Regarding the wake...for three years I rode a too-small, continuous rocker, low-end 2000 Liquid Force. To pop, I really needed to edge and build a lot of tension. With that board, I didn't really like to ride behind my S22 without ballast (assuming small crew). A decent crew and a 800 pounds ballast was nice, but I really liked 1500 pounds (two big bags plus a little extra) when running with just a couple adults. That's a really nice, clean wake that is kind enough to let you (some would say force you) load the line hard and remain in control up and throught the wake. Behind the Super Air or the Centurion Avalanche, I found the wake to be so abrupt that I couldn't (didn't need to) load the edge so much. There's a thread on wakeworld right now discussing the SAN wake that seems right on IMHO. I for one am used to and like a more gentle transition from edge to air.
I did finally get a new board, a right-sized CWB Flame 141. Flames are supposed to always be last-year's Absolute. All I know is that this board is really wide, and because it's also longer, there's a ton more surface area. It's also got a three-stage rocker, and there's a lot more total rocker than what I'm used to. All things together, the board reminds me much more of a 2005 Parks that what I'm used to (read: if you load the line and edge through the wake, you're gonna friggin launch). With the added pop this board gives, I actually had a couple fun sets behind my boat with a small crew and no ballast. I'm not talking just riding switch and sliding, ollies etc., but big jumps high and into the flats. I did end up using the single big bag, but never wanted to use my usual two-bag setup.
Regarding fuel economy, I can imagine that a newer 5.7L will do better than the older engines used to make the "61% better" claim. GPH is really a tough measuring stick. How much weight, cruising speed, no-wake time, etc. are the easy ones, but also how long your riders average between falls, how much you hot-rod, are you a POWER TURNER, etc. probably make big differences, yeah? This is why posts like Bitzy's are so important - side by side, how do boats compare? A SAN owner know seems to run between 5 and 6 GPH, but he does run more weight (not pro-weight, but more than I). Our Centurion buddy we roll side-by-side with seems to burn between 'a little' and 'a lot' more than we do. Like Bitzy noted, he's got different gearing, so he'd probably get better mileage than us if we were both really sacked out (quicker time to plane), but for the most part, he's going to be turning a lot more RPMs than us (I'm just under 3,000 rpm while towing). Doubt his boat would've turned 3.3 GPH during our recent Havasu trip considering all the higher-speed cruising we did (although one of the runs had 11 people in the boat).
Don't buy your Epic just because of fuel economy. Don't buy it if you see boats as commodities. Don't buy it if you're into bling, because towboats have come a LONG way in terms of flashiness in the past six years (compare 2000 and 2006 X-Stars, for instance). If you're down with CLEEEEEEAN, classic lines, and basically just 'class' in general (comfortable seating, quiet drivetrain, clean layout, etc.) go with either a Natique or an Epic. IMHO, except for the SAN's renowned wake, strong resale, heritage and brand, and the fact that they're smaller, the comparison between SAN and S22 or SX boats are closer than some might think. Classic lines, very well-built and not so much bling to get in the way. I've heard that the newer MCs especially and the BUs too have caught up in terms of fit and finish, but the Epics were and are just top shelf when it comes to how the cushions fit and remove, how every space is carpeted, how the storage is smart (if not 247-ish, Fest - we can't hide many bodies under our seats), how the engine shifts and the steering feels.
FIND SOMEONE TO RIDE WITH!!! Spend a full day out there, hopefully with someone who knows what they're doing with the wake, etc. Hopefully NOT the guy you're gonna buy the boat from.
