FL-cracker
X-H2O
- Location
- old exit 72 Melbourne
:haha:
How have you shaved weight off your SJ?
- Thread starter Jawbreaker
- Start date
My take: You get more performance from your ski by a better power/weight ratio.
You can accomplish this by:
1.) Increase power
2.) Decrease weight
If you think power/weight doesn't matter for serious flatwater freestyle, you're kidding yourself.
No one's talking about surf.
Ask Malone if he's running a stock hull and stock 61x cylinder.
You can accomplish this by:
1.) Increase power
2.) Decrease weight
If you think power/weight doesn't matter for serious flatwater freestyle, you're kidding yourself.
No one's talking about surf.
Ask Malone if he's running a stock hull and stock 61x cylinder.
- Location
- So. IL
Maybe Drain will post it up in this thread but reducing weight is like adding horsepower. The power to weight ratio is better with ever pound you shed. I cant remember but it is something outrageous like 5 pounds is like 7 horsepower.
So cracker added the equivalent of bigbore and porting for the 400 to make his boat lighter. I know that you could just add the power but you can't add the power twice
So cracker added the equivalent of bigbore and porting for the 400 to make his boat lighter. I know that you could just add the power but you can't add the power twice
DAG
Yes, my balls tickled from that landing
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
siiigh.. and not only a few months ago ppl were ragging on my b/c i wanned a cart tank. oh well
Not really - that's way too big of a number.
Besides, it depends on what weight and what power your reference is. :biggthumpup:
Example: assume 300lbs weight for the ski, and 80HP, makes for 0.267 lbs/HP
Shave 5lbs off, you're at 0.271 lbs/HP
To get the same with the same weight, you'd need 81.36HP
Not quite 7 HP, is it. In fact, not even close.
Take crackers example. I assume 270lbs weight, with approximately 88HP (piped, non-ported, right?)
That gets you 0.326 lbs/HP.
To get the same ratio with a stock 310 lbs ski (estimated), you'd need 101.3HP.
Quite the improvement! :biggthumpup:
FL-cracker
X-H2O
- Location
- old exit 72 Melbourne
stock cylinder, dual 44's
LBE
Eddie Would Go.
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
I hear ya Doug. Weight for surf ridders means nothing. These are flat water guys tho, weight means alot.
- Location
- So. IL
I wasn't going to do any math but that just supports my point I was making to Douglee. That weight makes a gob of difference. If money wasn't an object I would have a light weight hull and a limited motor but hulls are so expensive. You just have to cut corners where you can.
- Location
- Clearwater, FL
you sure about that:biggrin:
http://www.x-h2o.com/threads/16342
After you reinforce a stocker I bet it will weigh more than the xmetal. Pat must have made changes to his pole because I don't remember it being this light.:dunno:
- Location
- Clearwater, FL
Not for Cracker. I think he primarily rides surf. I definitely admire what he has done by shedding all that weight and he can definitely back it up with his riding skills now, but to ride a ski in the surf with no reinforcement and NO FOAM AT ALL seems crazy to me. I just can't afford to sink my ski and risk it not washing up on shore.
LBE
Eddie Would Go.
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
On a bone stock super jet (or SXR)you can land your first attempted backflip in the surf. It is not about weight or power, but about timing. A roll requires a bit more skill but once you have done it you can throw it on a heavy ski. I light weight ski in the surf is a waste IMO.
Mike Serlin and Ross Champion both throw down bigg, and I would say their skis weigh in significantly more than they did stock.
Mike Serlin and Ross Champion both throw down bigg, and I would say their skis weigh in significantly more than they did stock.
douglee25
m3booooy
- Location
- South Jersey
FL-cracker
X-H2O
- Location
- old exit 72 Melbourne
Thanks guys! Remember the entire boat was still reinfoced with Kevlar..... I did not jeperodize(sp) any strength with any of the mods i did...... if anything the boat will hold up much better with less mass/weight smacking the water when I eat shiet from going reel big! :biggrin:
Rotating mass, is what made me want a light boat even for surf.... it just gives me better control over what I can do with the ski, once I leave the wave!....... you can still go huge on a heavy boat in surf of course...... its mostly whatever you get use too.
Maybe Im starting to make since?
Rotating mass, is what made me want a light boat even for surf.... it just gives me better control over what I can do with the ski, once I leave the wave!....... you can still go huge on a heavy boat in surf of course...... its mostly whatever you get use too.
Maybe Im starting to make since?
Last edited:
LBE
Eddie Would Go.
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
I think that sums it up
Mile9c1
X-H2O.com
- Location
- Grand Rapids, MI
Said the guy with no foam, lol.
douglee25
m3booooy
- Location
- South Jersey
Cracker you're running no foam? Seriously?
Doug
Doug
FL-cracker
X-H2O
- Location
- old exit 72 Melbourne
yes..... my stock pole weighs 8lbs....... still lighter.
And yes, I realy dont run any foam:biggthumpup: :biggrin:
Im hard headed, the new boat I build for surf will have foam though/
douglee25
m3booooy
- Location
- South Jersey