gotta keep training for the races this year!)

102 - Miles run...

45950 - Yards swimming... (gotta love the Garmin 910xt)

 

So, now that those numbers are cleared up.... hello again!

 

When I was last here I had mentioned I was going to break out the hydro gurus and head out to the lake... well... mission accomplished. I gathered up some of the students from Embry Riddle Aeronautical University (I'm an Alumni,) and had them run their battery of tests on the nautique with and without the tower. I also had them compare my boat to another identical boat without a tower.

 

While they are still working on the results in numerical form, what I can tell you with the "leg test," there is a rather large increase in wake size with the tower addition. More so with the boards up, and even more so with the boards faced right side up.

 

So, considering the end of the semester is coming right up, hopefully some good numbers will be coming back from the hydro and aero gurus.

 

Until then, looks like the most of my season is over. Time to get back on the bike and get ready for Ironman Texas.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The joystick towers are really heavy compared to other towers. I agree it has to make a difference in the wake. I know that on my Malibu RLXI , when I removed the tower and wedge, the wake got much softer.. Maybe to those that ski 28 and shorter may not notice, but 15 & 22 , towers make a difference.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DW - the students actually took my boat while I was skiing behind a friends nautique, so I have no idea what was done. They then gave me my boat back, and took my friends 99 to do the same tests on. We then pulled the tower off my boat, gave it back to them, and they did another round of tests. I will publish their findings and the whole testing proceedures when they come up with the report. This was their "project" for advanced hydrology class. I thought it was a neat idea and was more than happy to lend my boat to science.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...