$txt['youtube'] = 'YouTube'; $txt['youtube_invalid'] = '#Invalid YouTube Link#'; Speaking Of Rear Ballast;

Author Topic: Speaking Of Rear Ballast;  (Read 1100 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ardster

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 33
  • Location: Skwentna / Wasilla Alaska
  • Cool Points: 7
  • Model Year: 2014
Speaking Of Rear Ballast;
« on: January 25, 2018, 07:42:30 PM »
I have two Mokai's one is a 2007 hull with a new Subaru motor in it along with many of Toms upgrades and the second is a 2012 with just the clutch and aluminum forcing cone for the impeller.

I am a large fellow, think 6' 4' and 225 pounds. I use these things on swift waters in Alaska where getting a grill full of gravel can be not only a pain in the butt but dangerous as well.

One thing I learned about these little boats early on was that with a heavy rider and under power they do not draft shallow. I need about 12 to 14 inches of water under me to be assured of not whacking any gravel which results in loss of power almost instantly.

Of course we all know how much fun it is getting these things up high enough to pluck the pebbles from the grill...............

To the point: Has anyone came up with additional ballast rhat helps to keep the Mokai's rear end from dipping so low when you are trying to take off?

On my river boat I had a pair made and they are the Stuff!

These are what I had made for my ATEC



Here you can see them better but in both images you see how high the rear of the boat sits even with that 374 pound outboard right there.



Both those pictures have the bow poked onto shore which is holding the stern end down some. When you are just sitting in a foot of water the back end floats higher than in the photos. What that does is allow me to get on step quick without that heavy motor driving the intake clear to the bottom on takeoff.

I need that for my Mokai's

Here's a good look,

 

Without the pods the boat sat almost seven inches lower when floating. Now I can drift over 5" without hitting bottom. I'm not sure my mokai drafts 5" when floating.

Offline Californiamokai

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
  • Location: California
  • Cool Points: 8
  • Engine: RS SP-210 w/17 ES
  • Model Year: 2006
Re: Speaking Of Rear Ballast;
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2018, 12:10:04 PM »
Do a search for “trim tabs” in the forum for another approach.  Have installed trim tabs on my 2006 model and does level this model when applying full throttle with no appreciable added weight.  Have often wondered what effect there would be by adding floatation material ‘on top’ of it to add as an additional stabilizer when standing/casting.  What material was your add on on your boat and was it true weight ballast or some sort of material that would be floatable? Tight lines, john

Online CC-Coder

  • Mokai Maniac Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 812
  • Age: 55
  • Location: UH - OH
  • Cool Points: 43
  • Engine: EX21 w/17 Head - ES
  • Model Year: 2010 (2)
Re: Speaking Of Rear Ballast;
« Reply #2 on: January 27, 2018, 06:51:40 PM »
Karl (Avago) has posted some ideas that may be helpful. Maybe moving his gas tank forward has worked for him?

http://www.improvingyourmokai.com/index.php/topic,724.msg9451.html#msg9451
« Last Edit: January 27, 2018, 07:02:23 PM by CC-Coder »
🤦🏼‍♂️ Chuck 🤷🏻‍♂️

Offline ardster

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 33
  • Location: Skwentna / Wasilla Alaska
  • Cool Points: 7
  • Model Year: 2014
Re: Speaking Of Rear Ballast;
« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2018, 12:02:26 AM »
Thanks for the suggestions and links fellas, sorry to take so long getting back but spent a couple months at the cabin during late winter no internet out there.

The pods on the back of the boat pictured are aluminum and are hollow with air in there, they were designed mathematically to account for the hull length and the transom load of the motor. They aren't as large as would be perfect but due to the jet output being responsible for steering like your mokai's are they are a bit shorter than the math called for. Their effect when going from dead stop to getting on step was that they cut the needed depth and get the boat up in almost half the time & distance as without them. On long trips like traveling to the cabin which is 75 miles one way they also improved fuel consumption by a full gallon each way. Last but not least they have raised the average speed traveling against a strong current by 1.5 mile per hour.

They were a triple win but I can't see the same concept used on my Mokai's without a negative hydrodynamic effect.