Did come moving =)

[Wickedcummins]

wanted the batterys out of the way and wanted to be able to move the fat sac weight all the way to the back.. So I made a new battery tray and moved things around

[embo]

What you did is something I was playing around with in my head. I thought of doing the same thing and then being able to have the sacs all the way back and even more weight. That added room I think will really increase the amount of ballast that fits in the rear lockers.

Would you let us know what you find as far as how much more ballast you actually fit in there and how it effects your wake?

Nice post.

[Wickedcummins]

I can fully fill custom 2k sacs =) My wake has great push 15 feet out I will update sometime here soon with the pics of the boards and rails I built. Takes about 1 min to pull my boards and work on anything with the engine in seconds.. I can easly get to anything and everything on the engine. The trays can be built to allow the ski pylon as well but I removed mine the day i bought the boat

[embo]

So, did you put anyting against the back wall or anywhere to protect the bag from getting punctured? I see some misc. bolts that look like they might do some damage to the sac when it is full. And what about the cables and things on the starboard side...any issues with weight against them? I really like this idea. Instead of having that getto ballast, just having the ballast bag farther back would certainly do the trick. I would love to be able to move my 1100 jumbo back a foot or two and get it full to the brim.

Are you running the stock 537 prop or did you change to the 1235 or ?

[Wickedcummins]

all the cables got moved. And yes on the back transom I coved it with carpet. Like I said that was the day I started ill get some more pics of it all done here soon!

[chpthril]

Looks well thought out and perfectly exicuted, but I gotta ask, again, is the amount of water getting moved into that small transom cavity, what was once behind the wall, equal to the weight of the now relocated batteries.

here is my reasoning: A group-24 battery is not much bigger then a gallon milk jug. A group-24 weights 60+ LBs and a gallon of water weights 8.34 Lbs. A project like this takes a lot of work for what seems to be a net loss. Again, not criticizing your work, its awesome, just really wondering if its for a gain in ballast.

[Wickedcummins]

Thanks

It actually made alot of difference in the wave and gave me alot more storage room. The reason I moved them tho was to allow for better access to the engine. I didnt want to be out on a lake far from home on a vacation and have to work around stuff. Now its simple to get to all of the engine.

[embo]

I would also think (thinking about my jumbos) that by moving them back I would be able fill them up almost 100% if not 95% full. That would be equal to about 245lbs differenece for me. Even if only getting 90% I would be getting 190 lbs extra and when the bag isn't being used,as Wickedcummins said, the storage is increased too.

190 doesn't probably seem like much but that's what I am putting on the swim platform or maybe only 150 and this way I wouldn't proabably have to do that and leave the weight in the rear locker and not mess around with another sac besides the jumbo. I would have to really take a look and measure but I think the move would be beneficial. Not sure if I am gonna do it but I like the idea.

Also, when moving the sac backwards, your not only getting a "little" more weight in the rear locker but you are moving that weight and the weight you previously had in the locker, back and that is huge in how it affects the wake. When I used the Jumbo in the rear locker, 260 in the seat behind the driver 2 peeps on or near that bag, and one peep in the bow, I could get the rubrail down to within 3 inches of waterline. Currently removing the 260 bag behind the driver, but keeping all the rest the same and instead taking that 260 bag, filling it about half and putting it on the platform, I now of rubrail without question. To be honest, I get over rubrail often. This has bad a pretty big difference in the wake I can generate. This is just my experience so it might not apply to all.

[chpthril]

I would also think (thinking about my jumbos) that by moving them back I would be able fill them up almost 100% if not 95% full. That would be equal to about 245lbs differenece for me. Even if only getting 90% I would be getting 190 lbs extra and when the bag isn't being used,as Wickedcummins said, the storage is increased too.

190 doesn't probably seem like much but that's what I am putting on the swim platform or maybe only 150 and this way I wouldn't probably have to do that and leave the weight in the rear locker and not mess around with another sac besides the jumbo. I would have to really take a look and measure but I think the move would be beneficial. Not sure if I am gonna do it but I like the idea.

Also, when moving the sac backwards, your not only getting a "little" more weight in the rear locker but you are moving that weight and the weight you previously had in the locker, back and that is huge in how it affects the wake. When I used the Jumbo in the rear locker, 260 in the seat behind the driver 2 peeps on or near that bag, and one peep in the bow, I could get the rubrail down to within 3 inches of waterline. Currently removing the 260 bag behind the driver, but keeping all the rest the same and instead taking that 260 bag, filling it about half and putting it on the platform, I now of rubrail without question. To be honest, I get over rubrail often. This has bad a pretty big difference in the wake I can generate. This is just my experience so it might not apply to all.

I understand the lever theory, but keep in mind that the weight of the two batteries that where back there, are now moved forward, or even worse, to the opposite side of the boat. This will actually work towards the other side of the lever theory and counter act the water weight.

Also, you dudes with the 22/24 V's, have more space behind the wall then those with Ve's and 20V's.

[embo]

You are correct chpthl. I have to say I didn't think about the offset of the batts. 190-60=130. hmmm...is there room to put the batts directly behind the engine thereby keeping the 60 in the back? Seems to me I remember thinking it was do-able but I haven't been working on this puppies like you guys have and you would know for sure what would be do-able. Know it might be a bit of a pain getting at the back of the engine if needed, but hopefully you are only needing to do that two times per year and no more. I

Would that work?

[Wickedcummins]

The battery weight is in the center of the boat so the weight is downward weight and not side to side. Insead of them counter balacing the weight of each other in the stock location. Stock hurts u because u have the same battery on the side ur not weighting down. In the center the weight is netural.Now they weight the hull center down

[shawn74]

i just got a jumbo sac to replace my 450 and if i hadnt already added two more 29's for a total of four batteries in the back corner i would consider doing the math, small lead versus big water so i could fill the jumbo more .wicked the job looks good and the center balance keeps it versatile

[bigdaddy_houseboater]

So Wick.. I gotta ask.. are you back in love with your Tige? I fell back in love with mine... wondering if you did the same.

[Wickedcummins]

Not the boat my anger comes from! Its the way they treat old owners

[duffymahoney]

Nicely done, I wanted to the the same thing, but my pumps needed to be were the batteries are. Nice mod!