Bring back the 196

[2gofaster]

The only problem I had with the 200.........well, other than the price lol........... was the noise from that 5.7 engine screaming at 4200rpm for 2 hours while you pull 15-18 skiers in a round.

[tski97]

A month or so ago I went a tour of the factory. The employee told me that the 200 was the number 1 selling boat in 2010 with the 230 behind it. It seemed like the numbers were abou 2 to 1 on th ob to cb. I wish I would have asked if the 196 was the the number 1 seller in 2009.

[MARK-S]

size

Again, I love the 200.
I just love the 196 more. The 6 inches and wider back end are very noticeable when in the boat driving.
it is more barge like around the dock and it has lost its sports car feel. The 200 drives on a rail and skis great but the 196 is more attractive to our club for all around use.
If you do a search, you can not find a 2008 or 2009 196 for sale. If you do, the value has now shot up compared to last summer.
If I had the money, I would be all over a 200, but buying a boat for club use has taken it out of the picture.

[swc5150]

A month or so ago I went a tour of the factory. The employee told me that the 200 was the number 1 selling boat in 2010 with the 230 behind it. It seemed like the numbers were abou 2 to 1 on th ob to cb. I wish I would have asked if the 196 was the the number 1 seller in 2009.

Wow, I wouldn't have guessed the #1 seller, with the popularity of wakeboarding.

Mattie,
CC still has the 196 molds. Actually, I believe they save all discontinued molds, but I'm not positive of that?

[DanielC]

First of all, full disclosure. I own a 1997 Ski Nautique, that is 19' 6” long. The boat has over 2250 hours on it. It is almost a year after I started hearing rumors of the 200, and I have yet to actually see one. Obviously, I have not skied behind one, or driven one.

The 200 is a great boat from what I have heard, even better than the 196. This opinion is based on what I have heard. Again, I have not even seen one.
The main problem I have with the 200 is that the boat is a compromise boat. Is it a better slalom boat than a 196, most probably, yes. Is it the best slalom boat Correct Craft could make? I think it is not. This is why.

The boat was designed as a hull that could be either an open bow, or closed bow boat and have the same characteristics. An open bow is a weaker design, because of the “U” cross section through the area of the windshield. A closed bow is a trapezoidal, or triangular cross section, closed on top. This is an inherently a much stronger design. In order to achieve the strength necessary to have the necessary rigidity, the open bow boat has to use more materials, making it heavier. Having to accommodate an open bow also dictated where the helm is located forward and aft. This also compromises the design.
Designing the boat as both an open bow, and closed bow is like Ford designing a four door Mustang, or GM designing a four door Corvette, or Camaro.

We have gone through a very hard year in the boating industry. And yet, Correct Craft has introduced a new slalom boat. I understand economic necessity may have made is important for Correct Craft to replace two boat models with one model, the 196, and 206.

Correct Craft has made a name, and has had a long tradition of not only producing the best slalom available, but producing the best slalom boat they could. Not just better than the competition, but the absolute best they could do. The 200 is not this boat.

The 1997 TSC1 Ski Nautique was produced in both an open bow, and closed bow configuration. However, with the open bow, the helm, and engine were shifted back, to accommodate the open bow. The 1997 Ski Nautique was designed as a closed bow first, and then compromises were made for the open bow. The 2009 200 was designed an a open bow that a closed bow deck could be put put on.

I fully believe that Correct Craft could take what they have learned in designing the 200, and use that knowledge to make a new closed bow 196 that will have an even better wake than the 200. Simply designing a boat as a closed bow stronger design means less material has to be used to achieve the necessary strength, less material means less weight, and less weight means less water displaced, and that has to make it possible to improve the wake even more. It could even be possible to design the new 196 to achieve slalom speed with out having to run a 350 cubic engine over 4000 RPM.

[ClemsonDave]

Daniel, I understand your thoughts about a car being weaker with 4 doors. Even more true about a convertible. I own a Z06 and it will easily out corner a convertible. However, explain to me where the 200 OB is suffering from being open bow. It turns just as hard and will spin on itself just like a 196. When you do spin it hard, it does not lean like the 196. It's like it is on rails. If you do find a weakness, then you can always get the CB.

Every inch of my 200 is more thought out and uses better materials (hinges, vinyl, etc) than my previous 196's. I'm having a difficult time understanding how the 200 is a compromise. No it is not perfect, but it is closer for most people than the 196. Next year's will probably be even better. I could be way off base, but I think for most people, it is worth sacrificing a few mph to get a smaller softer wake and have some storage space.

This thread has really gone off course from Mark's original post. It has turned into a 200 bashing/me defending thread. I think it would be great to offer both the 196 and the 200 as options!

[chris196]

From what I read, DanielC is not saying the 196 is better than the 200.
He's saying the 200 could have been better if CB only.
But, its an opinion and we'll never really know because they didn't make the boat.
However, I tend to agree with him.
The 97 was a no compromise 3 event boat, the 200 is better but, IMO, not from the same no compromise mentality.

I have a 1998 SN and one thing I love is the forward driving position.
If the new 200 was CB only, I would be willing to bet that the driving position would have been closer to the nose of the boat.
The other thing I really love about my 98 is take the back seat out and you have a really clean, uncluttered floor back there. Also, with no trunk, it's very easy to get on and off the platform. It's great for skiing with 3 people. I realize that the 200 is better than the previous 196 in that regard, but not as good as the 97-99 SN because of that step, IMO. Looks like you'll stub your toe a lot on that.

[j2nh]

When I took the factory tour, and watched them assemble my boat, I was told that they save all of the molds. My guess would be for liability reasons but that is just a guess.

I was hoping that the 200 was going to be a major upgrade to the 196, instead after skiing and driving it, it appears to be more of a lateral move with some compromises made to attract a larger market. Every time CC has made a change to the 196 I have had that burning desire to purchase a new one, but not this time.

There is no reason for me to want to purchase a boat that would restrict usage compared to my present boat, be more difficult to drive and observe the gauges, be louder inside, and use more fuel. There is also the unknown longterm issue of running significantly higher rpms.

Different strokes, different folks.

[DanielC]

Some of you are misreading my post, or not completely understanding what I am trying to say. Maybe I an not conveying my ideas and thoughts clearly.

I believe the 200 is a better boat for slalom than the 196 was.

I also believe the 200 is not the best slalom boat Correct Craft could make.

The open bow compromises the strength, and dictates where the helm, and engine are put in the boat. Design it a closed bow boat, and you will be able to build a better boat for slalom skiing.

Some people want the ultimate. The paragon.

Do not give us a hull that you can slap either a closed or open bow deck on. The "M" brand of boats do that. Be a leader, not a follower of everybody else

[ClemsonDave]

I'll ask again.... where is the compromise? Just about everyone so far admits the 200 is better than the 196 which is a world class boat. As far as seating position, anyone that has ever driven one will tell you that you have a far better, unobstructed viewing angle with the 200. Also, the bow does not rise up like the 196. Why does the seating position need to be further forward? We're a pretty tough crowd when they make just about everything better (minus speed) and it is still not good enough.

I have the back seat out of my 200 and it is most definitely uncluttered. Especially with the saddle bags. The only thing about the back I like better on the 196 is the bench to lay out on. It would be nice if they could have a way to mount the 200 rear seat flush with the stern. I always thought is was crazy to have that big storage area on the 196 and not be able to fit a ski in it. I caught more grief for that than anything. I think it is easier to get in and out of the 200 with the steps. Of course neither requires a lot of effort.

A lot of these responses sound like everyone is talking about a 206, MC or Bu open bow. I have those complaints about them too. I do not like the driver's view from any of those. The 200 is a different animal. I now have 60 hours on mine and have gotten to know it very well. There may be a few things I would change, but it is just a gigantic leap forward from an already pretty spectacular boat.

I hope I'm not coming off as defensive. I'm just giving my $0.02 with the experiences I have had with it so far.

FYI, I don't understand it, but this boat is not using any more fuel than my '08 196.

Wow, not a major upgrade?? more difficult to drive???

Sorry Mark for cluttering up your thread. I agree with you that it would be nice to have both as options. Just don't understand some of these other posts.

[swc5150]

This thread has really gone off course from Mark's original post. It has turned into a 200 bashing/me defending thread. I think it would be great to offer both the 196 and the 200 as options!

Dave is correct, and I'm a guilty party. Moving back to the original intention, what would it realistically take for CC to retool and build the 196 again? I'm assuming deposits would speak volumes, versus a simple petition. I, for one, would be willing to put down a deposit, even if it means waiting for a 2012 - assuming a substantial price increase wasn't required for CC's investment. That would partially defeat the purpose (for me anyway).

[jimmyj]

to get back off topic.

the compromise is Nautique not building the absolute very best, 100% hardcore ultimate doesnt get any better with current technology slalom hull. THAT is the compromise. pretty simple to understand. this is what danielc dude has been saying for months now. not that the 200 doesnt ski BETTER than the 196, but that it is not the BEST hull that Nautique has the capability to produce, period. (ie, to clear it up a little more, he is saying they could produce a better hull than the current 200).

that should clear up WHERE THE COMPROMISE IS

[ClemsonDave]

So, it's leaps and bounds better, but it is not perfect - even though perfect has not been defined. In that case, CC could never produce a boat without compromise - since perfection could never be achieved. Got it....

Bottom line for me, then I am done.... For my uses (3 event), the 200 is a far superior boat than anything that has ever been produced. Based on feelings I have heard here, there seems to be a need for a less expensive boat and I think the 196 would be ideal!

[chris196]

So, it's leaps and bounds better, but it is not perfect - even though perfect has not been defined. In that case, CC could never produce a boat without compromise - since perfection could never be achieved. Got it....

Bottom line for me, then I am done.... For my uses (3 event), the 200 is a far superior boat than anything that has ever been produced. Based on feelings I have heard here, there seems to be a need for a less expensive boat and I think the 196 would be ideal!

Sorry to keep this going, but no you don't "Got it."
You're still missing the point and people have pointed out the potential compromises. And no one said they expect a perfect ski boat from CC. And almost everyone says the 200 is better than the 196. They also say they think the 200 is not as good as CC could have done if there was not an OB requirement.

I guess the only way you will ever be convinced(if true) is to hear it from a CC engineer. But, I'd be willing to guess that will never happen. But seriously, you can't even entertain the idea that the 200 could have been better in a CB only model?

[gspotrider]

For those who want a 196 or the old 210 go and get one. There are a bunch for sale and that probably wont change. While the rest of the people progress with the industry you can always buy the oldies but goodies.

There are probably hundreds of reasons why nautique wont bring them back. They need to do what is right for the company and I for one trust them over anyone else. From what I've seen they must be doing things right because my local dealer has completely sold out of new nautiques.

So go and find a used 196 or 210 and be happy. After all its a nautique, it should last you forever.