Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 39
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Commerce Lake, MI
    Posts
    201

    Default

    I got the impression that they have two eared trim tabs, like a regular boat so yiou can lean the boat....something I think you could replicate on any wakeboard boat. The CATS system and Ramfill are awesome....Makes me want to seriously look at a Centurion if I ever upgrade.
    2004 Moomba Mobius LS

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snellville, GA & Lake Sinclair
    Posts
    7,048

    Default

    just be ready for some serious sticker shock going from an 04 LS to a 14 Enzo
    Drew
    New ride: 2012 Mojo
    Old ride: 2008 OBV

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    De Pere WI
    Posts
    4,198

    Default

    and study the fit/finish closely. riding mike's mojo and a centurion 244 in the polar bear, hard to find the 30k difference in the 2.
    '06 Supra Launch 20SSV-gone but never forgotten

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snellville, GA & Lake Sinclair
    Posts
    7,048

    Default

    well, the dash may be fugly, but the electronics probably make up a decent chunk of that variance, then the WetSounds, the solid tower vs tube and most 244's come with at least the 409 motor

    the overall fit & finish is comparable. maybe a bit more aluminum than plastic on the Centurion. but, there are many things that would drive me, and a mechanic, nuts.
    Drew
    New ride: 2012 Mojo
    Old ride: 2008 OBV

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    160

    Default

    IMG_5878.jpg

    I would be more concerned about the boat in the video being on the bottom of the lake they shot the video on.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    813

    Default Centurion Ramfill

    Quote Originally Posted by NateHaskovec View Post
    IMG_5878.jpg

    I would be more concerned about the boat in the video being on the bottom of the lake they shot the video on.
    If you knew why that boat ended up that way you wouldn't, human error and nothing to do with ramfill, how did you get that picture?
    -Jake

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snellville, GA & Lake Sinclair
    Posts
    7,048

    Default

    what the !@#$

    is THAT the boat from the video?

    how did it end up on the bottom of the lake?
    Drew
    New ride: 2012 Mojo
    Old ride: 2008 OBV

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    160

    Default

    I do know why it ended up there. Inspection covers for testing were left off of the tanks.

    Whenever you allow that much water to be forced into a boat that fast, a failure in the system will comprimise your boat. The picture is easy to find. Google Centurian Ramfill. Click images.

    I will stick with my opinion. When a boat testing "ramfill" ballast system designed to flood a boat with 1000# in "seconds" sinks during testing, it concerns me.

    If one of my ballast pumps or hoses fail, I am battling a one inch hole.

    If "ramfill" ruptures or fails, you are fighting two three inch holes which (when combined) are twenty times the size (area wise).

    Sure, you can argue the system wil never fail, but in the case of the test boat, it took less than a minute to sink.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    813

    Default Centurion Ramfill

    Quote Originally Posted by NateHaskovec View Post
    I do know why it ended up there. Inspection covers for testing were left off of the tanks.

    Whenever you allow that much water to be forced into a boat that fast, a failure in the system will comprimise your boat. The picture is easy to find. Google Centurian Ramfill. Click images.

    I will stick with my opinion. When a boat testing "ramfill" ballast system designed to flood a boat with 1000# in "seconds" sinks during testing, it concerns me.

    If one of my ballast pumps or hoses fail, I am battling a one inch hole.

    If "ramfill" ruptures or fails, you are fighting two three inch holes which (when combined) are twenty times the size (area wise).

    Sure, you can argue the system wil never fail, but in the case of the test boat, it took less than a minute to sink.
    I too read all about it on wake world, just wondering why you would throw up a pic and be so vague about it. They cut 6" inspection holes so you could see it filling for documentation/promotion/etc. and someone left the covers off! Again, not a ramfill issue.
    -Jake

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beat taco View Post
    I too read all about it on wake world, just wondering why you would throw up a pic and be so vague about it. They cut 6" inspection holes so you could see it filling for documentation/promotion/etc. and someone left the covers off! Again, not a ramfill issue.
    I diasgree. From a design standpoint it is a ramfill issue.

    There is a reason why other boat manufacturers have not gone to rapid filling ballast systems. It's not for a lack of tech, it's about safety.

    An engine driven water pump (mounted like your raw water pump) with a high capacity design could easily move 5000 lbs of water a minute, and only rob the motor of a few horses.

    A 1/2 HP sump pump can move 800 lbs a minute.

    The problem/liability is the 3'' holes, hoses, and fittings that would sink your boat almost instantly if they failed.

    The human error that sunk the test boat was a clear test of what happens if the system fails.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •