2015 Weighting with AVX, TAPS, Sacs and other bloviations.

[Coop]

Then I believe yours should be the same as my 2012 Z3. As long as you have the Bennett setup from the factory it should work.

I assume the same thing, but I just wasn't sure if maybe the TAPS plate or connections with the ram had changed from 2011 to 2012. My boat is 4 hours away, so I can't go out and look at it. Thanks for the responses.

[007]

Hi ragboy,

If I am reading all this correctly, with my early production 2015 with the Surf "X" bags, hard tanks and AVX:
-Should have the most current TAPS plate
-Has more rear ballast than the current 2015's in production???
-Will not be as condusive to rigging a cross fill system due to the hard tanks
-Should have a similar ballast potential as the Wake9 bags you are developing for the 2015's(???)

And per other earlier posts, to recreate the Polarbear "Sunday" surf wave I need:
-About 400lbs. of lead or steel ballast (100lbs. under each rear bag + 200lbs. in the bow on the surf side)
-Full Front Bags
-Full Surf Side Rear
-50% approx offside rear
-a few more freinds than normal (we often surf with only 1-3 adults in the boat)

[ragboy]

@nharp1 I don't know if this will help the porpoising for wake boarding, which I saw you asked, but I sure would be interested to know. The plate is much wider, but a bit shorter, there is def more surface area and I think one of the main things is that it is THICKER and stronger. The old one flexed a lot.

@all this is tested for the VX, it may work better or help any boat, I think it would due to the flex issue, but I have no idea.

@coop, it should fit, if it doesn't send it back, you will just pay for shipping.

We did all kinds of testing, and if you want to get an idea of how we figured this out, here are a couple of private videos showing some of our tests. This first one is with one of the 8 prototypes we made, which was not yet thicker or much wider, and you can see how the water moved around the sides of the TAPS and then shot out the top and was the source of much of the wash. This is why going very wide helped eliminate that, along with thicker and no flex.

[ragboy]

This was an earlier test, I believe with a plate Tige modified for us, just turned the back edge down. You can see the flex on the edges on this one.

when you combine this taps, and change the angle up, then its heaven, IMHO. The AVX is still a bit better since you can make different on each side, though.

[ragboy]

Hi ragboy,

If I am reading all this correctly, with my early production 2015 with the Surf "X" bags, hard tanks and AVX:
-Should have the most current TAPS plate
-Has more rear ballast than the current 2015's in production???
-Will not be as condusive to rigging a cross fill system due to the hard tanks
-Should have a similar ballast potential as the Wake9 bags you are developing for the 2015's(???)

And per other earlier posts, to recreate the Polarbear "Sunday" surf wave I need:
-About 400lbs. of lead or steel ballast (100lbs. under each rear bag + 200lbs. in the bow on the surf side)
-Full Front Bags
-Full Surf Side Rear
-50% approx offside rear
-a few more freinds than normal (we often surf with only 1-3 adults in the boat)

You should have current taps, compare to the picture earlier in this thread to be sure.
Not sure on more ballast, they may have adjust bags cuz they are pretty tight on certifications and stuff.
Cross is just as easy, it just doesn't work quite as well due to slow empty times. Switching from goofy to regular is fine with tanks or not, regular to goofy is slower due to tanks.
Yes, same potential, the 2012-2014 bags may slot right in, I would need pictures.

[NHarp1]

Ragboy,
Do you have any video of the finished plate performance? Did the final (thicker, and wider) version practically eliminate the water washing back over the top of the TAPS plate?

[ragboy]

I don't have the video of under the tunnel with the new one, it was lost. I can take some more in the near future, but it was obvious that making it wider allowed less water around it and up the tunnel that shot out the back. The stiffness also made a huge difference, you could see it. Well, huge is arguable, but you notice every little thing.

This is a private video I did in august of 2013, and this was right after tige was working on some AVX prototypes and we build a manually adjustable VX and found a much better setting. This is the first video report I did when we had found that setting, and using the new taps plate, you can see the goofy wake, as clean and as good as the regular with all the extra weight, we did a stock one as well.

[chpthril]

FYI!

I have the exact dimensions of the OEM Tige Z3 sac. Over the weekend, I will get them spec'd out to see what the weight comes out to based on those dimensions.

[Greeko]

17, 424 Cubic inches in the sack, 7,690 Cubic Inches in the Arm. Total Cubic inches of water is 25,114. This equates to approximately 903 Lbs if the sack is super full! Not enough for a 23 foot boat!

[Booms]

According to the Tige website each corner of the Z3 is 1200 lbs with the surf XL package.

[Greeko]

According to the Tige website each corner of the Z3 is 1200 lbs with the surf XL package.

That is for Rev 1 bags, Rev 2 Bags are 900! They couldn't get the certifications for the extra weight...

[Booms]

That is for Rev 1 bags, Rev 2 Bags are 900! They couldn't get the certifications for the extra weight...

****! I paid for 3500 pounds of ballast I would hope I get 3500 pounds of ballast!

[JohnnieMo]

****! I paid for 3500 pounds of ballast I would hope I get 3500 pounds of ballast!

I think Tigé rates the bags for their 'potential' and not what they actually can fit once inside the boat.

Case and point my Z1 has 400lb rated bags in the front (two of them) but they fill in 2:30. When you do the math you realize that this is well beyond the capabilities of the pump.

In the end I don't care about the number, I care about the wave. And my wave still isn't good enough. That's why I do whatever ragboy recommends

Sent from my Passport

[Booms]

I am going to call my dealer Monday and have Tige plumb for the bags but keep the bags if they are not going to provide me with an epic, comp size wave.
They can give me a deduct for the 2 rear bags and I will buy whatever Ragboy uses at the ewt.

[ragboy]

I will let you know what we do, we are working on it.

Regarding @chpthril's figures. I am out of town and don't have the specs in front of me, but my last conversation was that the Z3 would have the same dimensions as the wake9 goofy sac on both sides. If that is correct, I can tell you that we tested those in several ways and got a weight of about 1200 lbs. So if they are using the wake9 goofy sac on both sides, it should be 1200 lbs and that is more than was at the polar bear on the first day.

If they have used something smaller than the goofy wake9 z3 sac, then I have no idea.

If you take one of those sacs, and you fill them up with air outside of the boat, you will see what I mean, they can carry a lot more water than the measurements work out to in cubic inches.

Also, those sacs were carefully fitted to the Z3 and the Z1 with different measurements til they fit the space right when filled, not putting too much pressure on the boat in certain areas. For example, if you have space that is 12 inches tall too fill, you may make the sack 6 inches tall in measurement. But when you fill it up with water, it fills up the space. If you did it at 12 inches, you blow the seat up, which happens with other bags and not with ours, we were very careful about this. The same goes for the measurements in the locker.

The only true test for weight of a sac in a boat, is to put it in the boat, fill it up and measure how much water it took to fill. I am sure @chpthril's math is correct ;-), but it doesn't necessarily translate to actual volume/weight in this instance. I have a picture somewhere of some of these bags filled on the ground, out of the boat, pretty nuts.