Quote:
Originally Posted by XCR-700
I see this group LWA appears to have made some effort to include specific language regarding the technology used to create the wake from most "wake boats" (ballast vs something else) and even gone so far as to call them ballast boats, is that intended to exclude other potential forms of wake increasing devices or technology?
I seem to recall some company planning to incorporate a mechanical device like a dive plane that worked somewhat like a trim tab but was intended to pull the boat stern deeper into the water to create the wake but without the risk of bringing all that water into the boat and the strain of all that increased weight on the boat. Is that kind of technology not of interest/concern to the group sponsoring HB229?
Not sure I fully understand the goal of HB229. From my seat it does not just appear to ID wake boats, but to limit the use of the term wake boats as only applying to boats that use ballast technology, which seem odd to me. But I may well be missing something as I have not been following this in great detail.
Thanks for any clarity anyone can add to this matter for me.
|
I was confused about that too. All it does is seem to define what a wake board is. I sent them comments basically agreeing that the definition sounded accurate but they need to be careful that it does not include any boat that has a trim tab to be defined as a wake boat.
Malibu boats had a wedge that would dig into the water like you describe about 20 years ago. It was manually set and done through a trap door in the swim platform. That was before ballast tanks.
Maybe they need to agree on what wake board is before they decide what to do about them.