Ski Tower (Struggle)

Form and Function's V drive

Seacamper - Take a look at this thread.... F&F is well versed in the 2001, and put together a beautiful, well thought out project.   He explains a lot of his desicions on how he decided on some of the parts he chose... He probably took a lot of flack for not being true to the original, but did come out with a very nice user friendly boat.

Dreaming wrote: Form and Function's V drive Seacamper - Take a look at this thread.... F&F is well versed in the 2001, and put together a beautiful, well thought out project.   He explains a lot of his desicions on how he decided on some of the parts he chose... He probably took a lot of flack for not being true to the original, but did come out with a very nice user friendly boat.

WOW! Thats quite a mod! A tip of the hat to F&F on that. I could have missed the "tone" of his reply so if I did, F&F, my apologies.

I see both sides. I had a tower on my 92BFN, and would not change that one bit. I would definitely not waste the money doing it to my 90SN. I also would not put one on a pre-82 CC.
The 89 is largely sought after because of the unique boarding wake it throws. If the boat is perfect or near so, I would not install one, but really, if that is your boarding boat, and you are not planning on getting a V-drive (or making one, in Ryan's case ) do what you want, it is your boat.

No. I think there was thread creep. I think what people are saying is the 2001 series got a reputation among wakeboarders because of its deeper v. At slolom speeds, the boat had a great rep because of its ability to produce a minimal wake in most conditions but it was beat by other boats on glass. It was designed as a 3 event boat and CC chose a deeper V to field more lake conditions. The deeper V ended up giving a nice wake by mistake for the up and coming wake board craze. When wake boats started being made, many noted the 2001 series already threw a great wake and with sacks, was outstanding.

This sure is a bare knuckle forum!

Look through the windshield, that's why it's clear glass. If you know what you're doing you can perform all the same tricks from any pull height. I do put up the Skylon if I'm struggling with something new.

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO not true! When you do tricks that require you to keep tension on the rope it will pull you out of the sky and back to the water much faster when the tow point is lower.

I have wakeboarded on a low tow point and it was terrible!

Your funny Pete :)

If you want to be a stand out wakeboarder, why jeopardize your possible career/tournament status by skiing on a short pole?

If you want to compete with the big dogs, you have to give yourself a chance. They use nitrous, now you have to. That sorta thing.

If you think you are in need of a tower to pull off a certain trick think again and read this page if you have not already seen it.

No crutch

Most people want to say a tower will help them throw their first invert or make them a better boarder. Yes, there are advantages to a tower. Reality is, they need to work on their technique and timing instead.

I love when all the kids on our lake with $70K Xstars come out on saturdays and try inverts when they cant do the basics. I wonder why they all get pissed and cus at my buddies when we roll by in our SN (no extended pylon) and throw inverts on a trick ski! A tower DOESN'T make you a great wakeboarder!

You're right Chris, It doesn't. But, it can make a great wakeboarder better.

I've never skied off a tower, always on a standard '90 pylon. I am skilled in rallies, Scarecrows, Backrolls, Tantrums, Handlepass 3's, etc etc...

But, I do agree with most of you on the fact that the closed bow boats don't look right with the towers. 206 or bigger for me... JMHO

akabulla wrote: SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO not true! When you do tricks that require you to keep tension on the rope it will pull you out of the sky and back to the water much faster when the tow point is lower. I have wakeboarded on a low tow point and it was terrible! Your funny Pete :)

Akabulla, on this you are just wrong. I've posted before a video of Scott Byerly doing tricks that most will never touch behind a barefoot malibu outboard on a low pole. Shapiro and Parks did the same behind ski boats with low pylons, for a long time. I've pulled local riders doing tricks off the low pole that few will ever pull off.

It's about the skill of the rider. It has little to do with the height of the tow point.

There are a limited number of tricks for which the rider needs to get great height to pull off the trick. Examples include the speedball and the 1080. There are probably less than 200 people in the world that can do these types of tricks.

A high tow point does present certain advantages, but to say that it is required is just not correct.

BKH

I never said it was required. All I said is you will stay in the sky longer with a higher tow point which I still stand by.

I have seen the videos you posted with Scott and they are very impressive.

It is a wonder we even have Super Air Nautiques with Towers when we would be just as well off with a POS outboard and wakeboard just as good!

mdvalant wrote: Forget the fish-n-ski. I got a 16ft flat bottom with a 30hp johnson that I do all my moves off of. Put 2 anchors in the back and 6 gallons of gas..shooooo.

Now we're talking! Let me know if you ever put that puppy on Craigslist.

haha funny part is, in HS I did rig up a little quick clip system to be able to pull skiers behind it......

put many hours on it when I didn't feel like taking care of a boat all day like we do the ski :) lol

It's more like a hunt/fish/ski boat. I learned to barefoot behind it when I was about 8.

You guys are missing the point, a tower is really a coat rack for your boat. I now I would have many stiches and some really bad looking upholstery if we tried to cram 4 or 5 foils in the boat. With everything off the floor it also make getting to the cooler easier.