weighting an 89 sunsetter

Wakeboarder3780 · Posted: Jun 26, 2008 2:31 pm Post subject: weighting an 89 sunsetter

Might be a silly question. But I eventually need to weight this bad boy and the guy I bought it from mentioned the best place to weight it was on the SIDE of the motor. I always assumed it was best to get a fat sac seat thing and replace the back seat with it and then counter that weight with a front bow sac to help you plane out a little. Any input? Specific products are also welcome.. I'm completely new to the ballast arena.

Commodore · Ladies Man Joined: 20 Jun 2005 Posts: 11636

Put these in your boat, and you will have a kickass wake.

Wakeboarder3780 · Posted: Jun 27, 2008 9:19 am Post subject:

i suppose that could be considered brand specific.. thx!

WakeMikey · Addict Joined: 29 Mar 2008 Posts: 640 City: Fridley

Damnit Haugy you just had to go and ruin the thread didn't you? Now evvvvvery time I open this thread I'm going to see that damn picture! Smile

Shudder......

I would say it is a debate worth having, wether weight is better in either side of the engine compartment versus one in the rear ski locker and one under the rear bench seat.

When running a DD, therer's just no way to put sacs on either side of the engine unless they're on top of the flooring (or you rip your flooring out). And I simply have no intention of losing my walkways!

For me it's simple. ~400 in rear ski locker, ~400 under rear bench seat. ~500 under bow.

So far my experimenting has been limited to running my 680lb fat sac in the rear ski locker where it can only get half full. This helps the wake a lot. I've ran it all the way full sitting across my rear seat. I have also run it alongside the motor for surfing, which worked great.

I didn't notice any difference in handing or anything by having the sac so far to the rear or side to side vs front to back.

Yes, if you weight alongside the motor, the weight is a little more centered in the boat, especially front to back. But I would argue that putting weight at the extreme back will sink the back end more then weight in the middle would. As long as its balanced I think it should be fine.

I will continue to experiment soon as I continue to get my 87 Supra Sunsport DD ready for a plumbed ballast system (sacked as described above). Once I buy all the sacs I can mock it up with the manual fill and see if it is adequete.

I find that a lot of rear weight is needed to get it peaky enough for me. So far I haven't put more than 680 on rear seat. Final plan is 800 in back, but the 500 in front should help too once I get to that point.

I tried running weight only in the bow and it made a HUUUGE ramp of a wake but it didn't have any pop to it. I want a BOOTER!

I would also advise you to check the Supra threads on WW right now, there's a new one and an old one that have lots of advice about weighting and ballast systems. K.I.S.S.!

Jensen · Posted: Jun 28, 2008 10:20 am Post subject:

the older sunsetters are very very capable of throwing great wakes. My uncles 92 sunsetter had a wedge, fat sat across the back, and a fat sack in the bow. If you can get a wedge installed at your dealer it will make a huge difference.