Lack of power while wakesurfing

[Bjork22]

Hello, I am a reader of all forums but have never posted yet. I have a 2018 AR195 and was out the other day with a wakesurf setup. I had almost 600 pounds on the swim deck and almost 600 pounds in the ski locker. We had 4 in the boat all weighting approximately 150 each. Everything was looking good during a trial run with no surfer. But when I pulled the surfer up, I wasn't able to plain out. I was stuck at a low speed and had no power. It was like there was no water coming through the jet. I had the throttle wide open and it would not get up an go, almost like spinning on ice. If the surfer was able to get outside the wake and close to the pocket it was better and had more power. I was able to plain out then. I guess I am wondering if anyone has had this problem or if anyone knows why this is happening. I have no mods and is stock except for the cobra jet find. I seems to me that the boat should have plenty of power to pull up a surfer with that set up. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

 

[Gym]

So just an observation here. I have a 23 foot 2006 SX230 twin engine with the high output engines. Its rated to carry 10 people or 1800 lbs. Your load was 1200 lbs of ballast, 600 lbs of people, I'm guessing full fuel 300 lbs and maybe 200 lbs of beer, wake boards and boat gear for a total of 2300 lbs. Then you want to pull one of the 150 pound guys out of the water. I don't know if that's going to work but maybe a member who has your model boat has a better perspective. By my calculations you need no more than a half tank of gas -150 lbs, throw 2 of your buddies overboard -300 lbs and toss the case of beer overboard also. Ok I was just kidding. Don't throw the beer overboard.

 

[J-RAD]

Sounds like you're experiencing cavitation due to the load. Was there debris in the water? I was unable to plane my first try with the transom bag. It turned out to be a little twig in the pump.

If no debris. Try moving one or two bodies up to the bow to help you plane. Otherwise less weight in the transom bag.

 

[Whisky]

When we used to have our 190, we were trying to see if we could get a respectable surf wake by moving crew around. When I put far too many people right at the back in order to test "ballast placement options" I did find that I could create a similar situation. I don't blame the boat, as I was well outside of the expected load distribution, but thats my story if it helps

 

[swatski]

Hello, I am a reader of all forums but have never posted yet. I have a 2018 AR195 and was out the other day with a wakesurf setup. I had almost 600 pounds on the swim deck and almost 600 pounds in the ski locker. We had 4 in the boat all weighting approximately 150 each. Everything was looking good during a trial run with no surfer. But when I pulled the surfer up, I wasn't able to plain out. I was stuck at a low speed and had no power. It was like there was no water coming through the jet. I had the throttle wide open and it would not get up an go, almost like spinning on ice. If the surfer was able to get outside the wake and close to the pocket it was better and had more power. I was able to plain out then. I guess I am wondering if anyone has had this problem or if anyone knows why this is happening. I have no mods and is stock except for the cobra jet find. I seems to me that the boat should have plenty of power to pull up a surfer with that set up. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

That is interesting. Is the boat listed? Are you pulling from the tower? Does the cavitation stop only when the surfer rides on a side and pulls the rope?
It sounds like a (pump) loading issue and cavitation? may not be anything wrong with the boat, just a capacity issue?

Your surf-ability could benefit from the L13 cone.

--

 

[Bjork22]

That is interesting. Is the boat listed? Are you pulling from the tower? Does the cavitation stop only when the surfer rides on a side and pulls the rope?
It sounds like a (pump) loading issue and cavitation? may not be anything wrong with the boat, just a capacity issue?

Your surf-ability could benefit from the L13 cone.

--

What do you mean is the boat listed? I am pulling from the tower and it does get a lot better only when the rider gets outside the wake. I will definitely try again with less weight....but I thought I have read that @JetBoatPilot was running the same amount of ballast with his 19 footer...maybe not as many people on board though. I have also ordered the TVW fins for my boat and not the L13 cone, but maybe I should switch that around first and try the cone instead. I dont know if the two are compatible.

 

[fireflymedic]

I thought @JetBoatPilot only used 600lbs on 19ft and 1200 on the 24s

 

[Bjork22]

I thought @JetBoatPilot only used 600lbs on 19ft and 1200 on the 24s

Just watched his YouTube video on surfing with the AR195, although his weight distribution was different and I don't know if he had any other passengers, he had 1200 pounds of ballast weight.

 

[J-RAD]

Last I heard, the L13s were not compatible, the increased pressure from the pump was bending done if the bolts on the device.

"Listing" the boat = causing the boat to lean to one side or the other. Listing the boat surf side causes increased displacement on the same side and favors the wake more for surfing.

 

[Jgorm]

Start off the swim step underway or have one or two more people move forward if it's bow high until it planes.

 

[swatski]

What do you mean is the boat listed? I am pulling from the tower and it does get a lot better only when the rider gets outside the wake. I will definitely try again with less weight....but I thought I have read that @JetBoatPilot was running the same amount of ballast with his 19 footer...maybe not as many people on board though. I have also ordered the TVW fins for my boat and not the L13 cone, but maybe I should switch that around first and try the cone instead. I dont know if the two are compatible.

By "listed" I mean listed to the side with ballast. The only way to get a decent (surfable) wave behind these boats. According to most forum members that surf.

There is still a discussion and a good amount of debate as far as how much the JBP TVWs help in shaping the surfable wave.
Personally, I think the TVW claims are kind of bs. The device currently remains untested and unproven, and personally I'm convinced JBP claims about TVW magic are massively overblown.

For example, while @JetBoatPilot claims you can surf on both sides of the wave, but pushing the ballast to the side of the swim platform is what is done to shoot all of his surfing wave featuring videos. I can tell you someone like me with beginner skills needs the boat listed to surf ropeless, based on what I have seen thus far. I don't think it is going to change but I could be wrong.

The fact that those TVWs would be incompatible with the L13 is mind boggling. Just to think about it, all the L13 does it increases the pump pressure and thrust but the gains are not huge at all I would say maybe 10-15% if that. It mostly helps eliminate cavitation and cavitation burn damage by increasing the efficiency of pump loading.

I can tell you based on my own first hand experience most of the factory-new Yamaha jet boat pumps can be made to generate 10-15% more thrust by sealing/porting the pump and the intake tunnel.

Would that make those incompatible with the TVWs?
(lol)

What do TVWs do in a non-L13 equipped pump? The L13 adds thrust and that, somehow, hurts the new steering?

I don't think I would want to run with a steering component that is in danger of falling apart due to more efficient thrust generation (we are talking 10-15% at the most, if that, not adding a supercharger to a n/a boat). What about deleting the ribbon as another modification that marginally increases thrust? Would that be compatible with TVWs?

--

 

[fireflymedic]

Just watched his YouTube video on surfing with the AR195, although his weight distribution was different and I don't know if he had any other passengers, he had 1200 pounds of ballast weight.

I stand corrected I mostly posted to get Will to verify. I'm sure he'll be in directly to give his advice.

 

[Scottie]

In my 212x, when we first started surfing with the transom bag, I struggled to get up to speed. Firstly, let's correct some terminology just for clarification (not trying to be a dick). You're NEVER going to get on plane while surfing. You should never exceed 12mph (maybe not even 11) when surfing, and the boat won't plane at that speed, even unloaded. Secondly, what helped me was an 800 lb bag in the ski locker, and then L13 cones. Once those were done, it doesn't matter now how many people are in the boat. We get to surf speed easily with no issues. Obviously your boat is different, but I was in a similar situation and that's what worked for us. I have no idea if the TVW is compatible with the L13 cones. It would be nice to get some clarification on that. I personally would never trade the performance from the L13 cones for the TVW, if that is what must be done. That would be an important factor in the decision for many I would think.

 

[swatski]

In my 212x, when we first started surfing with the transom bag, I struggled to get up to speed. Firstly, let's correct some terminology just for clarification (not trying to be a dick). You're NEVER going to get on plane while surfing. You should never exceed 12mph (maybe not even 11) when surfing, and the boat won't plane at that speed, even unloaded. Secondly, what helped me was an 800 lb bag in the ski locker, and then L13 cones. Once those were done, it doesn't matter now how many people are in the boat. We get to surf speed easily with no issues. Obviously your boat is different, but I was in a similar situation and that's what worked for us. I have no idea if the TVW is compatible with the L13 cones. It would be nice to get some clarification on that. I personally would never trade the performance from the L13 cones for the TVW, if that is what must be done. That would be an important factor in the decision for many I would think.

Here:

I too had the TVW and was running a Lucky 13 cone. The additional thrust from the Lucky 13 cone caused the bolts to bend on the TVW which resulted in my reverse gate catching and posing a major safety issue. I spoke with Will over the phone and they have done no testing with the TVW and the Lucky 13 and admitted over the phone that they are not compatible.

 

[Jester429]

@JetBoatPilot told me after the design change there should be no issues between the tvw and the l13 cone provided everything is installed properly

 

[JetBoatPilot]

Our findings in regards to the L13 Cones thus far have been inconclusive. One customer reported that he had bent some bolts on his 195. He was running an air intake upgrade and the L13 cones. It was not confirmed whether or not he'd followed the adjustment protocol to the letter. We believe it is possible that the deflection angle for the deflector was in excess of the specified angle (per the install video) which would in turn add additional forces to the system, more than were anticipated during our planning. In fairness to the user that reported this to us, the adjustment step has room for improvement so it is uncertain if the downward deflection on his TVW System was to spec or not.

I am sure others have run their boats with Thrust Vector Wakes and L13 cones by now and we have not gotten any other negative feedback. So the jury is out on whether or not the current system can function reliably with the L13 cones installed.

One more point that I need to mention. We tested our boats with and without Thrust Vector Wake installed using the same ballast on each test. Our findings were that the Thrust Vector Wake helped the boat get to surf speed much more effortlessly than without. The conclusion was that the deflection of the thrust in a more downward angle helped to push the bow down enough to make reaching surf speed much more effortless. I would not have believed this had I not been the one doing the test. I felt like we were not deflecting enough water to make a difference, but in fact we were. I mention this to help some understand that the L13 cone has not been needed on our test boat. We've had 1200 lbs of weight plus 5 passengers plus Thrust Vector Wake installed on several outings and each launch has been effortless, reaching surf speed with ease and without cavitation.

We are monitoring the situation closely and if it is determined that it is possible to bend bolts using L13 cones while settings are known to be 100% to spec, then we'll begin the process of adding a heavier duty bolt to our kits. For now we'll observe all of your findings and will be glad to help where we can.

 

[Bjork22]

Our findings in regards to the L13 Cones thus far have been inconclusive. One customer reported that he had bent some bolts on his 195. He was running an air intake upgrade and the L13 cones. It was not confirmed whether or not he'd followed the adjustment protocol to the letter. We believe it is possible that the deflection angle for the deflector was in excess of the specified angle (per the install video) which would in turn add additional forces to the system, more than were anticipated during our planning. In fairness to the user that reported this to us, the adjustment step has room for improvement so it is uncertain if the downward deflection on his TVW System was to spec or not.

I am sure others have run their boats with Thrust Vector Wakes and L13 cones by now and we have not gotten any other negative feedback. So the jury is out on whether or not the current system can function reliably with the L13 cones installed.

One more point that I need to mention. We tested our boats with and without Thrust Vector Wake installed using the same ballast on each test. Our findings were that the Thrust Vector Wake helped the boat get to surf speed much more effortlessly than without. The conclusion was that the deflection of the thrust in a more downward angle helped to push the bow down enough to make reaching surf speed much more effortless. I would not have believed this had I not been the one doing the test. I felt like we were not deflecting enough water to make a difference, but in fact we were. I mention this to help some understand that the L13 cone has not been needed on our test boat. We've had 1200 lbs of weight plus 5 passengers plus Thrust Vector Wake installed on several outings and each launch has been effortless, reaching surf speed with ease and without cavitation.

We are monitoring the situation closely and if it is determined that it is possible to bend bolts using L13 cones while settings are known to be 100% to spec, then we'll begin the process of adding a heavier duty bolt to our kits. For now we'll observe all of your findings and will be glad to help where we can.

Was the 1200 lbs of weight and 5 passengers on your AR195 test boat?

 

[JetBoatPilot]

Was the 1200 lbs of weight and 5 passengers on your AR195 test boat?

Yes, several outings. Did great!

 

[swatski]

Our findings in regards to the L13 Cones thus far have been inconclusive. One customer reported that he had bent some bolts on his 195. He was running an air intake upgrade and the L13 cones. It was not confirmed whether or not he'd followed the adjustment protocol to the letter. We believe it is possible that the deflection angle for the deflector was in excess of the specified angle (per the install video) which would in turn add additional forces to the system, more than were anticipated during our planning. In fairness to the user that reported this to us, the adjustment step has room for improvement so it is uncertain if the downward deflection on his TVW System was to spec or not.

I am sure others have run their boats with Thrust Vector Wakes and L13 cones by now and we have not gotten any other negative feedback. So the jury is out on whether or not the current system can function reliably with the L13 cones installed.

One more point that I need to mention. We tested our boats with and without Thrust Vector Wake installed using the same ballast on each test. Our findings were that the Thrust Vector Wake helped the boat get to surf speed much more effortlessly than without. The conclusion was that the deflection of the thrust in a more downward angle helped to push the bow down enough to make reaching surf speed much more effortless. I would not have believed this had I not been the one doing the test. I felt like we were not deflecting enough water to make a difference, but in fact we were. I mention this to help some understand that the L13 cone has not been needed on our test boat. We've had 1200 lbs of weight plus 5 passengers plus Thrust Vector Wake installed on several outings and each launch has been effortless, reaching surf speed with ease and without cavitation.

We are monitoring the situation closely and if it is determined that it is possible to bend bolts using L13 cones while settings are known to be 100% to spec, then we'll begin the process of adding a heavier duty bolt to our kits. For now we'll observe all of your findings and will be glad to help where we can.

Let me see if I understand this correctly...
Are you saying you have no idea if replacing the OEM cone with the L13 cone is going to f@ck up a pump when run in conjunction with the TVWs?

If that is the case, I would think it's concerning given L13s do little to increase maximum thrust.
While they do help loading the pumps, minimizing cavitation, top speed and/or max power/thrust output gains are not very substantial!
Most struggle to get maybe 1-2mph gains w/L13 at WOT, if that, so in terms of actual change in maximal thrust it can not be very significant.

On the other hand, TVW deflectors obviously have the ability to change the boat attitude/pitch (pushing the stern up, bow down) with or without ballast, so they must be subjected to the kind of force that make L13 "gains" pail. I think. It is more like applying trim tabs' level force to the pump.

Not to mention with ballast (1,000+lbs) the TVWs are completely submerged at surfing speeds as a boat is not on plane; that's got to put a lot of force on those, no?

I'm not sure the L13 could possibly be a problem here.

--