Swapping in Bags for Factory Tanks

[s_kelley2000]

Sorry I am sure this has already been answered multiple times but I can't seem to find it. I am planning to pull the rear factory ballast tanks on my 2012 230 and replace them with sacs. Do I need to add check valves on the vent/overflow lines or is that only needed if I want them to drain completely flat?

I think I am going to go with 1100 lb sacs, do I need to beef up the engine dividers? If so, anybody have experience with the Wakemakers kit: https://www.wakemakers.com/products/...i&_ss=e&_v=1.0

[bturner]

Honestly, I would call Wake Makers and have them set you up, that's what I plan to do when the time comes. They should be very competitive and this is what they do. They'll probably have an entire package for the project for you to follow as well.

[hal2814]

I did this on my 2011 230. It’s the same setup. I used the Ronix Eight.3 1100lb trapezoid bags in the rear. Those didn’t require any additional divider reinforcement. You don’t NEED check valves but I used them. The factory fill and vent locations are practically on top of each other so you’re more likely to suck air. If you skip the check valve, I’d position the bag to vent more aft. To separate drain and fill more. Wakemakers hasn’t been a bastion of customer service lately. I wouldn’t trust anything they say is backordered. There’s also a thread on here somewhere for how to keep your ballast sensors. It involves some light PVC work.

[jpwhit]

I wouldn't trust anything Wake Makers told me. They've been absolutely terrible lately. I won't do business with them anymore.

As hal2814 said, a check valve shouldn't be necessary when you just have a bag. When you have a bag piggy backed over a hard tank is when a check valve is really needed.

[s_kelley2000]

Thanks guys, appreciate the info. Unfortunately I have been hearing bad things about WakeMakers lately too. They were great when I did the system on my 99 a few years back. Looks like everything I need is in stock so going to try my luck as they have they best prices for what I need.

[s_kelley2000]

One more question. I am planning to piggy back off the belly tank to fill an integrated sac that will go under the bow seats in the storage area. I assume this is where I am going to want to use a check valve to avoid the risk of tin canning or cracking the belly tank. I am thinking the existing belly vent hose becomes the under bow sac fill/drain line and then I vent from that sac to the existing vent through hull. Any issues with that setup? Check valve goes between bag and vent through hull correct? I did this setup with belly bag to integrated bow bag in my 99 Super Sport(all reversible impeller pumps like my current factory setup) and it worked great but just want to be sure I don't crack the tank as it would be hard to remove without separating the hull from the deck.

[mgitk]

So I was perusing a forum about check valves etc. And I found out that mastercraft has a hook which brings their fill line up over the top of the bag rather than filling at the bottom of the bag. Plus they have some sort of check valve on that line which goes to a separate branch from a y splitter. The theory was that the draining would probably suck some air out of the bag before sucking out the water since it was draining/filling from a top location. Why would they do that? I think the answer is that the pressure from the water in that bag is enough to overcome the ballast pumps ability to hold the water in the bag. I would notice that after ridiing I would be consistently topping off those bags because they were overwhelming the the ballast pumps ability to hold back the pressure from those bags.

Does anyone know if it is okay to route the fill/drain line to a top location on the bag to prevent this?

[mgitk]

One more question. I am planning to piggy back off the belly tank to fill an integrated sac that will go under the bow seats in the storage area. I assume this is where I am going to want to use a check valve to avoid the risk of tin canning or cracking the belly tank. I am thinking the existing belly vent hose becomes the under bow sac fill/drain line and then I vent from that sac to the existing vent through hull. Any issues with that setup? Check valve goes between bag and vent through hull correct? I did this setup with belly bag to integrated bow bag in my 99 Super Sport(all reversible impeller pumps like my current factory setup) and it worked great but just want to be sure I don't crack the tank as it would be hard to remove without separating the hull from the deck.

You can run a length of hard tub in the bag from the air vent to the fill/drain line. Drill a small hole in your fat sac connection and the small 1/2" tubing. Use a zip tie to secure it. That way you will always be able to get to air when draining and thus avoid imploding your hard tank.

[mgitk]

I did this on my 2011 230. It’s the same setup. I used the Ronix Eight.3 1100lb trapezoid bags in the rear. Those didn’t require any additional divider reinforcement. You don’t NEED check valves but I used them. The factory fill and vent locations are practically on top of each other so you’re more likely to suck air. If you skip the check valve, I’d position the bag to vent more aft. To separate drain and fill more. Wakemakers hasn’t been a bastion of customer service lately. I wouldn’t trust anything they say is backordered. There’s also a thread on here somewhere for how to keep your ballast sensors. It involves some light PVC work.

Question about your 2011 230. I have a 2008 230 and I sacked it out a lot like yours and added shot etc. I had an amazing wave IMO and when I saw your wave pictures I thought that one looks a lot like mine. The question is did your boat use the NSS plates? I read that NSS plates cant be buried too deep in the water or else they won't help in creating a wave. I believe that with the amount of weight that you and I run in our boats, we would bury the NSS plates too deep. I use a suction gate which allows me to place it higher up the hull side than where the NSS plate would stick out. I noticed that some newer 230 owners only swapped out to 850 sacks in the rear. Was this just to preserve their storage shelves at the top of the locker or was it because if they put in 1100's it would sink the NSS too deep and not create a wave?

[hal2814]

I started with a suction shaper and eventually installed aftermarket NSS plates. I wasn’t happy with them. I tried a bunch of different weight and NSS combinations (about 400 altogether) and nothing was as good as full ballast plus my shaper. I don’t know why that is. Maybe the plates were buried but I dropped enough weight that shouldn’t be an issue. I did notice the angle the aftermarket NSS plates stick into the water is different than the factory plates. Maybe that’s an issue. But whatever the reason I went back to a shaper until I got my GS24. Now on the GS I put WAY more weight in it than the 230 ever ran and it worked beautifully with NSS. Same with my current G23.

[mgitk]

I started with a suction shaper and eventually installed aftermarket NSS plates. I wasn’t happy with them. I tried a bunch of different weight and NSS combinations (about 400 altogether) and nothing was as good as full ballast plus my shaper. I don’t know why that is. Maybe the plates were buried but I dropped enough weight that shouldn’t be an issue. I did notice the angle the aftermarket NSS plates stick into the water is different than the factory plates. Maybe that’s an issue. But whatever the reason I went back to a shaper until I got my GS24. Now on the GS I put WAY more weight in it than the 230 ever ran and it worked beautifully with NSS. Same with my current G23.

That was another thing I wanted to ask. Did you get the GS24 to surf acceptably or did you decide it wasn't as good as your 230 and then go for the G23 because it is more of a known quantity?

[hal2814]

I got an amazing wave out of the GS24. It was better than the 230 in every way. But it required tons (literally) of additional ballast and a much lower pitched prop. I have a setup thread here somewhere on it. I eventually went with the G23 mainly because my life situation changed and I was willing to pay for it. The G23 with supplemental ballast was even better than the GS24 and is much more consistent. I don’t have to change ballast settings for regular and goofy riders. I can fill up in 6-7 minutes. Wind and chop doesn’t as adversely affect the wave. The G23 is just a tank in ways the 230 and GS24 will never be. And that matters to me on days when I only have from after work until sundown to get our sets in.

[mgitk]

That makes so much sense. The reason I wanted to upgrade from a 230 was because of convenience. I felt like I got a great wave out of it with a shape that I was happy with but the loss of storage was gonna bug me.. Plus I wanted to have some storage available even if it was sacked out completely. I'm happy to hear that you were able to get the GS24 to surf the way you wanted to but I can understand how the G would have been so much more convenient. The thing which was holding me back from a G was that I recalled the wave being fairly vertical and hard to throw a spin on. Did you just adjust to the wave or is there a secret to getting the wave to be less upright.

[hal2814]

Which G’s have you ridden? That was a common complaint about the 2013-2020 hulls. The 2021+ G23 is far more adjustable. They still trend a little towards the steeper side but we have skim boarders and surf style riders regularly doing spins and shuvs. The skim boarders usually ride full ballast at 11.8 with wave 0 or 1. But either way, spins are more a technique issues than a wave issue in a modern wake boat.

[mgitk]

Which G’s have you ridden? That was a common complaint about the 2013-2020 hulls. The 2021+ G23 is far more adjustable. They still trend a little towards the steeper side but we have skim boarders and surf style riders regularly doing spins and shuvs. The skim boarders usually ride full ballast at 11.8 with wave 0 or 1. But either way, spins are more a technique issues than a wave issue in a modern wake boat.

The 2013 thru 2020 hull was what I was riding. The 2021+ were a bit out of my price range. And honestly after 7 years of steep waves, I just kind of expected it to be more of the same. Did they really get the hull shape that different that it surfs better? I can see the chines look better which I always assumed would help.