Wave ratings

At Southern Surfest we did something new this year and did some specific testing of surf waves. We had each rider rate the push of the pocket in the middle of the wave and to the back of the wave. We also measured the length of all 10 2015 major brands of boats. We are finalizing the results and will publish next week but I am curious to hear who you think had the best results?!!

Each and every boat had the best result. They each deserve a trophy, gold plaque and a cookie.

From what I heard some boats shined and others did not, some boats had some mechanical mishaps others had some serious driver errors in judgement, however, I heard very little consistent feedback beyond what 'we' already know about certain models/boats, so it will be very interesting to see if there are clear trends that can be fished out of the 40+ rider reviews.

That is all I have to add, beyond we were blessed awesome weather, good food and a good time seemed to be had by all. Thanks Scott, Drew, Jim, Keith and everyone else and put in their time to make it a great weekend.

Nick

I'm gonna put my money on a Tige with the AVX system, especially if it's a Z1 or Z3

It would be best if they made all the ratings anonymous. Then sponsorship wouldn't get in the way as much.

Here are the results:

New for 2015 we measured the length of all of the boat waves at Southern Surfest. We were very surprised how varied the results were. Thank you to Shawn Wright of Brigade Wakesurfing for being the official measurement person! To qualify the results, they were taken on the same lake, in the same area, same group of people and using the same method during each round. Both the regular and goofy sides were measured and if the boat had a wake adjusting system we measured the mellow setting and the steep settings. We also had the driver keep the same speed setting when the surfers were out on the water so they couldn't manipulate the results (many wanted to speed up!!). From this we took the longest wave measured. Only one boat had a a large variation so we are noting it on our results (and the MasterCraft X20 was not measured due to schedule goof up).

1. 2015 Nautique G23: 23' 8"
2. 2015 Supreme S226: 23' 4"
3. 2015 Centurion FS33: 21' 4"
4. 2015 Axis A24: 20' 6"
5. 2015 MasterCraft X23 Goofy Side: 19' 8"
6. 2015 Supra SE550: 18' 1"
7. 2015 Malibu 23 LSV: 17' 8"
8. 2015 Moomba Mojo (w auto flow): 17' 3"
8. 2015 Tige Z1 (w AVX): 17' 3"
9. 2015 MasterCraft X23 Regular Side: 16' 8"

As an engineer I'm all for empirical data. This is pretty meaningless to me without a better understanding of how it was measured, though. Some questions:

1. Is this with similar weighting?
2. How is the length being measured, how do you decide when the wave is "done"?
3. What was the speed setting, and why not use the "best speed" for that boat/rider/board?

Ultimately I think it would be better to understand what the riders voted the best wave when set up the best for that boat.

I agree with John. It would also be interesting to see which boats used stock ballast and which boats added ballast. Was the G23 slammed with an additional 2,000lbs and the Tige and X23 were stock?

Inquiring minds want to know...

I will take a stab at answering and providing some details. The measurement device was a small bouy/float attached to a tape line. It seemed to work well and did not interfere with the wave.

The distance was measured from the corner of the rub rail out to the where the wave started crashing on itself, I believe. I think the idea was to measure the 'clean' face.
I probably would have measured from the swim deck corner, since swim decks vary so much, and the effective wave is really a few feet past the swim deck.

Nick

All good questions and we will be publishing the details behind this and the overall reviews on our website soon. I will include the ballast set ups for each boat, speed range, wave settings, etc. So all of that is coming soon. I will say that the event itself is kind of a battle of the brands. Being a demo event each boat maker dials in each wave to max possible to have the best showing possible. We don't restrict how they ballast up... we just tell them people will be judging and testings so we advise to bring their A game to the event. Some boats have extra ballast and others run stock but the ones who run stock usually have a new ballast design to hold more water than before. Off the top of my head the G23 and Tige had extra ballast and the X23 was stock. The wave was "done' at the wash out of the back of the wave and was measured from the back of the transom. You will see when we show our overall reviews that the riders rated the back of the wave push and other criteria... this data along with the measured length should help to be more informed. The best speeds were being used all weekend long... so if a boat was going 10.8 to 11.1 all weekend then it would not be fair to now bump up to 11.8 when it comes to measuring time. If the wave was a great wave at 11.8 then the driver should be making that their normal speed range all weekend. The event motivates this to happen and we wanted the wave length at the event speeds. More to come

By the way it would be nice to have some engineer types involved the next time we do this as there is more things to take into account on a wave. We are a group of riders doing this and not industry people so we try to be as unbiased as possible. I was typing while Nick was replying.

Trying to scientifically rate waves that are subjective and FULL of differing variables is just silly. At this point, push is just laughable too. Learn how to ride the board and you'll never have an issue with it, as long as the wave is half-way decent.

Events like these are awesome, because you get to get out there and surf and try different boards and boats (and I applaud the organizers and volunteers), but using them to make a scientific determination/rating is going overboard.

^^ Tom, I can't agree. I've heard that argument before in other venues and it's just tired. Science is just trying to understand the natural world through experimentation and observation. Any complex problem is decomposable and understandable through scientific process -- building a great wave is no different. Look at what has been done with advancing wakesurf boards -- people like Chaos and Surfdad try to understand what works and what doesn't and why, and change up the formula. I can understand how this can be misused as a marketing tool, but done right it's useful for builders AND buyers.

Isn't this kind of like trying to determine the perfect sized/shaped penis for all women?

It's more like trying to qualify the different penis types which exist, their properties, and what general preferences can be observed. But I leave that exercise up to the audience

Originally Posted by JohnAr

^^ Tom, I can't agree. I've heard that argument before in other venues and it's just tired. Science is just trying to understand the natural world through experimentation and observation. Any complex problem is decomposable and understandable through scientific process -- building a great wave is no different. Look at what has been done with advancing wakesurf boards -- people like Chaos and Surfdad try to understand what works and what doesn't and why, and change up the formula. I can understand how this can be misused as a marketing tool, but done right it's useful for builders AND buyers.

Surf boards are another one that is hard to nail down a "best" for.

Just look at ocean surfing. Different board shapes, lengths, volumes, rails, etc... for all different wave types that a rider might ride in. Then you have different riding styles on all of those waves. Some people like longboards, some people like mellow fish shapes, some people like snappy shortboards.... it goes on and on. There is no one perfect surf board the same way there is no one perfect wave. It's all about preference and what the individual rider subjectively likes.

I think the take home here is we see a 7' difference between the 'longest' wave and the 'shortest' wave. That is a huge spread and far greater than anyone might have expected. However, what we have determined is it is not necessarily an even playing field with regard to ballast, etc. And, frankly this would be difficult to really control and compare as each boat is a different length, with many different characteristics and features to attempt to control.

That being said, quantifying some aspects like this is important. We all know that some boats manufacturers are known for 'short' waves, particularly in their older hulls. However, just because they are known to be short or the human characterization is that the wave is short, does not necessarily mean or accurately describe the wave as short. What is short? Relative/relatively? Compared to? You first have to ask the question.

I always go back to how people describe boards as fast, and this is the most confused term in wake surfing. When people say a board is fast they usually mean the board is loose. Loose 'feels' fast. A 'lock' end board feels slow, until you unlock it.

Nick

So why does the MC X23 get both sides posted and no other boat seeing that the X23 wave lengths in the "test" were mediocre at best compared to the 20+ foot waves of the others. Surely the top 3 or 4 boats had longer opposite side waves than the 16'8" of the X23

what was the test procedure? Is this just length from the transom or surfable length of the wave?

For instance, I know on my last boat (2011 MB 23) the surfable part of the wave began much farther away from the transom and swim platform than on my current boat (Malibu 23lsv). So I don't doubt that if I were holding a measuring tape from the back of the pocket to the transom on the MB that the raw number would be longer, but I don't know that that equates to an actual longer pocket.

Also not being able to vary speed is a big deal too. Not all boats are going to put out their best wave at the same speed. My MB would put out a great wave all day long at 12. Other boats need to be far slower.

I'd rather see a "length of surfable pocket" measurement that is not locked into a particular speed.

This makes as much sense as arguing about what is the best bills to carry in your wallet. Which are most accepted. It depends on where you are and what your spending them on. This test proves nothing. I'm sure if you let each one of the manufactures play with those waves they could produce better results.

I find it hard to believe that the supra was throwing that small a wave. I've seen those things in action and they throw agreat wake. In regards to the Tigé do we know what setting the AVX was at? Theres a lot of variability with this data.

The Tige Z1 is the only 21' boat in the test, the rest are 22' to 24'.

No Tige Z3 there?

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Also not being able to vary speed is a big deal too. Not all boats are going to put out their best wave at the same speed. My MB would put out a great wave all day long at 12. Other boats need to be far slower.

I'd rather see a "length of surfable pocket" measurement that is not locked into a particular speed.

Read the write up again, it sounds like they actually have a pretty fair system for testing out the waves and they did their best for keeping the variables at a minimum. All the boats were demo boats and each one got to test out their setup and found what they would call optimum for the situation before the testing began, and since these were the dealers setting up each boat I'm sure they had a lot invested in getting it as good as they could. But once testing began they couldn't change the variables like speed and ballast just to preform best at that specific measurement. i.e. in the wave length measurement they could all the sudden go a couple MPH faster, since we all know that would make the wave "longer".

So not all boats had to go 11.5 mph, just no body could change the speed they picked originally from test to test

Originally Posted by chillinoj

Read the write up again, it sounds like they actually have a pretty fair system for testing out the waves and they did their best for keeping the variables at a minimum. All the boats were demo boats and each one got to test out their setup and found what they would call optimum for the situation before the testing began, and since these were the dealers setting up each boat I'm sure they had a lot invested in getting it as good as they could. But once testing began they couldn't change the variables like speed and ballast just to preform best at that specific measurement. i.e. in the wave length measurement they could all the sudden go a couple MPH faster, since we all know that would make the wave "longer".

So not all boats had to go 11.5 mph, just no body could change the speed they picked originally from test to test

That makes sense. And yet... I do vary the speed of my own boat from rider to rider and board to board. Still working out the setup on the LSV, but with our MB I'd vary from 11.3 to 13.3. All the time on any given day. At 13.3 the wave was so long I had to add a few sections to our surf rope.

Also as noted in my original post, length from wash to transom does not necessarily translate to longest useable pocket. On our MB the wave developed much farther behind the swim platform than other boats.

All in all I do appreciate the effort to quantify some of this stuff though.

The reality of this is as objective as someone would like to make this, it is still a very subjective preference. Variables include cost to purchase, wave shape, the riders style of riding and or dealer proximity and boat maintenance. What may be good for someone maybe be so great for someone else. If you are buying, get a real time demo with a knowledgeable dealer. Better yet, hitch a ride with a knowledgeable boat owner and get the straight scoop.

First, obviously this is not scientific. There are no real controls, nor were the test run multiple times, and it would be very difficult to call it reproducible.

It is a start, and I think it will spur further looks at quantifying wave lengths within a set of parameters. Will we be able to effectively quantify the rideable wave length? Probably not. That adds even more subjective human variables. Comparing the different boat models is like comparing apples and oranges. They make great juice, but are not the same or even comparable. What many would find useful I think is if someone looked at wave lengths of individual boats at different speeds and different basic ballast configurations. You could come up with a great chart that would allow people to much more rapidly dial in their boat for their needs.

I do appreciate the thread however, because it provides continued additive evidence for how loyal to almost cultish people are about their boat brands. The heart of the wake surf industry is the boat.

Nick

Originally Posted by swell_rider

Well that explains it...

Haha. I thought the same thing. I am not a MC fanboy though. I own an Axis now and I know the surf wake isn't great, the wakeboard wake is money though. The surfwake is good with push. I was never much a quick footed guy so doing and cool tricks is tough.

Originally Posted by swell_rider

Somebody remove this clown T Roberts
from the forum - he brings nothing

hows about you just stop taking the bait?

I see a lot of talking no links to cool videos...

Originally Posted by st68

All good questions and we will be publishing the details behind this and the overall reviews on our website soon. I will include the ballast set ups for each boat, speed range, wave settings, etc. So all of that is coming soon. I will say that the event itself is kind of a battle of the brands. Being a demo event each boat maker dials in each wave to max possible to have the best showing possible. We don't restrict how they ballast up... we just tell them people will be judging and testings so we advise to bring their A game to the event. Some boats have extra ballast and others run stock but the ones who run stock usually have a new ballast design to hold more water than before. Off the top of my head the G23 and Tige had extra ballast and the X23 was stock. The wave was "done' at the wash out of the back of the wave and was measured from the back of the transom. You will see when we show our overall reviews that the riders rated the back of the wave push and other criteria... this data along with the measured length should help to be more informed. The best speeds were being used all weekend long... so if a boat was going 10.8 to 11.1 all weekend then it would not be fair to now bump up to 11.8 when it comes to measuring time. If the wave was a great wave at 11.8 then the driver should be making that their normal speed range all weekend. The event motivates this to happen and we wanted the wave length at the event speeds. More to come

I think in order to give a fair comparison, all boat should have ben run with stock ballast. Some boats do have new ballast designs, however if you run more that "stock" ballast in any boat its going to make the wave better.

I don't think you would see those lengths on a G with stock ballast.

for the guys trying to give the general audience an idea of how the boats stack up against each other, i appreciate it. This thread is still about boat waves, right?

I go on Lake Powell trips where most of these boats are represented. The results don't surprise me much with two exceptions: I thought the Tige would be higher but it's a bit smaller of a boat than the others. The bigger Tige throws up a nice wave. I was a little surprised the Supreme was that high. Had I had to guess I would have picked the Centurion and the Nautique as the top two.

The two different MC measurements do not surprise me. From what I've witnessed their dual tab setup is the least effective at equalizing the port and starboard wave. I've never been all that impressed with MC as far their boats being great for surfing. Awesome wakeboard boats though. I have heard that they changed the hull shape on the X46 to try and be more surf specific but I haven't had the chance to witness if they have improved or not.

This is an awesome start at a comparison and really cool to see some thought was put into it. Congrats for that. Of course there are variations in testing. There are too many variables and too much subjectivity involved. I have not ridden behind every boat on the list, but a lot of them. Fair warning, I own new X23 and am possibly biased But, from my empirical experience behind these boats, I am a little shocked that the G23 was ranked where it was. I've ridden behind several G's. Surfed behind 3 of them. One of them was a pro wakeboard rider who had the thing sacked out. I was thoroughly unimpressed by the surf wake behind the G (the wakeboard wake is a WHOLE other story). For me, it lacked push in the back of the pocket and was to steep. Not to say had it been weighted differently it might have been better, but I made a decision between the G23 and the X23 based on my perceived vast difference between the two surf wakes. Additionally, I've spent a fair amount of time behind a Supra SE and thought the surf wake on the boat was incredible. One of the top 2 wakes I've ever ridden. One thing about the Supra wake is that, in smooth deep water it will curl at the back of the wake more than any I've seen. That curl is rideable. Additionally, that curl will wash out in bumps, shallow water, or with a bigger rider. But it is still surfable. So measuring the clean face of the wake may be a little deceiving.

Oh well, a great test to, at least, get heated discussions going. Arguing who has the best wake seems to be 50% of the fun. I'm fairly confident, at this point, that a bigger wake isn't going to make me a better surfer - ride time is. Now lets stop worrying about it and go ride whatever we have!

while most of this is subjective and some riders are partial to their brands, I think fuel consumption would be note worthy and factual