200 devalued in first year?

[ScarletArrow]

I'm curious about the discussion related to the RPM's and top end speed for the 200 at 34 and 36mph with the 5.7.

I'm suspecting that many will order the 2010 200 with the 5.7L.

If, however, we learn that the RPM's are higher than desired, and it becomes preferable to have the 6.0L in future years, will the 2010 model take a higher hit in depreciation b/c of this fact?

Will those who spend the extra $ today on the 6.0L see a better retention in value later for this specific year?

Are those with a 196 and the 6.0L about to recoup the price difference when they sell?

Will this be similar to the 2002? model with digital gauges that went defunct?

Gauges - easy to swap out to retain value...motors - no so much.

[swc5150]

RE: 200 devalued in first year?

I've heard chatter that 6.0 will be the standard engine in the near future, due to the RPM/top speed concerns. Some interior tweaks will come as well, as the hinges on the saddlebags apparently have been fraying ropes. These concerns have me leaning towards a late-model 196, in which all the bugs are gone, versus being a first model year guinea pig.

[502Python]

RE: 200 devalued in first year?

Agreed, in which case the standard motor will definitely depreciate quicker.

[AirTool]

RE: 200 devalued in first year?

When will catalytic convertors be required as standard for all states? Will that kill the 5.7 for pcm?

Also, I'm 99% sure the "design rpm limit" for my pcm transmission is 4500 rpm. Will that be revised to better match the 6.0?

[DanielC]

RE: 200 devalued in first year?

Quote
"Also, I'm 99% sure the "design rpm limit" for my pcm transmission is 4500 rpm. Will that be revised to better match the 6.0?"

In the 2038 hours I have put on my 1997 Ski Nautique, it has spent a fair amount of time above 4500 RPM. Darn those barefooters.

[Nautiqueman]

RE: 200 devalued in first year?

Who can tell what depreciation will be like for the near future? With the economy where it is in regards to the boating industry, I would expect to take about 20% off the retail price after the first year. The primary reason being NADA retail pricing has dropped significantly with the market over the past year which in turn causes the financing of used boats to be more complicated. Also warranty for the 2nd owner (parts only) is not as good as the first owner (who gets parts and labor included). Banks are more cautious about lending on big ticket items.

My suggestion is that you consider trading every 2 years to minimize the bite in depreciation if a sale after the first year is too painful. The best thing you will have going for you is a higher demand for something that is not available after the first year.

[behindpropellers]

Re: RE: 200 devalued in first year?

My suggestion is that you consider trading every 2 years to minimize the bite in depreciation if a sale after the first year is too painful. The best thing you will have going for you is a higher demand for something that is not available after the first year.

If you are really worried about depreciation the fact is you should not buy new. There are tons of 5 year old boats out there with less than 300 hours on them that will cost 1/2 of a new boat. Personally, I am not worried about a warranty. Compared to a car...there really isn't much to go wrong in these boats.

Tim

[ScarletArrow]

RE: Re: RE: 200 devalued in first year?

Depreciation b/c of the economy is one thing...deprecition b/c this is a "bad" model year is another.

I think CC could help prospective 200 owners and avoid a "bad" model year by supplying official data about the top end speed and RPM's for the 2 motors so buyers are more educated.

Who knows - maybe more people opt for the 6.0L?

[SkiTower]

Re: RE: 200 devalued in first year?

My suggestion is that you consider trading every 2 years to minimize the bite in depreciation if a sale after the first year is too painful. The best thing you will have going for you is a higher demand for something that is not available after the first year.

If you are really worried about depreciation the fact is you should not buy new. There are tons of 5 year old boats out there with less than 300 hours on them that will cost 1/2 of a new boat. Personally, I am not worried about a warranty. Compared to a car...there really isn't much to go wrong in these boats.

Tim

Agreed. Mine is two years old and the depreciation has killed me and the economy hasn't helped.

[ClemsonDave]

RE: Re: RE: 200 devalued in first year?

From what I've heard, the catanium 6L is the most impressive motor. Gets better fuel economy than the 5.7L. However, it is a very expensive upgrade even for promo reps. With the prices we have had to sell our 196's for, along with the increased price of the 200, I suspect most promo's will have the 5.7L.

[qstufflebeam]

6.0L and Zero Off

What effect does the 6.0L have on ZO? I have heard with the prior software versions of ZO that the 6.0L had an even hard pull than the 5.7. Will a 6.0L be less forgiving behind the 200 or will there be any difference?

[ClemsonDave]

RE: 6.0L and Zero Off

I skied the 6L at practice during Nationals last year. It was last year's ZO. Felt smoother than the 5.7. Of course, I have liked all the ZO versions.

[Robbinbanx]

RE: 6.0L and Zero Off

What is a ZO ? I too have a 2006 SANTE 200 ZR6 (6.0L) and it seems to hit the rev limiter at WOT is there any fix for this? I had a '88 american skier for over 20 years with no tranny issues or any other motor/drivetrain issues. For CC to put such a conservative rev limit into the ingnition (lets just say I thought somthing was wrong with my new boat! )I was relived when the dealer said this is normal but I wish there was a way to get a few more rpms out of it without changing my prop. I know that the motor and tranny can handle a lot more :-)

[j2nh]

Re: 200 devalued in first year?

I'm curious about the discussion related to the RPM's and top end speed for the 200 at 34 and 36mph with the 5.7.

I'm suspecting that many will order the 2010 200 with the 5.7L.

If, however, we learn that the RPM's are higher than desired, and it becomes preferable to have the 6.0L in future years, will the 2010 model take a higher hit in depreciation b/c of this fact?

Will those who spend the extra $ today on the 6.0L see a better retention in value later for this specific year?

You know how it works, right place right time and the boat gets sold. Having said that IF all of the talk about speed/rpm is true then the market for the 200/5.7L will be smaller when it becomes time to sell. JUMPERS, barefooters, show clubs, might be dropped as potential buyers. Worse yet if the 6.0L then becomes the std. engine (mid year or 2011). Then there will be the argument that the engine has been put under more stress.
Why did CC use the 6.0 in the Big Dawg?

[AirTool]

Re: 200 devalued in first year?

Why did CC use the 6.0 in the Big Dawg?

To make people want to buy it.

When I'm at Sea World San Antonio, I always get 6.0 envy...even though I don't need it.