Jump to content

Welcome to TheMalibuCrew!

As a guest, you are welcome to poke around and view the majority of the content that we have to offer, but in order to post, search, contact members, and get full use out of the website you will need to Register for an Account. It's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the TheMalibuCrew Family today!

03 Sunscape 21 LSV Surf set up


Levi900RR

Recommended Posts

Levi, I have an extra W704, now that I have a longer one, that I may sell if my buddy doesn't buy it.

Keep me posted...

I'm going to mess with what I have for now and make sure I can get it dialed in real good then I want to plumb everything in. I'd really like to keep it all under seats.

Link to comment

I would be really surprised if you even got 400 in that W705 under the port seats, considering that most of the space under those seats is only 16" wide and 8-9" high. Also, the W705 would need to be bulging to 17" in order to get to max capacity(650 lbs), so you can basically cut your weight capacity in half due to the height and width restrictions. I had an older version of the W705 that was 60x23x10 and it was tough to fill up because of all the extra material and airspace. There is just too much room for it to bulge and push the seats up. The tube sac will hold nearly the same due to the space and will fill much easier without having to burp it constantly like I did with the wider bag.

Levi, I have an extra W704, now that I have a longer one, that I may sell if my buddy doesn't buy it.

As I was walking out the door this morning, I took a quick stop to the garage and did a quick measurement under the port seats. Your width measurement is off. At floor level, the width is 19". At the top of the base, the width is 20". Floor to the top of the seat base is 8.5" I didn't measure length but recall that it is over the length of the bag, so that's a non issue.

This means that the W704 has no chance of filling the cavity as fully as the W705. I have used my W705 a couple of seasons and have never had to burp any of my bags. That said, they are all properly plumbed with impeller pumps and vented to thru-hulls with check valves like you are supposed to do.

Link to comment

As I was walking out the door this morning, I took a quick stop to the garage and did a quick measurement under the port seats. Your width measurement is off. At floor level, the width is 19". At the top of the base, the width is 20". Floor to the top of the seat base is 8.5" I didn't measure length but recall that it is over the length of the bag, so that's a non issue.

This means that the W704 has no chance of filling the cavity as fully as the W705. I have used my W705 a couple of seasons and have never had to burp any of my bags. That said, they are all properly plumbed with impeller pumps and vented to thru-hulls with check valves like you are supposed to do.

I wasn't arguing that the W704 can fill as full as the W705. My point was that it is a marginal difference, and certainly not the 100-150 lbs difference that you estimate due to the space and my experience with the larger bag in that space. I too have a Johnson pump and have it vented, but there was so much extra space in the bag that it had trouble venting on its own.

Using your measurements,

19.5"x8.5x60=9945 cubic inches. 9945/1728=5.755 cubic feet of water. 5.755x62.46(lbs per cubic foot of water)=359.4573 lbs. Granted you may get a little additional weight on the end where it widens out, but there is no way you are getting another 100-150 lbs in that space.

My point is that in my experience, the tube sac holds nearly the same(~50lbs less) and fills better without lifting the seats as much. Both will work, and ideally if you can find a bag that is 70+ inches long and narrow like the tube sac would be ideal. I found mine on ebay and it works great. It must have been a sample or a prototype.

Edited by Brodie
Link to comment

post-4769-1403132266929_thumb.jpg

Bottom

Just sayin'

The tube sac fills the space both width and height.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BTW, remove those plastic holders for the table leg/stern light as well to free up space.

post-4769-14031322888264_thumb.jpg

Edited by Brodie
Link to comment

i've got a 750 lbs. bags on each side of engine, plus a 3-400 lbs. in the ski locker.

I don't have any ballast in bow.

Our best results are:

-Rear bag full; surf side

-Rear 1/3 full; non-surf side

-Ski locker full

-250 lbs. man flesh in bow; Surf side

-5-600 lbs. man flesh along surf side (middle to back of boat).

The most people we've had in boat for surfing is (4) adults + (3) kids, along with adult surfer.

Should I get bigger bag for rear?

If I could kick my habit of slalom skiing, I'd get a 23 LSV…..

my son and I looked at some new ones last weekend.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

Dude that looks great. I think I'm now at the point where I need to re-prop...

Thanks. It gets waaaaayyyy better with 3-4 (or more) people on that side too.

Too bad I haven't surfed it for a month due to our no wake restriction. Planning to trailer to a different lake this weekend.

Edited by Brodie
Link to comment

I've been running a 750 in my rear locker, a W704 under the port side seats, and the center locker full. I am pretty sure I need to get some more weight up in the bow to lengthen the wave but my prop barley moves my boat all loaded up so I may have to lighten the load a bit until I can upgrade.

Link to comment

I've been running a 750 in my rear locker, a W704 under the port side seats, and the center locker full. I am pretty sure I need to get some more weight up in the bow to lengthen the wave but my prop barley moves my boat all loaded up so I may have to lighten the load a bit until I can upgrade.

Yes, you definitely need some bow weight. 300-400 works wonders, and will help the motor too. Yes, a 1939 (or more aggressive) is in order :)

Link to comment

1939 better than 1235?

Without this turning into another "prop" thread, I will just say that it is better for "my application". I don't need a prop as aggressive as the 1235 (or many others mentioned on this forum) for my mixture of surfing and pulling the wife and kids skiing. If I wakeboarded more, or had a larger crew on average, the 1939 would not cut it with heavy ballast(although it is a lot better than the 381 or 537) The 1939 would be the least aggessive prop that I would go with for anyone with a hull like ours. It doesn't over-rev, yet it works very well for surfing with 2k of ballast, and is perfect for skiing and cruising speeds. The 1273 would be the next prop I would go with on the curve (and one I might try if I conitinue to wakeboard more). There are many other props out there that will pull a lot better than the 1939, but they all will use a lot more fuel at ski speeds, and will hit the rev limiter. For me, the 1939 is a great mixture of power, speed, and fuel consumption, but for people that wakeboard more with heavy ballast, it is not the prop of choice.

Edited by Brodie
Link to comment

Good info man, I guess I need to think about what I want out of a prop. If I'm running all that weight plus another 3-400 in the bow do you think the 1939 will surf alright? Or will I need the 1235. I need to search around and see what people are getting for top speed etc out of the 1235. I want to have real good low end but don't want to sacrifice a ton. I'm starting to cruise more and more, doing dinner trips etc... Most places I go are 18-20 mile rides one way so I need to keep that in mind as well.

"My Application" is surfing with around 2K lbs, wakeboarding (usually with just the wedge and center locker) and cruising. Maybe I should give wakemakers a call and see what they recommend.

Thanks for the info.

Link to comment

Good info man, I guess I need to think about what I want out of a prop. If I'm running all that weight plus another 3-400 in the bow do you think the 1939 will surf alright? Or will I need the 1235. I need to search around and see what people are getting for top speed etc out of the 1235. I want to have real good low end but don't want to sacrifice a ton. I'm starting to cruise more and more, doing dinner trips etc... Most places I go are 18-20 mile rides one way so I need to keep that in mind as well.

"My Application" is surfing with around 2K lbs, wakeboarding (usually with just the wedge and center locker) and cruising. Maybe I should give wakemakers a call and see what they recommend.

Thanks for the info.

I run anywhere from 300(underseat bow sac)-700 lbs (with additional 400 on top of seats)in the bow for surfing, as well as the other 1600 lbs + 3-7 people and the 1939 works great. If you aren't running 2k+ for wakeboarding, then the 1939 is all you need. I get 44 mph top speed @ ~4800 rpms IIRC.

Link to comment

Brodie,

What engine do you have? I have been contemplating this upgrade and my biggest question was top speed loss. Looks like speed does not suffer much (I am 46mph with a 381 prop @ 4900rpm) but I want to make sure I am comparing apples apples.

Thanks

Link to comment

Brodie,

What engine do you have? I have been contemplating this upgrade and my biggest question was top speed loss. Looks like speed does not suffer much (I am 46mph with a 381 prop @ 4900rpm) but I want to make sure I am comparing apples apples.

Thanks

Monsoon. I don't think my WOT rpms changed at all going from the 381 to the 1939. The rpms are higher throughout the range with the 1939 by about 200 rpms with a lot more hole shot, but at WOT it is about the same.

Link to comment

Awesome,

Thanks Brodie

Do you run your wedge in addition to the weight you mentioned below or no wedge?

I run anywhere from 300(underseat bow sac)-700 lbs (with additional 400 on top of seats)in the bow for surfing, as well as the other 1600 lbs + 3-7 people and the 1939 works great. If you aren't running 2k+ for wakeboarding, then the 1939 is all you need. I get 44 mph top speed @ ~4800 rpms IIRC.

Link to comment

Awesome info again man. The cool thing is, I think if I get the 1939 from wakemakers and need something more aggressive they'll let me trade for a 1235.

PS, I run the wedge surfing... maybe I shouldn't?

Link to comment

Definitely use the wedge, it makes a big difference. I run 750 rear surf side, 300-350 under port seats, full MLS, bow sac under seats ~300 and sometimes another 400 in the bow.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment

I have the Monsoon 335. I upgraded to the 1939 from the 381. For surfing, we run 750lb in the rear locker, a W711 underseat bow sac that I guess gives ~300lb, and a w705 in the center locker that i guess gives 450 lb. Sometimes we add an additional 450lb sac on a seat on the surf side. So...1500-2000 lbs plus the wedge. The 1939 works fine for us and works fine for skiing. At about 11mph, I think we are running at about 2200-2300 rpm.

I'm going to try installing a homemade surfgate this weekend and I'll let you know how the prop does with that. We don't really wakeboard, so I can't say how it works...but if I remember, I'll try to fill all the ballast this weekend and get to 22mph.

Link to comment

I have the Monsoon 335. I upgraded to the 1939 from the 381. For surfing, we run 750lb in the rear locker, a W711 underseat bow sac that I guess gives ~300lb, and a w705 in the center locker that i guess gives 450 lb. Sometimes we add an additional 450lb sac on a seat on the surf side. So...1500-2000 lbs plus the wedge. The 1939 works fine for us and works fine for skiing. At about 11mph, I think we are running at about 2200-2300 rpm.

I'm going to try installing a homemade surfgate this weekend and I'll let you know how the prop does with that. We don't really wakeboard, so I can't say how it works...but if I remember, I'll try to fill all the ballast this weekend and get to 22mph.

Crystal,

I built a surfgate last year and have been fairly please with it so far, its really nice to not have the boat listed. The 2 things that I have found are:

1. don't delay the convergence too much (a very long gate, or a gate that sticks out very far). When I delayed the convergence too far I found that the wave I was trying to surf had no push.

2. Don't be afraid to pull back how much bow weight you run with the SG when you have a light crew. Following is what I usually run.

400lb in each locker, ski locker MLS full, wedge down, all peeps on left side of boat. If I have 6 people in the boat I would have 1 driving, 3-4 along the port side and then 1-2 in the bow. I have no extra bow weight except peeps.

If we are running a light crew, I will add a few hundred pounds on the floor in front of the port side seat or under the port side seat.

Just my experience. I found that bow weight was totally necessary when listing the boat but not nearly as helpful when using the SG.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...