Considering Buying a Used Nautique (80s?)

[TRBenj]

Trbenj,

No it is not all wrong. Perhaps I used different wording when I stated "composite seat bases" than what you would but the fact of the matter is in the CC parts book they refer to "bases" what you refer to "frames". So, to use your terminology the 1986 was the 1st year for the rotocast/plastic/composite "frames" not 1985 as you stated. Wood was still used for the bases/frames in 1985.

As for speed you are wrong. You don't get something for nothing in this world. If you increase bottom end, all other things remaining constant, you lose top end. A 1989 SN will be slower by 3-4 mph than a '82-88 SN assuming the engines are exactly the same.

Its pretty close to all wrong! My experiences have been the same as Chris4x4.

Whatever you call the frames (that lift the seat up off the floor), the older style is metal, the newer is plastic- so neither rot. The base itself (what the vinyl staples to) is wood on both versions. CC didnt go composite on that piece until '93.

I dont buy the fact that the 1.23 trans hurt the top end at all. Maybe your experience is limited to a few select boats? Hull variations can account for several mph difference in top end speed, even with the same powertrain. Our '88 was only good for 42-44. 2 of my buddy's '86's run 45-46 on the GPS. Ive seen stock engined '89's run 47. I have not seen any correlation between the 1.23 trans and lower top end speeds. My buddy has a '94 base model SN with a 240hp 351w and 1:1 transmission and its slower (42mph) than my '90 was with the stock motor (43mph), which has the 1.23... and my '90 has a slow hull in every sense of the word.

As for "something for nothing" I cant say youre right there either... theres a reason why CC has been using the 1.23 in most of their direct drives since '89- its a great feature! It offers an improved holeshot without a top end penalty. MC has essentially switched their Powerslot to a 1.26 (from a 1.5:1) in recent years, so that must be pretty close to the sweet spot for this type of hull. Some of the fastest Correct Crafts I know (mid to upper 50's) have the 1.23, FWIW!

[TW]

You are the one who incorrectly used the word "frames". Seat bases are what the cushions sit on, not what the vinyl is stapled to and these bases were wood pre-1986 contrary to your earlier comments. Rotocast ( I correctly used the word composite, as rotocast is a composite material, earlier but obviously this has confused matters so I will change it to the more precise word of Rotocast ) seat bases were introduced in the SN in 1986.

Perhaps my experience with my father's '85 and '86 outperforming my '89 were anomolies due to factors you mentioned above. If so, I stand corrected but please realize you are incorrect in your comments about the bases. A 1985 SN did not have rotocast bases and your use of the word frame for a base was very confusing (nice way of saying wrong).

I agree the 1:1.23 transmission is an excellent choice for tournament ski boat. However, the reason some of the fastest CCs have it is because the hp increased drastically with the introduction of the GT40 heads in 1992 but the only time I've gotten into the 50s with a SN was the supercharged 5.4 used at the Masters in 2000 or 2001 (don't remember exactly which year but I know the boat had an "N" gel stripe).

As for Chris4x4 questions about props the 13x14x1 rh was the standard prop for the majority of the 2001 years with the 13x13x1 rh being an optional power prop. I believe the 13x14 was always the standard prop for the 2001 pre-gear reduction but perhaps CC changed it to the 13x13 in the later years of it. With the introduction of the 1:1.23 the standard prop was the 14x16x1 rh. Everything CC was 3 blade and Federal until 1997with the introduction of the TSC hull.

[swc5150]

correctcraftfan.com has all brochures online under their "reference" link. It's pretty slick!

[Hollywood]

Perhaps my experience with my father's '85 and '86 outperforming my '89 were anomolies due to factors you mentioned above. A 1985 SN did not have rotocast bases and your use of the word frame for a base was very confusing (nice way of saying wrong).

Perhaps your father's '85 didn't have the optional Deluxe Interior.

As for Chris4x4 questions about props the 13x14x1 rh was the standard prop for the majority of the 2001 years with the 13x13x1 rh being an optional power prop. I believe the 13x14 was always the standard prop for the 2001 pre-gear reduction but perhaps CC changed it to the 13x13 in the later years of it.

Where are you getting your infomation? Small block Ski Nautiques since the early 70s came with 13x13s. I can't say for sure what a big block SN came with, but I think that may have been a 13x14.

[TRBenj]

Perhaps your father's '85 didn't have the optional Deluxe Interior.




Where are you getting your infomation? Small block Ski Nautiques since the early 70s came with 13x13s. I can't say for sure what a big block SN came with, but I think that may have been a 13x14.

Thanks for proving my point HW. Ive only been in one '85 recently and it had the delux interior... I cant be certain the frames were rotocast like 86-89, but it would make sense if they were.

I agree on the props as well... not to say that none of the 351w 1:1's got a 13x14, but Ive never seen one. All 13x13's. Im guessing the big blocks got 13x15's though, just like the 79-80 BFN.

Oh, and CC switched to OJ props in '94. They installed the 3-blade legend for a few years before switching to the 4-blade in '97.

[TW]

Nice pictures from the '85 brochure but they do not show the seat bases as only a top view is shown with all cushions installed. Both 1984 and 1985 delux interiors were wood seat bases. Yes, my father's '85 was delux and in fact the same color scheme as shown in the brochure pictures above.

As for the props the 13x14x1 was the standard prop and the 13x13x1 was optional. This doesn't mean the 13x14 was more prominent than the 13x13 as it certainly wasn't. Think about it this way, in 2007 and 2008 the 645 was the standard prop for the SA boats with the 1235 designated as the power prop. Although the 645 sold pretty well in '07 by '08 most dealers spent the extra money for the power prop. Then in 2009 the power prop became standard on all Team Editions. However, the 645 remained the "standard" prop for Limiteds and Standard Editions. It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who knows CC that they will make an extra buck anyway they can (make you pay an upcharge for the best prop).

Have a nice evening and thanks again for posting the pictures from the "85 brochure.

[TRBenj]

Since you like the brochures so much, here's a shot from the '84 brochure showing that the 2001 came with a 13x13 prop. Ive never seen or heard of a 13x14 being installed from the factory on one of these boats... not saying it couldnt have happened now and again, but it was not the "prominent" configuration.



Regarding the 1.23 box- the fastest CC I have ridden in was a 1.23 boat with extra power added... but it was a '83 2001. The builder/owner surely would have gone with a 1:1 instead of the reduction gear if he thought there was a speed advantage to be had with that particular gear ratio. Ive been 56+ in a '09 196 (obviously with the 1.23) so the powertrain is no slowpoke. Of course, while I love my '90 with the gear reduction, more of my CC's have a 1:1 so Im not unfairly biased. My fastest boat still has a 1:1 but it has the advantage of big block power and a relatively fast hull.

[TW]

Nice picture of the 1984 SN delux interior with wood seat bases. Same material used in the '85.

Never said the 13x14 was prominent, simply said it was standard. Since this has become such an issue for you I'll try to dig up an old dealer option sheet.

[Bimmerboyz]

My Boat is available. PM me if you are interested.

[bubba]

This last weekend I purchased a 2008 SN206 so I will be selling my 1984 SN2001. Currently it is in storage but I will try to get some pictures by the weekend. PM me if your interested. I live in Albert Lea, MN; I am about an 1 hour and 45 minutes south of you.

[harddock]

Does anyone know of a history page with pictures of old Correct Crafts? I'd like to be able to see them all in one spot.

CCF has a brochure section so you can compare just about all years.

[WakeSlayer]

On CCF, in the Diaries section, you can also search by just the year and see some really cool old boats.

[TravisFling]

1989 2001

I love my 1989 2001. It's been a wonderful boat. I added a tower for several reasons, but it makes it nice to be able to use the backseat, especially if you have children. My .02 for what it's worth. I have the 351w in mine, which has been a great motor. I have zero complaints. The only thing I would trade for would be a v drive open bow, just for the additional space.

Travis

[bobchris]

Nice picture of the 1984 SN delux interior with wood seat bases. Same material used in the '85.

Never said the 13x14 was prominent, simply said it was standard. Since this has become such an issue for you I'll try to dig up an old dealer option sheet.

well if it was standard why isn't listed on the advertizement from the factory? because it wasn't standard a 13 x 13 was and for that mater it was standard equipement from about 1974 until the early 90's when they switched over to the 1.23:1 transmission and went to a 13 x 16 as standard equipement for the prop DA

[TravisFling]

1.23

I believe, bobchris, that they switched to the 1.23 in 1989. At least that's what I have in my 1989 and I don't believe it's been replaced. Also the first year for the invertaflow, I believe. I think some 1989's had the 1, but from my understanding they were few and far between. If I remember correctly the reduction tranny allowed the engine to be mounted horizontally, while in the 1.1 the engine was tilted towards the stern. I may be wrong though, but I'm pretty sure that's the ticket...