8Wake improvements over the years.

[DanielC]

A friend has a 1996 MB 190. The boat wanders a lot when trying to pull a slalom skier, will not turn when trying to do an around the boat maneuver, and is very hard to control with a medium or larger size skier on the boom.

Do not get get an "M" boat. You want a Correct Craft.

My 1997 Ski Nautique has over 2168 hours on it.
Correct Craft has been in business since 1925.

[sodbuster88]

I used to be an MC guy. I owned an '89 and a '93. The wakes behind the '92-'94 prostar 190s and '92-'95 prostar 205s are arguably some of the best slalom wakes you will find.......even today. These boats were narrower, lighter and much flatter on the bottom with some nice straking. In '95, MC management left and the hulls from '95 to current have just not progressed. The newer prostar 197s have come along way, but they will never be the same as the '92-'94 hulls.

Now to the '04 196 I have today and how I would compare it to the '92-'94 prostar hull. I am still going to prefer the '92-'94 wake because I believe it is narrower and and you don't have the troughs, especially at the longer line lengths....something that the new 200 seems to eliminate. That was the biggest difference I noticed going to the 196.

I left MC for CC because the MC company took a dive in their design philosophy and product offering in '95. Now that I have had the privilege of owning CC's, I love them and especially the company. Can't wait to hear how the 200 performs and especially what the wake is like. Sounds like it will be very similar to the early MC wake....just wider.

[SkiTower]

Sod, how was the tracking on the early MC's compared to CC's of today?

[east tx skier]

Sod, how was the tracking on the early MC's compared to CC's of today?

The tracking of today's SN wins hands down. I've owned a 93 Pro Star 205 and driven and skied 190's and 205's of various model design changes throughout the 90's as well as the 197. They're fine boats, but the Nautiques are like freight trains.

The wakes at longline between a TSC 1/2/3 Nautique and an early 90's MC are different. The best distinction I can give in the shortest manner possible is that the early 90's MC 190 (91--94) wake is very narrow, with a small, slightly firm bump. The TSC Nautiques 97--Present have a slalom wake that varies only slightly through the three model changes. This wake is much wider with small crests at the edges before you see the foam from the chine spray. The bump is a touch taller than the early 90's MC, but it is much softer.

When I first skied a TSC2 SN, I was hooked. I later skied a TSC3 and remained impressed. I found my current boat (a 98 SN) in 2007. When I went for a test drive and ski, my first impressions of the wake were that I did not like it. But I convinced myself that the many people with whom I'd spoken who ensured me that it was only slightly different from the TSC 2 and 3 hulls knew better (plus, the conditions were far from ideal that day).

I got the boat home, swapped out the prop for an acme and found some smooth water and I never looked back. The wake behind this boat is superb. And, with all due respect to Sod, my preference as a longliner goes to the SN TSC 1/2/3 wake over the early 90's MC, which I would give a very close second. Though the MC wake of that era was excellent, it was still something I thought about. Nowadays, I don't even think about the wake as an obstacle anymore.

Just my $.02.

[sodbuster88]

All good points.....east_tx_skier. And tracking is no comparison. The TSC hulls, along with the fin/pylon/rudder geometry coupled with the powertrain is a far superior set-up on the CC. Please don't get me wrong, I am not looking back either. I love the TSC hull as well as the rest of the boat...and it has also been 10 years since I skied behind the MC. However, I get a chance to compare my TSC2 with a '94 MC PS190 in September for a good 4 days...I'll report back.

[SkiTower]

very nice write up ETC. I appreciate the details as opposed to a 'thumbs up'. It allows someone to determine if they share the same criteria as you.

I've skied behind Sod's 196. I thought my 211 was comparable until I cut through the wake. I was hooked. Like you said, I sliced through the wake.

I hope I get the chance to ski a 200 one day.

[east tx skier]

All good points.....east_tx_skier. And tracking is no comparison. The TSC hulls, along with the fin/pylon/rudder geometry coupled with the powertrain is a far superior set-up on the CC. Please don't get me wrong, I am not looking back either. I love the TSC hull as well as the rest of the boat...and it has also been 10 years since I skied behind the MC. However, I get a chance to compare my TSC2 with a '94 MC PS190 in September for a good 4 days...I'll report back.

A 97+ SN and a 94 MC. Great problem to have. If I could have two boats, those would be they.

[mpost]

Thanks to all of you for your opinions. Sorry for the delay in my response post but was out riding around in a fishing boat for the last 10 days and no where near a computer :grin:
So now it is back to the water behind the Nautique and stretch things out again. Will have to start working the BOSS a little harder now for the update to a newer boat Yellow_Flash_Colorz:
Thanks again for all the help.