Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome to Jetboaters.net!
We are delighted you have found your way to the best Jet Boaters Forum on the internet! Please consider Signing Up so that you can enjoy all the features and offers on the forum. We have members with boats from all the major manufacturers including Yamaha, Seadoo, Scarab and Chaparral. We don't email you SPAM, and the site is totally non-commercial. So what's to lose? IT IS FREE!
Membership allows you to ask questions (no matter how mundane), meet up with other jet boaters, see full images (not just thumbnails), browse the member map and qualifies you for members only discounts offered by vendors who run specials for our members only! (It also gets rid of this banner!)
"By the book" the 190/192/195's have a "zero" deadrise at the transom, which is why I think Yamaha only publishes the bow number. I can say without a doubt that even though the deadrise numbers on the two boats are identical (our old vs new), our Yamaha rides 100x smoother than our old Rinker.
I think hull design has changed a lot in recent years, and a "variable deadrise" approach has been taken to many hulls. More at the boat and less at the transom. This would lead to a better cut through waves/wakes, and a higher top speed (or less power required).
In a twin inboard jet boat, the intake loading is a major consideration as far as hull design, limiting deadrise, and preventing stepped hull design (that otherwise crept from racing boats into everything, recently).
The hull is actually "flat" on either side of the pump intake for a few inches. The transom has sort of a \_/ shape to it instead of a \/ shape to it. Clearly it doesn't ride like a flat bottom boat would ride, however it doesn't carry the tip of the "V" all the way from the bow to the transom like a traditional hull would.