Slalom Wakes

[M3Fan]

Show me a private lake that has a club 196 and I'll show you a dock that has some sort of weight on the dock that the members load in the 196 when there isn't a third person there to ski.

I've seen weights in all boat brands at clubs. At the two ski schools I've been to, there were weights in all the boats- MCs in both cases.

Take two basic hull types- one that has no lifting strakes and still renders soft, small wakes with great handling and tracking, with all 3 tracking fins ahead of the pylon and another that has a flat bottom with lifting strakes galore (get that hull out of the water!) and tracking fins all the way back under the engine because so much boat is out of the water on plane. I tend to have more admiration for the company that does it the "hard way" at the expense of interior room, weight insensitivity, rear locker storage, and everything else. To me, that says more than anything that that company is extremely dedicated to function over form.

[skisix@38]

Show me a private lake that has a club 196 and I'll show you a dock that has some sort of weight on the dock that the members load in the 196 when there isn't a third person there to ski.

I've seen weights in all boat brands at clubs. At the two ski schools I've been to, there were weights in all the boats- MCs in both cases.

Take two basic hull types- one that has no lifting strakes and still renders soft, small wakes with great handling and tracking, with all 3 tracking fins ahead of the pylon and another that has a flat bottom with lifting strakes galore (get that hull out of the water!) and tracking fins all the way back under the engine because so much boat is out of the water on plane. I tend to have more admiration for the company that does it the "hard way" at the expense of interior room, weight insensitivity, rear locker storage, and everything else. To me, that says more than anything that that company is extremely dedicated to function over form.

I think it great that you are passionate about your boat brand... That's great! The context of what we were discussing though was weight sensitivity and that was the context in which I replied.

No contest that a 196 properly weighted performs well. Arguable as to whcih boat performs best and I tend not to think there is a best but that the big three all preform well enough in marginally capable hands to give skiers a good opportunity to achieve their PB. I also firmly believe that any of these boat can be set up poorly and driven poorly and that can result in a unsatisfactory experience.

[MARK-S]

Thats my 07 196.

[M3Fan]

Thats my 07 196.

Cool! I love that picture.

Greg, I thought I was pretty in context about weight sensitivity. The TSC1 and higher hulls are ultra weight sensitive due to their hull design which I admire. That's basically what I was getting at there.

[SGY]

Show me a private lake that has a club 196 and I'll show you a dock that has some sort of weight on the dock that the members load in the 196 when there isn't a third person there to ski.

I've seen weights in all boat brands at clubs. At the two ski schools I've been to, there were weights in all the boats- MCs in both cases.

Take two basic hull types- one that has no lifting strakes and still renders soft, small wakes with great handling and tracking, with all 3 tracking fins ahead of the pylon and another that has a flat bottom with lifting strakes galore (get that hull out of the water!) and tracking fins all the way back under the engine because so much boat is out of the water on plane. I tend to have more admiration for the company that does it the "hard way" at the expense of interior room, weight insensitivity, rear locker storage, and everything else. To me, that says more than anything that that company is extremely dedicated to function over form.

Joel, there is something cool about a no-compromise machine. it's what attracted me to the 196. Hard core all the way. I hope CC doesn't change their approach on this boat--despite the many reasons justifying such change.

[Hollywood]

I think it great that you are passionate about your boat brand... .

He's passionate about the TSC+ hull, which is why it's his boat not the other way around and you know that.

[skisix@38]

Thats my 07 196.

Cool! I love that picture.

Greg, I thought I was pretty in context about weight sensitivity. The TSC1 and higher hulls are ultra weight sensitive due to their hull design which I admire. That's basically what I was getting at there.

I get distracted or confused or both after two sentances and you wrote 5...

What were we talking about?....lol

I got into this debate on the Malibu forum ( SB VS OB) because I just don't understand this. You and SGY have both now stated that the no compromise didication( paraphrased) approach to the 196 is attractive to you in a boat. That's something I don't get. If you can run your best and do it behind a boat that will also pull other water activities or allow your family to ride in the bow, why wouldn't that be equally or more attractive. To me, when I hear this debate of function over form, I have to wonder what you drive back and forth on the road? I know what SGY drives and it's not totally function, there's a lot of form to that...

[MARK-S]

I am a function guy. 196 all the way. Of course I dont have any use for a open bow on a 2200x300 lake. If I would go boating it would be on one of the larger lakes in the area and at that point you need a big V drive or a boat that rides higher in the water. Everyone knows how I feel about those 197/206/RLXI submarines. They will be under water before you can get the bow up in the air.

[skisix@38]

I am a function guy. 196 all the way. Of course I dont have any use for a open bow on a 2200x300 lake. If I would go boating it would be on one of the larger lakes in the area and at that point you need a big V drive or a boat that rides higher in the water. Everyone knows how I feel about those 197/206/RLXI submarines. They will be under water before you can get the bow up in the air.

I don't know Mark... I can get a lot of water in a 196, just as much as I can in my 03 RLXi. The only difference being that in the 196 the water is getting everyone wet head to toe and in the RLXi it's onyl getting the bow passengers wet head to toe and then everyone elses feet wet. SGY can confirm this....

[MARK-S]

No dought, I have had water over the windshield of my 196 on the big lakes, but I would not attempt to take it there again. Its to small for a lake like Minnetonka. its the wakes of the big cruisers that come over the bow an dsink you to the gunwales.
If you dont power turn back into your wake and saty off the big water, you will stay dry in them all.

[MARK-S]

It has been nice here all week and our water is as warm as Deans was when I left. Bring on Global warming. Are you skiing at triple J next week?

[DanielC]

Prop rotation is not a "load of crap." It is important, that is why Mastercraft has has a ballast tank available on the port side of the some of their Prostars, to counterbalance it. Better idea than every other boat company, besides Correct Craft to choose to ignore it.
No boat manufacture can predict what weight of the driver and passengers will be. The observers job is to be aware of where their weight is, and to adjust accordingly. On a Correct Craft you have this option.
When I bought my 1997 Ski Nautique, I noticed it was one of the lighter "hard core" slalom boats. That also contributes to the weight sensitivity.
When I got my boat, I also joined a ski show team. One of our other members got a SNOB. (Ski Nautique Open Bow) I drove my boat at ski team practices, and the SNOB. They handled differently, and had different wakes. The SNOB weighed more, and rode with a higher bow, that was more pronounced at slower speeds.
Every design element on a boat is a compromise, you may gain something with a change, but almost always something else is compromised.
Many people like a left hand prop, because it makes the boat pull to the driver on the right, but it unbalances the boat a little. A wider beam boat will be less weight sensitive, but the wake will be different.
Test drive the boats, ski behind them. Decide what you want in a boat.
If you want to have a Slalom boat with an open bow, maybe you only run a 1/4 tank of gas when you are actively training for shortline slalom passes, and fill the tank when wife and kids are out with you wakeboarding.

[SGY]

Thats my 07 196.

Cool! I love that picture.

Greg, I thought I was pretty in context about weight sensitivity. The TSC1 and higher hulls are ultra weight sensitive due to their hull design which I admire. That's basically what I was getting at there.

I get distracted or confused or both after two sentances and you wrote 5...

What were we talking about?....lol

I got into this debate on the Malibu forum ( SB VS OB) because I just don't understand this. You and SGY have both now stated that the no compromise didication( paraphrased) approach to the 196 is attractive to you in a boat. That's something I don't get. If you can run your best and do it behind a boat that will also pull other water activities or allow your family to ride in the bow, why wouldn't that be equally or more attractive. To me, when I hear this debate of function over form, I have to wonder what you drive back and forth on the road? I know what SGY drives and it's not totally function, there's a lot of form to that...

That's exactly what I was refering to in my earlier post about future changes to the 196. One can make a boat that performs well for both the early morning dawn patrol and for the family. The Response has proven that. For me, it's an emotional response. The notion of a company taking a no-frills approach to a ski boat appeals to me on an emotional level. Skisix, I heard you say time and again that the sexy lines of the 2003-2006 RLXi appeals to you. That's an emotional response similar to what I'm talking about.

I'm not here to say my emotional response is rational or that the 196 performs above and beyond other ski boats. Now, if one believes that the closed bow, narrow beam format is necessary for the best possible result in the slalom course, that's a totally different argument. Some folks cotton to that notion. But that's subjective in my mind. I'm not saying, I'm just saying.

As for my daily truck--Titan vs. Tahoe. No contest. The Titan wins hands down. :mrgreen:

[skisix@38]

It has been nice here all week and our water is as warm as Deans was when I left. Bring on Global warming. Are you skiing at triple J next week?

I doubt I'll go to triple J but, Deans is back in the mid 80's again and skiing great! especially when the weight is on the observer side of the boat to help counter balance the prop rotation thingymajig of the 08 196 that I drive everyday, well almost everyday.

[Hollywood]

especially when the weight is on the observer side of the boat to help counter balance the prop rotation thingymajig of the 08 196 that I drive everyday, well almost everyday.

Now I can't tell if you are being serious or joking.

A weight on the observer side of a 196 is torquing the boat the same way as its prop rotation. You don't need the weight because of the prop rotation.

Show me a private lake that has a club 196 and I'll show you a dock that has some sort of weight on the dock that the members load in the 196 when there isn't a third person there to ski.

the torque imparted on the boat due to prop rotation has only a marginal affect at best and is insignificant when the driver is over 170lbs.