Project RiverRat II

[FL-cracker]

I think Bobby is gona do two different pump configurations....

One for everyones SXR stuff to drop right in.....

The others for SJ stuff to drop right in..... both will be based off the SXR hull, the Yam stuff in the SXR hull will only be for freeride, as it will be illegal the way rules stand in freestyle right now.... hopefull that will change some day.

Im trying to get him motivated on a SJ hood, but he has so much going on.

His lower will be started next week after we go riding this weekend. :woot:

 

[Idok]

he NEEDS to start making lightweight x2 hulls!

 

[IceRocket1286]

That stuff from Trinity was really nice :bigeyes: I mean seriously, that was some impeckable work. I was under the assumption that it was a prepreg carbon b/c he talked about baking it in an over to cross link.............. Either way, he has excelent control over his resin content whatever process he is using and the fit and finish of the parts was killer :hail: When I talked to him he was pretty adimate about doing just SXR stuff and a complete hull is not that far off from my understanding. He is definatly a guy to watch..............you SXR guys have it made. :beerchug:

YESSS!

 

[RiverRat]

One aspect of a build page that I like to see is when people expain why they make the choices they do durring the build process. So I will take a few moments to do so.

Observations on the Squarenose Hull for Freestyle​

Some guys are perlexed at my decision to sell the squarenose hull I spent allot of time building. It was a nice hull for sure and it was very well balenced. However, although the bottom decks are the same as a round nose it did not handle the same at all. I found that the squarenose had better lateral stability and (possibly due to 155lbs hull weight) could carve better than a roundnose with the same mods (short plate, 201 grate).

Although I liked the better handling of that particular boat I was not to keen on the shape of the tray. Turf wise I should have added padding on the top of the gunwals, my arms got a fair amount of bruises hitting those. The ski also handled well in the air. It was fairly flickable due to the added power so that was anouther positive aspects of the hull.

The Negative, my subjective observation

Anouther difference I found between the squarenose and the roundnose was how they handled under water. The square was not that forgiving when you enter the water. I achually called my boat the "shovel nose" b/c once that nose enters the water is it will not pop up like a roundnose has a tendency to do. Likewise, when you enter the water inverted the staright side profile makes it less forgiving in trying to complte a rotation. On a round I found that you could finish a rotation under the water w/ ease but the square unless you were 3/4 there it felt like once you entered the water the rotation would try to stop and I felt like I was continuously fighting the ski in those situtations. That being said the square is still a great hull, I was just in a good position to purchase a aftermarket hull so I jumped on the opprotunity.

 

[FL-cracker]

Great info man!

 

[RiverRat]

Why I Chose Waterdawgs and the X-jet​

It is no mystery that I am a big fan of Waterdawgs :haha: The main reason I started liking WD is b/c of the design of the X-jet. Not being able to compete on this hull is a drawback but when I started to think about it I have been trying to make events for the last 2 years and b/c of my work schedule it has just not been feasable, so it would suck to have the powers to be dictating what I ride and/or purchase. Suposidly you cannot compete in the amateur class on a aftermarket hull anyway so even if I would have purchased a WF or XFT hull I could not compete that either So the competition aspect was not a concern.

The nose and bracket

I liked the idea of the handlepole bracket being machined out of a soild peice of billit and being mounted to the hull on 2 planes. In all honesty it is "over built" but I will take over built over under built anyday of the week.

The nose of the x-jet is also nice b/c there is not a tiny nose peice so the lines are sleaker and it is just 1 less thing that can break and/or rip off. The draw back to this design is that if you want to remove the handlepole you have to unbolt the bracket fron the hull. I am sure you can tighten the bolt but the bolt itself cannot be removed b/c the bracket sits down into the hull. B/c of this the piviot point is something like 1 1/8 in lower than a lowered supejet. This should translate into faster rotation and a lower center of gravity, or more central center of gravity. The Bracket on the X-jet is very beefy and weighs in at around 5lbs :bigeyes: However, it is not made that way just to be a stought peice of billit. It was designed that way to double the surface area that load being applied can dispursed through out the mounting area. Even with reinforcements, if you land wrong you can rip the nose of a superjet off. We all have seen pics of this happening on both roundnose and squarenose superjets. A typical superjet bracket spreads the load across 35-40 sq inches of surface area along one plane. The X-jet bracket spreads the load across 90 sq. inches on 2 planes. This makes for a mounting are that is significanly stronger than any OEM style mounting set up. It has been tested for several years w/o incident. Poles have been snapped and bent on x-jets and to my knowledge the has yet to be stress crack in the glass.

The Handlepole

You guys saw this thing in Daytona..........need I say more, it is bad ass and virtually indistructable. The combination of the stiff handlepole and beefy bracket mounted on 2 planes should translate any movement through the pole directly to the nose of the ski w/ virtually no flex. The aftermarket pole I ran last year had quite a bit of flex in it and you could really feel that flex in when you wer cranking the bars. It did not give me a very positive feel which is what I was looking for. I just feel that composites is not suited for a handlepole application w/o being insanly expensive. My old AC pole was fine and a roundnose AC would work well on this boat. As far as I know the WD pole is the strongest out there and is competivly priced w/ others like the RRP. I do like the RRP but it is heavy at 15lbs while the WD pole is 10.5lbs. That being said I noticed that the RRP is a little top heavy b/c the bulk of the weight is on the top and bottom in the cast peices that bolt to the tubes. In contrast I found the WD pole to be very well balenced (3.5lbs of the 10.5 at the base) and the rest of the weight almost evenly distributed through out the length of the pole.

 

[RiverRat]

The Topdeck

I was surprised to find out that the X-jet hood is not a WD diable hood :boggled: They are two different molds. The diablo is the diablo, the X-jet is the X-jet and the REV is the REV. All differnet hoods, brackets, latches ect. That is pretty cool, each was individually designed for a specific purpose.

The side gunwals make the ski look look very trick, but they were done that way b/c the handlepole and hood are so low that that would hit :bigeyes: I do not really like how thick the side walls of the tray are but I guess I will have to live with it. I estimate it to be about 3-3.5in wide and is flat on the top. To me that is just a asthetic eye sore. However, it is a nice flat surface that is easy to support yourself on if flipping onto the hood or standing in that location. I think the shape can be tweaked a little but it works.

I was also surprised to see how wide the x-jet is. I thought the REV hull was larger than the X-jet but no, the REV looks small and petite in comparison. I am more inclined to attribut this to the fact that the REV is taller and has more lines to it. The side prifile looks sleek but from the front the X-jet looks kind of fat. It really is not that "fat" but b/c it is so low it appears a little squatty, but looks very stable if using the topdeck as a platform for hood tricks. We will see how ir performs on in that reguard. I plan to post a full ride review and will have several boats that I can ride back to back for a comparison.

 

[Mile9c1]

That white/black X-jet with the halves bolted toegther.. that was Jeff's first one, he revised some of the lines after he made that one.

The X-Jet is the same width as the Superjet, if you don't count the rail extender "wings".

 

[RiverRat]

That white/black X-jet with the halves bolted toegther.. that was Jeff's first one, he revised some of the lines after he made that one.

The X-Jet is the same width as the Superjet, if you don't count the rail extender "wings".

Yeah, I got those pics off the old WD website but you get the idea. The width is the same as a Sj but the low profile and rounded shape makes it look wider IMO.

 

[RiverRat]

The Bottom Deck

The bottom deck of this ski will have some different features on it. It is a variation of the SJ bottom, accepting the Sj intake grate and OEM 144mm pump via a billit pump shoe. The bottom deck on this hull will have intergrated sponsoons on the front, making the front of the boat more boyant by giving it a larger frontal footprint. This should make the boat corner better and be less prone to nose diving down the face of a wave. The mods to the bottom should help the ski plane better and hopefully address the chine walking issue commonly associated with the SJ at speed. I am interested to test this aspect of the hull as well.

Lightening the nose

I don't think I will have the power to pull a flatwater backflip but I will definatly give it a whirl though I can say now that I will be the limiting factor there :frown: . This is anouther area of the boat that I wanted to tinker with. Some guys chop the rear section of the ski in order to allow the nose to pop up a little easier. On this ski I am doing a few things differently and liked what waterdawgs was doing by relocating the battery. Here is my paln for makeing the ski more lift faster:

*First off I tossed the factory pipe water box. It was not that heavy b/c it was for a squarenose but I held a roundnose box the other day and you really will save 10lbs by switching to the x-metal box. So that is 10lbs off the nose of the boat right there.
*Next I tossed the idea of using a OEM tank. Kart tanks are cheap and I liked how the XFT tank I used last season performed and cleaned up the interior of the boat (see pic). This is good for anouther several pounds off the nose and if you only run 1 gallon of gas there is anouther 7lbs in gas. The OEM tank holds 5 gallons or 35lbs of fuel. Granted that 1 gallon of gas = 1 gallon of gas but the kart tank itself is a few lbs lighter than OEM and allows me to position the fuel store right in the middle of the ski and probably 6in closer to the motor. Everyone knows I am talking out my a$$ right now but bear with me :biggrin: Moving the bulk of the fuel anouther 6in closer to the center of the ski that I could not do with XFT set up b/c the battery was there. Whick leads me to the next weight alteration.
*On the X-jet the battery can be housed in the bulkhead of the boat (see pic), allowing anouther 16lbs(depending on what battery you use) to be removed off the nose of the ski. :bigeyes: This in turn should make a nice difference when going into a move like a faltwater flip, 50/50 or anything where the nose needs to pop up quickly. If you think about it, on a flip the nose of the boat has to make the longest movement so the heavier it is, the slower that movement will be (assuming the force is the same)..........once again, all out of my ass :biggthumpup: I am hoping these mods make the ski more balenced all around, translating into a more flickable and predictable ski.

 

[Mile9c1]

Is that an aluminum bulkhead? Huh??

 

[RiverRat]

Is that an aluminum bulkhead? Huh??

??

 

[Mile9c1]

What? You posted a picture of what lookes to be a REV hull with an aluminum bulkhead in it. I was wondering why Jeff used aluminum, if it is aluminum.

The REV's and X-Jet's use the same bottom, in case you were wondering.

 

[RiverRat]

What? You posted a picture of what lookes to be a REV hull with an aluminum bulkhead in it. I was wondering why Jeff used aluminum, if it is aluminum.

The REV's and X-Jet's use the same bottom, in case you were wondering.

Oh, to my knowledge the bulkead is glass, the gel just has a haze on it. The inside shot is of a REV but was just for reference on the battery location. That was the raffle hull from Daytona.

The bottom deck on that REV is the same one we are using on this project so I got a good close look at it while I was there.

Just as a general FYI none of the pics above (of WD stuff) are of my boat. It is still in the molds.

 

[RiverRat]

Hull Composition: 1/2 prepreg 1/2 wet laid glass​

For the hull I decided to have a wet laid bottom deck made and a prepreg topdeck and hood. The reason for this is to save significant weight over a all wetlaid hull and cut down the total cost of the hull while retiaing long term durability. I did not just want a stronger hull (my square was strong as nails), I wanted a "lightweight" package.

Top Deck and Hood

Prepreg is some interesting stuff. Basically what prepreg is is the cloth is preimpregnated with the exact amout of resin for optimum strength. Excess resin does not make the part any stronger, only heavier. The better control over your resin cloth ratio, the lighter and more precise the part. Maximize strength while minumizing weight. It takes allot of time and patience to get everything into the mold, vacume bag it and then autoclave the entire part (which activates the reisn). Want to know more....call WD and he can tell you the process more indepth.

Bottom Deck

Bottom deck is a wetlaid and vacume bagged. Good process that is less expensive and faster to turn parts out so that helps save some cost on the hull b/c materials and lay up time are less. The bottom deck will be heavier but will be able to with stand a beating for many years to come. It is also the heavier of two halves but is on the bottom so at least the bulk of the hull weight is on this part of the boat. I read on freestylegeeks build page that his squarenose bottom deck alone was 58lbs. This bottom deck will save a minimum of 20+lbs right there, just by using better materials and different lay up process. I imagine that my squarenose bottom deck was about the same.

 

[RiverRat]

Progress has been pretty slow but I did manage to finish the gas tank mod. Cut the original mounting tabs off the pump. Looks better now IMO. Need to order a cap with a barbed fitting so I can install the check valve, but other than that it is done.

 

[sflsurfrider]

Progress has been pretty slow but I did manage to finish the gas tank mod. Cut the original mounting tabs off the pump. Looks better now IMO. Need to order a cap with a barbed fitting so I can install the check valve, but other than that it is done.

steve and i had discussed this with his cart tank..... why cant you put a TEE in the return line and put the checkvalve on the TEE? i think itd work.

 

[RiverRat]

steve and i had discussed this with his cart tank..... why cant you put a TEE in the return line and put the checkvalve on the TEE? i think itd work.

I guess you could, but the entire cap is just a few bucks which is about what a brass t-fitting would cost.

 

[Mile9c1]

Progress has been pretty slow

Lol I thought after this you'd be talking about Jeff's progress :banghead:

 

[RiverRat]

Lol I thought after this you'd be talking about Jeff's progress :banghead:

:haha: I can neither confirm nor deny that progress has been made on that end :biggrin: I told him that I wanted the hull by March............guess I should have specified the year just to be safe :banghead: :haha: I did get my order from AJS and Blowsion today so at least I ahve parts trickling in.