1998 Sport Nautique Beam?

[Grover777]

Hi All!

How wide is the 1998 Sport? I am looking at one, as well as a MC 205 and a Sunsetter.

Any thoughts on these boats in the 1998-2001 year range?

Thanks!

[Erik]

RE: 1998 Sport Nautique Beam?

1. 91 inches.
2. The Sport Nautique is an extremely good boat with multiple applications - ever since its introduction.

It will be hard to find people, especially here, that have much bad to say about it. Close second is that 205 you mention, then the Sunsetter. All of them are strong, with the Sport being the strongest, especially for a wakeboarding potenital . The Sunsetter may be the best option for slalom, while offering the lowest resale and dependability. I'm assuming you're talking the 1998 range for all three.

[Grover777]

Erik:
Thanks for the reply!
Yeah, I am looking in the 1998-2001 or so range, around $25k.

The only concern I have is that the Sport is 91 inches and the MC and Malibu are around 98 inches. Does it make that much difference in interior space?

Any advice is appreciated!

Daron

[NCH2oSki]

RE: 1998 Sport Nautique Beam?

I'll post my ramblings on the subject, since I was shopping for the same 3 boats last year.

My only comment about the 98 sport is the open bow step up. In 99' the open bow is the same level as the rest of the boat. The sport will feel quite a bit larger then the 205. The 205 is 86" beam iirc. I also dont like the cheap flip down drink holders in the MC. Both boats are very solid, and will ski very similiar, with a nice wake at 32+mph. Not sure about the wakeboard wake, as I dont wakeboard.

Both MC and CC will have a trunk with a nice sunpad starting in 99'. The 99' mc will have sort of funky interior, that they only used in 99' and went to the more current interior in 00'. I had a friend with a 99' mc 205 and we used it to ski the course with often. I really liked the layout of the boat, the way it handled and everything about it, except the funky interior, although if I found a nice 99' 205 for the right deal I would have overlooked the interior design.

The 99' 205 has higher gunnels and feels larger then the 98, but also weighs more. I think the sport got heavier in 01 or 02, not 100% sure.

With any year prior to 00' on the cc and 99' on the MC you will get the standard mech guages, and not have to worry about failure issues that do happen ocasionally with the electronic guages.

98-99 CC have the classic graphics, not the giant N, personal preference.

98 and previous Mailbu hulls are not shoe box construction on the hull and deck. They are butted and then bonded at the rubrail. 99+ Bu hulls are shoebox fitted at the hull and deck. MC and CC are shoe box from way back not an issue.

Most sports will have the GT-40 EFI wich is basically bulletproof if maintained properly and can easily give 2000+ hours of fun o the water. A lot of the 205's I looked at had the Vette engine, which I didnt want. The standard 350 with TBI is a pretty good set up, very dependable.

Good luck in finding what you want. The search for the perfect boat to fit your needs is a lot of fun.

[NCH2oSki]

RE: 1998 Sport Nautique Beam?

I was wrong on the MC beam, its 87" not 86". If you look at the Team Talk forum there is a good write up on the 205 hull and various other changes. The post is by NSX Bill.

On the CCFan website you can download and look at the various year brochures that can give you some excellent info for comparison also.

[Grover777]

The Sport I am looking at is a 1999 (I mistakenly typed 1998) with a GT-40 and 225 hours. How does your sport handle? I have had experience in a Ski Nautique and a 1997 Prostar, however I am looking for something more family friendly.

My wife does not like the lower gunwales on the competition boats, is the Sport higher?

I dont want to start a "bashing" thread, however, from the boards I have been on, many say stay away from the Sunsetters. I have no experience with Malibu.

Any other thoughts between the Sports and the MC 205s in the 1999- 2001 range?

Thanks!

[NCH2oSki]

We went from a 196 to a sport, and the family loves it. My wife loves the sunpad and the trunk, no more skis in the floor.

It does not handle as well as the 196, but its not bad it just feels a little larger. One end of our course is a very short turn around and it handles it fine. I would almost dare to say the MC205 probably handles a little better, but not by much. You wont go wrong with either boat, but I dare say the CC will hold its value a little better.

The sport and 196 have the same height gunwales, we have a 4 year old and we feel fine with her in the boat, she has been out on our boats since she was 2weeks old.

My only comment about the sunsetter, is my PB in the course is behind one. They have a great wake for skiing especially for a large boat.

[east tx skier]

I have some experience skiing behind my father-in-law's 98 205. Solid boat. He has the 308 hp TBI engine and it is quite bullet proof. That is to say, I wouldn't treat it that way, but it holds up great regardless. As NCH2oSki mentioned, there is a write up on the MC site by NSXBill that is linked in the site's FAQ section. It is a very good write up that Bill put a lot of work into.

The ski wake is pretty good behind the second generation (96--2000) 205 hull. That said, the first gen 205 was smaller, more nimble, and had a better slalom wake. The 96+ 205 has a noticeable bump at longer line lengths, but like most mid 90s MCs, it is a pretty narrow wake. I don't wakeboard, but this is the same hull that was used by the first generation (through 03 I think) Xstars if that gives you any frame of comparison. It handles the chop well and spray is a nonissue. I used to think the interior was quite spacious until I got my 98 Ski and understand what 4" extra beam can mean for interior space.

One other thing that's probably worth mentioning that you're likely to run into when you say the words "1998 MC" is that the 1998 205 was based on the 1995--1997 Pro Star and not the 98 that had all sorts of things added to its rudder and hull before its release. No 205 was ever based on that hull design. Any changes after 96 were above the deck.

I'm sorry I can't offer a comparison to the other two boats, but I haven't ever skied them. Hope that helps.

[brodie]

Re: RE: 1998 Sport Nautique Beam?

Close second is that 205 you mention, then the Sunsetter. All of them are strong, with the Sport being the strongest, especially for a wakeboarding potenital . The Sunsetter may be the best option for slalom, while offering the lowest resale and dependability. I'm assuming you're talking the 1998 range for all three.

It depends on which sunsetter! The Sunsetter LXI is the apples to apples comparison for the sport, and it is a great boat that has very good resale. I regularly ski and board behind a 99sport and an 02 Air (same hull) and planned on buying the same thing last year. I shopped and compared it along with the Sunsetter lxi and 99+ 205 ( which I almost bought, but hated the interior). I ended up buying a 2000 LXi for 3 reasons:
#1: It skis the best
#2: The observer seat holds 2 people vs 1.5 in the sport. (important for skiing, and wife and child)
#3: The Lxi has the most interior room (especially due to the wide gunnels on the sport).

The fit and finish of Malibu is very good from 99+, and they are just as dependable IMHO. I will always prefer the feel and sound of PCM, but indmar makes a good motor. For wakeboarding, the 205 and sport are better because they require less weight to sink. All three boats have there advantages, and all three are solid, well built boats. It mainly comes down to personal preferance. I still really like the sport/air and would still enjoy to own one. I would definately look @ the lxi to compare.