moving bracket forward???

[ksarge91]

Would it make any difference to move the pole bracket forward a little over .75"?

I was looking at it and if I moved it forward .75" it would still sit perfectly flat, all I would need to do is make new backing plates for the hood hooks. Can't imagine it could make too much of a difference since all the aftermarket boats seem to have it atleast 3 inches forward. But for the minimal effort required it could be worth it.

Any feedback on this?

Thanks

 

[yamanube]

I ran my last hull like this, worked just fine, no problems.

 

[Dustin Mustangs]

Personally, I'd like to hear one of the aftermarket boat makers that have boats like this explain why there is any advantage to doing this at all, 3/4", 4" or whatever.

 

[yamanube]

Personally, I'd like to hear one of the aftermarket boat makers that have boats like this explain why there is any advantage to doing this at all, 3/4", 4" or whatever.

From what I have heard it increases leverage on the front of the boat and makes it more maneuverable. In reality most aftermarket hulls (FS1, Q8 and Matrix) that have the pole on the nose are this way because the nose has been shortened rather than the bracket moved forward. I don't think you will find a stock length hull with the pole way up on the nose.
I moved mine forward because I wanted a shorter pole setup and didn't want to cut/weld my XMW pole or buy a new one.

 

[stanton]

supposedly more leverage, i dont see much benefit..

 

[Dustin Mustangs]

More leverage for what? To help with rotation on a backie or something else? Because with how the pole is positioned for most tricks (backie included), moving the mount forward would not help for that. I've always wondered why this is done...

 

[yamanube]

More leverage for what? To help with rotation on a backie or something else? Because with how the pole is positioned for most tricks (backie included), moving the mount forward would not help for that.

Again, on pretty much all of the skis you see like this the pole is not actually moved forward, the nose is shorter.
If, when you where doing a backflip, you pulled back on the bars to help your rotation, the further the pole is towards the end of the ski the greater the leverage you can put on the ski. This is probably alot less of a factor for hull design than it would just be silly to shorten the nose 4" and move the handpole bracket 4" back (into the hood) because it was easier than explaining it to somebody who can't just accept the answer "because"

 

[yamaslut]

Again, on pretty much all of the skis you see like this the pole is not actually moved forward, the nose is shorter.
If, when you where doing a backflip, you pulled back on the bars to help your rotation, the further the pole is towards the end of the ski the greater the leverage you can put on the ski. This is probably alot less of a factor for hull design than it would just be silly to shorten the nose 4" and move the handpole bracket 4" back (into the hood) because it was easier than explaining it to somebody who can't just accept the answer "because"

are you sure?? if the pole was moved toward the center wouldn't that create more leverage???

example:
say you had a 2ft pole mounted to the end of a 4ft pole at 90 degrees w/ a hinge, if I pulled the 2ft pole one foot in my direction the nose would effectively move 1ft. But if I mount the 2ft pole to the middle of the 4ft pole at 90 degrees w/ a hinge and move the pole toward me 1ft the nose would have effectively moved much further than having the 2ft pole mounted on the nose..

so to me moving the pole forward would decrease the leverage...

anyone understand that??? mfg:

 

[yamanube]

are you sure?? if the pole was moved toward the center wouldn't that create more leverage???

example:
say you had a 2ft pole mounted to the end of a 4ft pole at 90 degrees w/ a hinge, if I pulled the 2ft pole one foot in my direction the nose would effectively move 1ft. But if I mount the 2ft pole to the middle of the 4ft pole at 90 degrees w/ a hinge and move the pole toward me 1ft the nose would have effectively moved much further than having the 2ft pole mounted on the nose..

so to me moving the pole forward would decrease the leverage...

anyone understand that??? mfg:

If the pole (force) is closer to the pivot point you get greater rotation for the same amount of pull (travel) on the bars but more leverage is created the further away from the center of rotation the force is. Cut the kickstart on your bike in half and try to start it, you will have to move your foot less for the same amount of rotation but will have to work much harder.

 

[yamaslut]

If the pole (force) is closer to the pivot point you get greater rotation for the same amount of pull (travel) on the bars but more leverage is created the further away from the center of rotation the force is. Cut the kickstart on your bike in half and try to start it, you will have to move your foot less for the same amount of rotation but will have to work much harder.

ok... got ya

 

[ksarge91]

I don't think you will find a stock length hull with the pole way up on the nose.

Yeah, I figured that for most of the aftermarket boats. But RRP makes a bracket that allows you to move the pole forward on a stock boat and the new Tem hulls look like a somewhat stock set-up, only the mounting location is flat, allowing you to mount it in the stock location or several inches forward. I couldn't see .75" making a difference, but figured I'd ask incase someones had a good experience doing this. Everything's already out so it would only take me a couple minutes.

I wouldn't be doing this to shorten the pole, I'm already at -4.5 or -5, just for the leverage benefit if there is any. I moved my holds forward and inch after riding a couple boats with them like that. I'm trying to find the sweet spot for my center of gravity. Also thought it might benefit surf riding being able to control where you want to put the nose.

 

[Big Kahuna]

are you sure?? if the pole was moved toward the center wouldn't that create more leverage???

example:
say you had a 2ft pole mounted to the end of a 4ft pole at 90 degrees w/ a hinge, if I pulled the 2ft pole one foot in my direction the nose would effectively move 1ft. But if I mount the 2ft pole to the middle of the 4ft pole at 90 degrees w/ a hinge and move the pole toward me 1ft the nose would have effectively moved much further than having the 2ft pole mounted on the nose..

so to me moving the pole forward would decrease the leverage...

anyone understand that??? mfg:

Think of a Kawi 650. The pole mounted so far back, you could get very little leverage on them. Even carving turns was difficult. They are very comfortable to cruise on. Very little input from the pole effects the handling.

 

[GDFL]

FYI, the Matrix does not have the pole mount moved forward any. He thought about it but decided not to so that you could just transfer your gear from your current hull to the new one and not have to buy a different pole. I think there were some other reasons as well.

I'm not sure that moving it helps much. BF's are about a quick rotation and I'm kinda with Nick on that one. Further out gets you more torque, but less speed and rotation. With all things equal except pole mount position, the pole further forward will allow you to more slowly pull the nose through less of an arc. That doesn't sound like an improvement. Unless the problem with BF's is not physically being strong enough to pull the bars to your chest, then it would hurt rather than help.


It's really hard to prove though. You'd have to have exactly identical boats with the pole mount being the only difference in order to get an idea of how much it helps or doesn't help. The shorter nose probably helps more than the position of the pole mount. I'm guessing the difference is so small that you probably wouldn't notice.

 

[Big Kahuna]

doing a back flip it seams that your not really pulling the pole or lifting the nose, it is more controlled thrust and weight shift.

 

[GDFL]

I haven't done one so I can't talk, but from everything I've seen many guys pull the bars into their chest once they are just past half their rotation. Some seem to pull just as they are leaving the setup wake....

 

[yamaslut]

doing a back flip it seams that your not really pulling the pole or lifting the nose, it is more controlled thrust and weight shift.

oh yes you do... or at least I pull on mine for the first 1/4 of the rotation..

 

[tightithrash]

yeah i pull too. you can even save a pancake by giving a hard tug mid air.

sluttys avatar is all pull.....

i think the bracket up front would help....help against pearling in the surf. i really want to ride a rickter to tell.

i dont think youd tell at .75 on actual nose pull. you'd tell that your pole is a little shorter.....

joe b moved his up and really digs it. read this:

http://x-h2o.com/showthread.php?t=44718&page=7

 

[ksarge91]

yeah i pull too. you can even save a pancake by giving a hard tug mid air.

sluttys avatar is all pull.....

i think the bracket up front would help....help against pearling in the surf. i really want to ride a rickter to tell.

i dont think youd tell at .75 on actual nose pull. you'd tell that your pole is a little shorter.....

joe b moved his up and really digs it. read this:

http://x-h2o.com/showthread.php?t=44718&page=7

haha, I've seen this boat in person. Joe B's my inspiration. Everytime I have a sawzall or cut-off wheel in my hand and I'm having last minute hesitations I just think "what would Joe B do?"

 

[227]

I've ridden a Rickter in the surf before. I didn't notice any different "feel" with the pole being mounted at the nose. I did notice how short it felt in comparison to a regular SJ. I thought the Rickter was OK but it sure wasn't a $6000 improvement over a regular SJ, it just felt a little different.

 

[Dustin Mustangs]

Further out gets you more torque, but less speed and rotation. With all things equal except pole mount position, the pole further forward will allow you to more slowly pull the nose through less of an arc. That doesn't sound like an improvement. Unless the problem with BF's is not physically being strong enough to pull the bars to your chest, then it would hurt rather than help.

The theory in this thread similar to above about moving the bracket forward to increase torque applied to the ski is fundamentally flawed. The 'lever arm' for a rotational force (aka moment) is the perpendicular distance from the force's line of action to the point of rotation. Check out the attached pic. The line of action, or force applied by the rider, is in red. The center of rotation is the blue dot. For this case it is very close to if not exactly the same as the combined center of gravity of the rider and ski (which was estimated here). The perpendicular distance between the two is shown in yellow, and this is the lever arm. Note how moving the bracket forward will do very little if anything to lengthen yellow (with the pole near or at the angle shown).