22 vs 24

[ragboy]

Don't worry, not trying to start a fight, or pissing war. I have just been trying to wrap my noodle around a few things. We took the 24Ve out on Saturday to see what would happen if we added more weight to the rear corner than usual, and started adding weight to the front. The weight up front seemed to destroy the wave. The RZ2 needs weight up front, but its more than just the extra 2 feet. They don't seem to react similarly, and I started thinking.

When you order a surfboard from say The Walker Project, and you order a 4.5. And then you order a 4.9 of the same board. The boards act the same, just take different weighted riders. I was applying this thought to the 22 vs 24 tige boats. Same hull, should act the same, just different proportions. But then, I realized that that is not the case. When you take a 4.5 board to 4.9, the blank is made by a CNC machine with a CAD file. So to make the bigger board, they just scale the drawing until its 4.9. So the board is the scaled the same all around to the new size. Its a bit wider, thicker, etc.

When they make an RZ2 from an RZ4 or vice versa, I think the only difference is the length. So its still the same beam, the same freeboard, etc, just the 24 foot version is 2 feet longer. So its really a different boat, and I think more different, at least when it comes to surf wake, then one would expect.

Anyway, I am just noodling it. My 24Ve made a great wake, and we loved it. I never considered it a competition level wake, but great all the same.

Our RZ2 surf wake, though, has blown me away. I think the hull shapes have to be similar enough, that competition level wake could be had from our 24Ve, but its going to be a much different formula. I am guessing that a 24Ft boat, should be treated like a 22 foot boat that already has a BUNCH of weight in the front. I am thinking its maybe as if the 24 foot boat acts like a 22ft boat with 500+ lbs already up front.

I am guessing for wakeboarding, since you weight the whole boat down, this isn't an issue, the 24 foot boat would def be the better.

Anyway, just noodling, what are your thoughts?

[Fiveflat]

Anyway, just noodling

You go noodling?




Sorry, I won't hijack anymore! just can't help but think of this when you say you're noodling.

[Fiveflat]

I think that ultimately it comes down to floatation from that extra 2 feet.

Have you ever seen weight specs on floating docks? A tiny little 2'X4'X 16" deep drum is rated for something like 600lbs. Now we are adding 2'X102" by much deeper freeboard than a 16" drum, that's a LOT of floatation!

[Ewok]

Just put this in front of your hijacked post, then you can say anything you want. Like when you tell someone "no disrespect, but your breath really stinks bad, it's horrible!". And they won't get mad at you for telling them their breath is stinky. Otherwise, why would they have put these little emoticons on the side of the posting window

Back on subject, I think you are correct rag boy, the beam is the same but the length changes the way the water is displaced. But as has been noted before, the angle or "dig" of the boat in the water makes a big difference. And it stands to reason that a smaller boat is more sensitive to weight distribution vs the larger boat that spreads out the weight more effectively.

[ragboy]

I definitely agree a smaller boat is more sensitive. But you would think a longer boat with the same running surface would build a longer, bigger wake, with the right setup. So far, I haven't seen that, but am willing to spend some time to work it out. October has always been a time when me and RJ and the kids work out this kind of stuff.

[da.bell]

I still don't believe the hulls are the same shape on the RZ4 -> 24Ve and the RZ2 -> 22Ve.

When Lanny was working at Tige 2-3 years ago, I was able to talk with him. He said that the RZ's had more of a rocker shape than the Ve's did. However, there is a debate on there with some saying that the RZ's and Ve's are the same hull. I wish that Tige would comment on this.

[turbonine]

My guess is that it has to do with rocker line and how weight is ditributed in relation to the apex of that rocker line. That apex acts like a pivot point and is further forward in an RZ than a Ve.

[Ewok]

I still don't believe the hulls are the same shape on the RZ4 -> 24Ve and the RZ2 -> 22Ve.

When Lanny was working at Tige 2-3 years ago, I was able to talk with him. He said that the RZ's had more of a rocker shape than the Ve's did. However, there is a debate on there with some saying that the RZ's and Ve's are the same hull. I wish that Tige would comment on this.

I have to agree as well, the side of the RZ hits the water earlier than the Ve when its listed on the side for wakesurfing and this has to affect the shape somehow. From the videos I've seen, when they are weighted equally and in a normal running attitude, they behave the same. So they sort of have the same hull but the pickle bow definitely changes the side of the boat and how it reacts to the water.

[ragboy]

Yes, I definitely agree on the side of the boat, but that would affect more the transition of the wave, not so much the shape I think. The shape of the wake on the Ve vs RZ is very similar.

I just saw a note on the "Now thats a Wave" thread from Stanley Wheelhouse on his 247. He said the same thing about his 247, he cannot put ANY weight up front. If he does, it destroys the wave. That makes me feel a bit better, I want to get out again and play, nothing up front.

More and more I am thinking a 24 (RZ or Ve) should be treated like a 22 that already has a bunch of weight up front, and needs weight only in the back to balance out. Maybe there is a point where the weight in back will be enough and the wake will be like the 22, just bigger. The only thing is, I am guessing this figure is more than I would want to weight the boat, but may do once to test my theory.

[talltigeguy]

I still don't believe the hulls are the same shape on the RZ4 -> 24Ve and the RZ2 -> 22Ve.

When Lanny was working at Tige 2-3 years ago, I was able to talk with him. He said that the RZ's had more of a rocker shape than the Ve's did. However, there is a debate on there with some saying that the RZ's and Ve's are the same hull. I wish that Tige would comment on this.

I believe this too. After watching this evolve for years like Da Bell has.

I have been behind an RZ4 wakeboard wake and a 24 Ve wakeboard wake and I think the difference is more than weight placement. I think that there are subtle but important running surface differences.

[ragboy]

Chris martinez was behind our RZ2 this weekend, and he definitely felt the shape was very similar, but he noticed our wake had more push, noticeably more. He is going to try to weight his boat more like we did, and see what happens. That will be a good experiment. He has a 22Ve.

[IDBoating]

I'm really interested in this thread, and don't yet have much to offer to it EXCEPT the following.

I asked the Tige folks about how they install factory ballast systems (the pumps and thru-hulls), and they sent me a fabrication drawing. Unfortunately, it was for an RZ4 and I had asked for a 24Ve. I mentioned that they had sent the wrong drawing, and they said the hulls are the same for both boats. Direct cut-and-paste from the email:

>>They are the same.<<

Obviously there are differences between a traditional and picklefork bow, but I have interpreted this to mean they are the same except as necessary to accommodate the bow design. That should only affect the most forward few feet, most of which is above the waterline.

[ragboy]

My guess is that the formula for the 24 ft boat, is all weight in the back, and nothing up front, until probably somewhere around 2500+ lbs. That is my guess. So in my mind, that means no weight up front, since I think max weight is 2800 or so.

Note that I am including people weight in there. I think RJ and I may go out tomorrow.

[IDBoating]

When they make an RZ2 from an RZ4 or vice versa, I think the only difference is the length. So its still the same beam, the same freeboard, etc, just the 24 foot version is 2 feet longer.

From my limited observations, I agree. If you really study side by side photos of the sister boats (22Ve and 24Ve, RZ2 and RZ4) you can see that the extra length is distributed around. It's not just that either the bow or passenger area has an extra two feet; the extra length is a little here, a little there. The pairs are the same width but ssstretchddd out.

I am guessing that a 24Ft boat, should be treated like a 22 foot boat that already has a BUNCH of weight in the front. I am thinking its maybe as if the 24 foot boat acts like a 22ft boat with 500+ lbs already up front.

Brainstorming here....

If the "stretch" mentioned above is real, then this makes total sense. The back end of the boats are basically the same; same engines, same engine compartments, same width so same storage compartments, etc. The rear 1/3rd of the boat also has lots of concentrated mass (full of engine and other heavy things) whereas the front 2/3rds has lots more empty volume. This means the center of gravity is toward the rear of the hull. And that means the longer the boat (greater the mass) in front of the CoG, the more the length will act precisely as you've surmised - like a shorter boat with ballast. Think of it like torque: You can get the same torque from a longer lever and less weight, or with a shorter lever and more weight. The former is the unballasted 24, the latter is the ballasted 22.

So... how would we alter the 24 to match the 22? The 24's length gives it "ballast equivalent" up front. That would tend to pitch the hull forward around its CoG and pull the back end up out of the water. You fix that with additional ballast in back, to get negative pitch and put that back end deeper into the water.

I suspect the trick will be to add weight to BOTH sides of the 24's stern. The effect of the extra length in front of the CoG is centered, and lifts both sides of the stern. As you add ballast to the surf side, it goes down but the other side goes up a bit; you're offsetting the bow's length but only on one side.

Two things may happen if you tune by adding weight to the non-surf side: 1) You'll offset the bow length effect, and 2) You'll raise the surf side of the stern. That will permit adding more weight to the surf side, to bring the rub rail back down where desired. Essentially you'll add weight to both sides of the stern to maintain the desired list (tilt) of the hull while offsetting the bow length effect.

At some point it may be necessary to add bow weight so that additional stern weight is possible without swamping. This gets back to someone else's comment about the larger hull being more buoyant. It will take more weight everywhere to force a 24 footer to settle down into the water like a 22.

Man, I wish it were earlier in the season and that I had fat sacs. I would LOVE to be playing around with this stuff. I'm jealous that all I can do is mental gymnastics.

[hycosurf]

My interpretation of WAboating is he is talking about the lean or angle of the rear of the boat port to starboard. Weight on nonsurf side assumes surf side rub rail will raise and need more weight to bring rub rail on surf side back down. If you are puting rail to water, weight any where else will adjust list angle of boat. I would imagine that weight on nonsurf side would onlymellow out wave. So how much of an angle produces the best wave I'm thinking.