Reply With QuoteSo many problems, but one that jumps right out at me. That hull produces almost no wake. I've been skiing behind one for years and there's barely enough wake to jump and get air at any speed. Who wants a wakeboard boat with no wake?
http://images.craigslist.org/0101120...5a2bf06a009450 .jpghttp://sandiego.craigslist.org/boa/422238890.html
LOL
So many problems, but one that jumps right out at me. That hull produces almost no wake. I've been skiing behind one for years and there's barely enough wake to jump and get air at any speed. Who wants a wakeboard boat with no wake?
So many problems, but one that jumps right out at me. That hull produces almost no wake. I've been skiing behind one for years and there's barely enough wake to jump and get air at any speed. Who wants a wakeboard boat with no wake?
it was a joke, he focked up a decent jet boat, imagine seeing that thing going down river:jawdrop:
Dan, I wish they are were like that
it was a joke, he focked up a decent jet boat, imagine seeing that thing going down river:jawdrop:
I'm hip..........Joking back.
Dan, I wish they are were like that
Amen brother. Be a lot smoother water if that were the case.
Oddly enough I saw a guy up at Bartlett one time. He had a low profile jet with
a tower on it, but it was a lower deal, mounted more forward and actually resembled
a rollbar on an Aussie sprint boat. Although I wouldn't have much use for it (I can ride
a wake board but no tricks), I liked the way that one looked. He said he had a hundred
hours of cad work to get the design just the way he wanted it and I don't think he
was lying. It was really well laid out.
Oddly enough I saw a guy up at Bartlett one time. He had a low profile jet with
a tower on it,
That boat looks stupid...any way ya look at it, period.
Posting Permissions