New Tow Boat

[ejj]

I've surfed 2 forward drives--Regal and Monterey. Both had ballast and both surfed fine.   The ability to trim the prop to change the pocket is pretty cool. 

The drawback of the forward drive is the fact that you can't really trim the motor up as you can in a standard IO.   Both boats actually handle every well--particularly at low speeds and backing, two things that inboard owners learn to manage.  

The damage issue is real. If my primary places to use it were shallow or involved beaching a lot, not as fun.  But that's not too different from an inboard. 

 

Oh--the WT-1 guys are th Dorton's--ex MasterCraft owners. 

[Bill_AirJunky]

Imagine what it would do to a rope/handle if you ever ran over it.  

[MadMan]

11 hours ago, ejj said:

The drawback of the forward drive is the fact that you can't really trim the motor up as you can in a standard IO.

Is that true?  I assumed it was basically a standard IO with the prop on the front.

[MadMan]

16 hours ago, jbower said:

I'm not up on v drive and tranny costs but I don't see why they wouldn't use it. I would think a tranny and vdrive would cost less than one of those out drives. On the other hand I would like to see it in action. I just personally don't see it working out.

I agree, the v-drive should cost less since it's less complicated.  I believe the reason Volvo developed this is the same reason the vast majority of family boat are IO or Outboard, better drivability.

 

[malibudog]

Had a friend who surfed one.  Said that the wake was fine going in a straight line, but that when the boat turned even a little, the wave washed out quite a bit.  By moving the drive another 15" forward, the R may have lessened any such issues.  Haven't ridden one myself.  The local dealer had a few priced in the 70K neighborhood, but I would have gone with an Axis at a similar price before jumping in on such new tech.

[MadMan]

It seems like you would be able to make the same size wake with less ballast because the prop is not angled down so much, picking the boat up out of the water.

Another advantage of an IO is the ability to "trim it up" and cruise at >40mph at less than half throttle.  And top speed 55 or 60 mph with 300  horsepower.

[ejj]

1 hour ago, MadMan said:

Is that true?  I assumed it was basically a standard IO with the prop on the front.

Sorry--should have been more clear.  The drive can be trimmed, which makes for nice wave/speed control, cruising, etc..   However, the user cannot trim the motor up out of the way--a trad IO can be trimmed to be nearly equal to hull depth.  This will still stick down below the hull by 12 inches.

 

I don't know why people are commenting on it being a nightmare to work on.  It's basically a standard Duoprop set up with the props on the front.  Is this coming from people that have done maintenance on standard out drives and FF drives?  I'd love to hear the details if so.  

[Sailvi767]

2 hours ago, MadMan said:

It seems like you would be able to make the same size wake with less ballast because the prop is not angled down so much, picking the boat up out of the water.

Another advantage of an IO is the ability to "trim it up" and cruise at >40mph at less than half throttle.  And top speed 55 or 60 mph with 300  horsepower.

The fwd drive can't be trimmed out to the degree a stern drive can. Regardless of that you're  never going to see the speeds you posted in a 4000lb plus boat. Another consideration is a spare prop set is 1800 dollars. Best discount I could find brings it down to 1600. Here is some performance data. Note the base price on the boat. They are not cheap.

We got the 2300 RX Surf to plane in 3.5 seconds, passed through 20 mph in 5.8 seconds and 30 mph in 8.2 seconds. We achieved a top speed of 46.2 mph at 5600 rpms. 

If the watersports toys are staying stored for a day and you just want to take friends and family out for a cruise, we found the best speed to be at 4000 rpms, giving us 30.9 mph and a range of 171 statute miles. 

Observations

With a base price of $91,870, Regal has nailed

 

Edited April 25, 2016 by Sailvi767

[jbower]

Haven't taken many vp out drives apart due to tools and no availability of parts. When one breaks I call up some people in Canada and nearly pay 7000 for a rebuilt one. I just don't like the cost factor of them being I can get a complete mercruiser out drive for less than 3000

[95echelon]

I would be on 100% on board with this concept if it had a V drive. There is no reason or benefit to be for that type of drive. There are a couple of design features on this boat that are breaking the KISS principle.

 

Love the idea of fully finished fiberglass, my knuckles would  love it even more!

[mattostmeyer]

Hello Everyone,

Thanks Nate for starting the post, and thank you all for your interest!  Nate has been a good friend and riding buddy for a few years.  I should have known he'd post this!!!

I started this concept with the primary objective of making a more efficient wakeboard boat.  When I built the electric boat, we were limited in runtime, and I felt that improvement could be made to the running surface and drive.  This boat is built on an evaluation of 18 different hull shapes and configurations, leading us to the production running surface, which is about 30% lower drag than the other big wakeboats. 

I have been a proponent of dual propellers on wakeboats since the introduction of IPS a decade ago.  I was lucky enough to get to put my hypothesis to the test on one of the electric boat prototypes.  We were running a V-Drive on electric power, which allowed us to see exactly how much power the boat was consuming.  We removed the V-Drive setup from that boat and glassed a pocket into the bottom of that hull, where we mounted the lower end of a Mercruiser Bravo III, in a fixed position pod drive setup, steered by the dual rudders behind the propellers.  That boat consumed 12-15% less power than the V-Drive version did, and the wake was far better.  There was no bias port to starboard, and it actually stood up taller and cleaner. 

Fast forward to the introduction of the Forward Drive, and we finally have a production solution.  We could rig this boat as a V-Drive, but, run side-by-side with the Forward Drive version, we believe that 90% of customers will prefer the Forward Drive.  Keep in mind, that this is the first and only Forward Drive put onto an actual watersports hull, with enough ballast to do the job. 

To date, we have done extensive state-of-the-art Computer CFD simulation, and we have built and tow-tested a 1/6 scale model.  All indications are that we will produce the best surf wave in the industry (of course, I did see a few videos of the M235 recently, and it may be close... that wave looks good!) and our wakeboard wake will be comparable (hopefully the BEST, but that's quite subjective...) to the other flagships on the market today.  Also, with regard to bow rise, the simulation is 100% accurate on this - there is only about 1 degree bow rise over the running trim angle, with the drive at 0 degrees trim.  Utilizing the 5 degrees of negative trim available in the drive, we expect zero bow rise (I didn't put the money into the additional simulation to test this... seems pretty obvious.)  The final proof will be when we launch the first boat in early June.

One of the biggest benefits of this boat, if you're concerned with fuel costs and environmental impact, is that you'll burn about 35% less fuel than the competition.  Also, the features you'll get with this boat, many of which do not exist anywhere else, are pretty stacked. 

Pricing will be released as soon as we work though the last bit of negotiations, but to generalize, the loaded up purchase price will be in the low $100's, for a product comparable with the $130-$150k competition.  This is due largely to our direct sale distribution model, and some very efficient construction techniques.  You'll also be entitled to "Ride Rewards", which if you haven't already checked out, look at that section on our website.  There will be customers who make enough to repay their boat within a couple years.  www.reflectboats.com

Thanks again for all your interest and comments! 

I'm very excited to share video and photos of the maiden voyage with you all!  In the mean time, I'll check back here from time to time, and I'm always available through the contact on the website. 

 

Cheers! 

 

[randv]

Thanks for the post @mattostmeyer. I think the concept is a good one, and can see why it could work well. I love it that people bring innovations to the market - better for all of us in the long run!

I really like the idea of having a thrust angle that can be trimmed (so it can be trimmed out and in? How much?), as that will help with lots of things, and counter rotating props should get rid of the issue my 23LSV has which is that on one side the wave is better than the other.  Also for my lake, draft isn't an issue so if the outdrive needs a little deeper water, that wont matter to many of us. Out of interest, how much longer does the leg go below the hull when compared to a typical v-drive?

However I think that breaking into the v-drive market will be tough unless the performance is significantly better than the existing offerings, or that the price is much less. At just above $100k, it puts it right in the heart of most V-drives (excluding G23s and M235s), so it will need to have a significant performance advantage!  Sure it will reverse better than a v-drive, but most of us get over that issue once we have built up a bit of experience, however things like dealer support and the perception (rightly or wrongly) of depreciation issues with newcomers (just read the Pavatti threads on here and other forums) will always be on people mind until it gets well established. The leading brands like Malibu, MC, SAN, are really easy to resell and that is always important when forking out $100k.

Look forward to hearing about its development, and how it is progressing, and genuinely hope that it proves to be a great boat. Keep us updated on here and good luck.

I hope it doesn't look too quirky once finished, as I think that can be a turn-off. I never understood why the 'Wake Tractor WT-1' had to look so bizarre, and I really can't imaging too many people buying that thing over a 3 or 4 year old Axis.

[mattostmeyer]

Likewise, thanks for the thoughts @randv, I agree that there are people who really like the inboard configuration, and there are some great inboards built today!  We are aiming to improve performance, wake quality and efficiency substantially.  Proof will be on the water!

The bottom of the forward drive skeg is 18-1/4" below the hull, and the prop tips are 17" below the hull.  17" props required on the big inboards hang below the hull about 17-1/2".  So draft wise, we are pretty comparable, although, we are a generally narrower running surface, so we will sit deeper in the water ballasted.  (But that's what you need to make a big wake!)

Volvo's engineers tell me that they have run the drive through some large logs with no damage.  They explained several reasons it can take the abuse.  First, the props are stainless steel, and have a relatively thick blade cross section, so they can take quite a bit of abuse.  Also, they have a flexible coupler in the gear box that can twist substantially (sorry, I don't remember exactly how many degrees...) and spring back, to dampen shock impacts.  This coupler is the first part to shear if the props are stopped, and will shear before significant prop damage occurs.  It can be replaced in less than an hour.  And finally, yes, the drive is designed to shear off under a severe impact, so that your transom stays intact and your boat doesn't sink.  However, the force required to shear the drive off is more like running into a stationary rock shelf or a very large submerged tree than hitting a log.  

I'm sure I'll personally get the opportunity to run the drive into some logs (unintentionally!) and you can bet I'll be the first to circle back around and see just how big a log we hit!  I think with all the concern about this, I'll keep a photo record of the impacts and damage/no damage.  I'm curious as well how much abuse it will take.

[jtrovato]

Sounds like a lot of sound research went into getting to where you are today.  I'm a little disappointed to hear the price point is going to be north of $100K.  I would have hoped that it would be less than that to try and break into this market.  I think you're going to have a hard time breaking in with the big name tow boats in the same price point.  They have their reputation, resale, dealer network, etc. all to back them up.  Even with a significant performance claim, I think it's going to be tough to break in when you're talking the same price as a well-established brand. 

I wish you all the luck, as it looks like it will be a great product if it performs as expected.