Think Elevation should not matter much to boat performance??

JayMan · **Posted:** Tue Sep 20, 2016 8:49 am

2016A22inCO wrote:

JayMan wrote:

So you tested with the rear slammed, wedge down, and no additional bow weight other than 1 person moving from mid-ship forward? I know elevation can play a big factor but it sounds like your weight ratio is off to me.

Boat had full PnP including the bow sac 650lb full. In my boat I run an extra 200lb of led in the nose on top of this set up so rest assured I have my weight ratios well dialed and a good bit of knowledge here. It was a true Apples to Apples test and I was shocked that the boat could not get on plane with the big motor and 1.72-1 trans ratio.

Given that my struggles here were long standing and well noted I thought it would go without saying that all of the other bags + hard tanks were full. In my description I just tried to let everyone know the variables that were sure to be asked (rear bag size and prop).

There are a few of us here in CO that are running into the same "wall" with the altitude. AXIS is apparently working with the dealer on an even more aggressive prop but what this test tells me is that my 409 is hopeless on getting this to plane if the extra 40hp and taller trans can't get it done.

I assumed you at least had the front PnP bag under the bow seats full, but was asking if you had any additional weight in the bow on top of that? Even in my '13 A20 with the older hull we ran an extra 400lbs on top of the arrow bag which definitely holds more weight than the horseshoe bag in my '15 A22. With the A20 being shorter it was also harder to tip the nose to help it plane out.

I don't have to worry about high elevation, but have dealt with plenty of planing issues and just trying to help. The wedge is a big culprit too but I'm sure you knew that. Too bad Axis hasn't switched to the power wedge with the quick planing feature... It's good to hear that your dealer is working with you to find a solution. Hope everything works out.

2016A22inCO · **Joined:** Mon Jan 18, 2016 1:50 pm **Posts:** 123

Coreyfire wrote:

Well I guess the higher alt guys just have to go to lower alt to boat. It's just a fact that boats/ vehicles can't run at the max they should in higher alt. I've seen a lot of posts and they are always the same thing. Over and over

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why didn't I think of this solution sooner? That's the ticket just move!

Sorry to annoy you (or anyone else) with trying to figure something out to allow my $70,000 purchase to perform as stated in all of the AXIS marketing. I don't believe I was ever directed to a disclaimer that read "Hey even our biggest motor won't get it done at any altitude over 3000ft - so buyer beware" That may have swayed my decision a little bit.

2016A22inCO · **Joined:** Mon Jan 18, 2016 1:50 pm **Posts:** 123

JayMan wrote:

2016A22inCO wrote:

JayMan wrote:

So you tested with the rear slammed, wedge down, and no additional bow weight other than 1 person moving from mid-ship forward? I know elevation can play a big factor but it sounds like your weight ratio is off to me.

Boat had full PnP including the bow sac 650lb full. In my boat I run an extra 200lb of led in the nose on top of this set up so rest assured I have my weight ratios well dialed and a good bit of knowledge here. It was a true Apples to Apples test and I was shocked that the boat could not get on plane with the big motor and 1.72-1 trans ratio.

Given that my struggles here were long standing and well noted I thought it would go without saying that all of the other bags + hard tanks were full. In my description I just tried to let everyone know the variables that were sure to be asked (rear bag size and prop).

There are a few of us here in CO that are running into the same "wall" with the altitude. AXIS is apparently working with the dealer on an even more aggressive prop but what this test tells me is that my 409 is hopeless on getting this to plane if the extra 40hp and taller trans can't get it done.

I assumed you at least had the front PnP bag under the bow seats full, but was asking if you had any additional weight in the bow on top of that? Even in my '13 A20 with the older hull we ran an extra 400lbs on top of the arrow bag which definitely holds more weight than the horseshoe bag in my '15 A22. With the A20 being shorter it was also harder to tip the nose to help it plane out.

I don't have to worry about high elevation, but have dealt with plenty of planing issues and just trying to help. The wedge is a big culprit too but I'm sure you knew that. Too bad Axis hasn't switched to the power wedge with the quick planing feature... It's good to hear that your dealer is working with you to find a solution. Hope everything works out.

Sorry I guess I misread what you were saying there. This whole thing just has me a bit tied up in knots. The other side of the issue is my buddies 5 year old Tige can get it done with even more weight on it than mine so it's obviously something a little more than loss of power due to air density that is causing this issue. Hull shape/design certainly is at play here as well and it's the one thing that no one will speak of. I have thrown a good bit of my own money at this problem trying to fix it (Lead, custom prop that has gone back 2x's to be tweaked to get my motor RPM in its sweet spot etc) so that me and my buddies can ride this thing to it's fullest potential and it just keeps coming up short.

I am going to jump on a T23 when the dealer gets one in with a 450 and see if that will change anything with the cockpit being further forward and a different hull design. But the friends + kids love the huge Play Pen area on the A22 so the wife was not crazy about going smaller up there. Thus why selling her on a huge external sack to sit up in front isn't a great solution for me either. Combine that with the fact that over the 4th of July we had 4 250lb guys shoe horn themselves in the front to see what an extra 1000lb would do to help. Aside from making it 10x's easier to dip the bow it still would not plane full ballast (no wedge) to wakeboard speed.

I had been running down the road of trying to get my dealer or AXIS to work with me on getting the 1.72-1 trans in the boat hoping that would get me where I wanted to go. The thing the lake test last week with the 450 showed me is that no matter what I do to my 409 (short of a supercharger that would void my warranty) it will never get it done with just a trans swap if the 450 and trans I desired couldn't.

The original thought behind my post was to 1) share with the members on here who I have heard say many times "Altitude can't make that much difference" that it sure does. And give a concrete example of such 2) Help out the local guys that are all probably chasing little tweaks in hope of a fruitless result (for example any prop change isn't going to be a greater net effect than going up 100 HP from a 350 to 450 that I just tried)

I am not trying to be that whiny guy on the forums. This community has been great for all of it's help and my dealer has as well. Maybe if there is someone from Malibu/AXIS that follows these things they will consider a way to let guys in my situation know (whether that be through the dealers or their own marketing) that these boats run into some serious challenges at altitude. It will keep guys like me from feeling like I purchased a Ferrari that only has 5 of it's 6 gears due to where I live - and that I should just be OK with that fact.

chaser720 · **Joined:** Mon Feb 15, 2016 1:31 pm **Posts:** 90

JayMan wrote:

2016A22inCO wrote:

JayMan wrote:

So you tested with the rear slammed, wedge down, and no additional bow weight other than 1 person moving from mid-ship forward? I know elevation can play a big factor but it sounds like your weight ratio is off to me.

Boat had full PnP including the bow sac 650lb full. In my boat I run an extra 200lb of led in the nose on top of this set up so rest assured I have my weight ratios well dialed and a good bit of knowledge here. It was a true Apples to Apples test and I was shocked that the boat could not get on plane with the big motor and 1.72-1 trans ratio.

Given that my struggles here were long standing and well noted I thought it would go without saying that all of the other bags + hard tanks were full. In my description I just tried to let everyone know the variables that were sure to be asked (rear bag size and prop).

There are a few of us here in CO that are running into the same "wall" with the altitude. AXIS is apparently working with the dealer on an even more aggressive prop but what this test tells me is that my 409 is hopeless on getting this to plane if the extra 40hp and taller trans can't get it done.

I assumed you at least had the front PnP bag under the bow seats full, but was asking if you had any additional weight in the bow on top of that? Even in my '13 A20 with the older hull we ran an extra 400lbs on top of the arrow bag which definitely holds more weight than the horseshoe bag in my '15 A22. With the A20 being shorter it was also harder to tip the nose to help it plane out.

I don't have to worry about high elevation, but have dealt with plenty of planing issues and just trying to help. The wedge is a big culprit too but I'm sure you knew that. Too bad Axis hasn't switched to the power wedge with the quick planing feature... It's good to hear that your dealer is working with you to find a solution. Hope everything works out.

THIS!!! I've been trying to figure out if the Axis wedge is capable of the angle to create lift. Would love to rig something up that would lock the wedge forward at low speed and pull a pin at X mph to go back to floating.

80AMT23 · **Joined:** Thu Jun 16, 2016 12:34 pm **Posts:** 191

2016A22inCO wrote:

Sorry I guess I misread what you were saying there. This whole thing just has me a bit tied up in knots. The other side of the issue is my buddies 5 year old Tige can get it done with even more weight on it than mine so it's obviously something a little more than loss of power due to air density that is causing this issue. Hull shape/design certainly is at play here as well and it's the one thing that no one will speak of. I have thrown a good bit of my own money at this problem trying to fix it (Lead, custom prop that has gone back 2x's to be tweaked to get my motor RPM in its sweet spot etc) so that me and my buddies can ride this thing to it's fullest potential and it just keeps coming up short.

I am going to jump on a T23 when the dealer gets one in with a 450 and see if that will change anything with the cockpit being further forward and a different hull design. But the friends + kids love the huge Play Pen area on the A22 so the wife was not crazy about going smaller up there. Thus why selling her on a huge external sack to sit up in front isn't a great solution for me either. Combine that with the fact that over the 4th of July we had 4 250lb guys shoe horn themselves in the front to see what an extra 1000lb would do to help. Aside from making it 10x's easier to dip the bow it still would not plane full ballast (no wedge) to wakeboard speed.

I had been running down the road of trying to get my dealer or AXIS to work with me on getting the 1.72-1 trans in the boat hoping that would get me where I wanted to go. The thing the lake test last week with the 450 showed me is that no matter what I do to my 409 (short of a supercharger that would void my warranty) it will never get it done with just a trans swap if the 450 and trans I desired couldn't.

The original thought behind my post was to 1) share with the members on here who I have heard say many times "Altitude can't make that much difference" that it sure does. And give a concrete example of such 2) Help out the local guys that are all probably chasing little tweaks in hope of a fruitless result (for example any prop change isn't going to be a greater net effect than going up 100 HP from a 350 to 450 that I just tried)

I am not trying to be that whiny guy on the forums. This community has been great for all of it's help and my dealer has as well. Maybe if there is someone from Malibu/AXIS that follows these things they will consider a way to let guys in my situation know (whether that be through the dealers or their own marketing) that these boats run into some serious challenges at altitude. It will keep guys like me from feeling like I purchased a Ferrari that only has 5 of it's 6 gears due to where I live - and that I should just be OK with that fact.

What diameter, pitch, and cup are you running now on your prop?

nitrous1 · **Posted:** Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:57 am

2016A22inCO wrote:

In the search of trying to figure out my summer long planing issue in my 16 A22 with the 409 I went out with the dealer last week on a 2017 A22 with the 450HP. For the sake of those who do not know the difference in these boats is not only the 40HP in the motors but also in the Trans ratio set up.

Boat had the High Torque ACME 2419 prop on it (what mine came with before having my custom OJ prop built). Result = with all ballast full (750's in the rear) and wedge down the boat hit the wall at 13.4mph and would not plane out to wakeboard speed. Salesperson that was with me moved himself from the observers seat up to the front and no change.

Bottom line altitude makes a TON of difference in these things. If a 450 cant get it done up here and 350's are pushing 1100's at sea level in these boats im just a little dumbfounded. Stinks to think that I would have to go up to the supercharged 550HP motor to get a boat from AXIS that can plane at my altitude (5300 ft) with full ballast and wedge.

On a positive note my dealer is being awesome (Tommy's) and the new Electronic throttle on the 17 is amazing. We will see where it all goes in the next few months. In the mean time I am off to Lake Powell on Wed and am excited to see what dropping a few thousand feet does to "Wake Up" my 409. Just wanted to share with the group......

The engine designation numbers(409/450) are actually peak torque numbers not Horsepower

80AMT23 · **Joined:** Thu Jun 16, 2016 12:34 pm **Posts:** 191

nitrous1 wrote:

The engine designation numbers(409/450) are actually peak torque numbers not Horsepower

Pretty sure it's HP because the 350 makes around 400ft/lb torque. In the new Raptor motors on the Malibu it's torque

shawndoggy · **Joined:** Sun Jun 16, 2013 11:19 pm **Posts:** 263

nitrous1 wrote:

The engine designation numbers(409/450) are actually peak torque numbers not Horsepower

Yeah though I wish it were true, that's wrong. the PCM 6.0 (LY6 IIRC) isn't doing 450 ft lbs of torque. Or 450 HP for that matter (check the CARB dyno tests). "450" is a badge engineered number to distinguish the hot cam/hot tune version of PCM's 6.0 from the "base" version.

nitrous1 · **Posted:** Wed Sep 21, 2016 10:03 am

If you look at the 2016 axis catalogue they only advertise the torque numbers and those coincide with the engine designation numbers.

80AMT23 · **Joined:** Thu Jun 16, 2016 12:34 pm **Posts:** 191

Paging 2016A22inCO,

Back on topic, what diameter, pitch, and cup are you running now on your prop?

Axis Wakeboard Boat Forum

Think Elevation should not matter much to boat performance??

Who is online