Can't search "Pro Air". How is this hull?

[GoBig]

Just to chime in, I've heard that the Pro hull gets worse gas mileage because of the chimes. I don't have first hand experience, just what I've read on here. Logically, it makes sense given that the hull is designed to push more water. My last ride was a '97 Sport, which is essentially the none-Pro hull version of the boat you're looking at. I loved that boat and we got a great wake out of it with a couple fat sacs. Highly recommend that hull for the lower budget. But like BKH said, if you're patient, you can get an early SAN or SS for that price range...they do come up from time to time...

[Jeff d]

Well, that particular Pro Air is out due to it being 500 miles away, cracks in the gelcoat and IMHO priced too high. If the gelcoat was near perfect I'd be willing to go that far for the price but not with the problems he's describing.

BTW for the record his FCT1 did crack but he had New Dimension (He's from Knoxville) weld it back together. So, there's another FCT1 failure.

There's still the local '98 Air but I'm just not stoked about it due to the saltwater useage and 1,000 hrs.

I'm probably gonna go take a look at an '03 Centurion Elite V in town. Could be a nice boat for the money but being an '03 it hasn't really hit the flat part of the depreciation curve like the '98-00 Nautiques have. They way I look at it if I can get a great deal on a 10-12 year old Nautique and I take care of it I can turn around and sell it with almost no depreciation loss in 3-4 years. With an '03 Centurion, unless I get a crazy good deal, I will likely loose more money with 3-4 years of ownership.

[bkhallpass]

If the Centurion for for you great. I would advise you to drive it before you buy it. Personally, I don't care much for the way the centurions steer and handle. Obviously, they sell a lot of boats, so it doesn't seem to be a problem for a lot of people. BKH

[Chexi]

Just to chime in, I've heard that the Pro hull gets worse gas mileage because of the chimes. I don't have first hand experience, just what I've read on here. Logically, it makes sense given that the hull is designed to push more water. My last ride was a '97 Sport, which is essentially the none-Pro hull version of the boat you're looking at. I loved that boat and we got a great wake out of it with a couple fat sacs. Highly recommend that hull for the lower budget. But like BKH said, if you're patient, you can get an early SAN or SS for that price range...they do come up from time to time...

If the 97 sport had the slant transom, which I believe it did, then it is not really the non-pro hull version. 97 and earlier was the same hull as the super sport, and is actually an even better wakeboarding hull than the pro or the 98-99 Airs, which are the non-pro version of what he is talking about. The trade-off is no stern locker in the 97 and earlier sports. The hulls between 97 and before versus 98-99 are relatively close, but there are small differences. I believe the 98-99 nose part of the hull slants back at a little flatter angle, making it appear a little sleeker than the 97 and earlier. That sleeker appearance comes at the cost of not having quite as good of a wake. All that said, you can still get a great wake out of a 98-99 Sport/Air.

[Jeff d]

If the Centurion for for you great. I would advise you to drive it before you buy it. Personally, I don't care much for the way the centurions steer and handle. Obviously, they sell a lot of boats, so it doesn't seem to be a problem for a lot of people. BKH

Just got back from looking at it. For a point of reference the only inboard boats I've ever been in/behind are an '01 and '08 SAN. Both meticulously maintained.

It was pretty run of the mill. No real surprises accept for the vinyl was paper thin. I expected it to be budget but it was borderline just bad. There were 3 places on the back seat where people had stepped and their feet ripped about 6" right through it (And not just at seams, right in the middle). The vinyl felt like what you'd find on a walmart "leather" recliner.

The tower seemed very high quality and everything else seemed plenty good enough to be functional. He had a great after market ballast system and audio system. The hull tapered drastically relative to the beam width. I guess I'm used to looking at SANs from behind but the wetted surface of the hull looked to be a lot smaller even though the beam was only a few inches narower. Overall it seemed like a nice enough boat but nothing to get excited about for $18,900.

So, I'm going to pass on it unless he comes back and says $15k or something like that and I didn't take it for a drive. It was a good experience though because it's the first boat that I've looked at in person. All of the rest have been too far relative to the potential deal to be worth the trip.

[Jeff d]

BTW what's the deal with these button down covers that everybody has on their boats?

"Let's drill 100 holes in the gelcoat and put screws in them to keep the sun and dirt off of the interior. It will look great when the cover isn't on to have a bunch of male buttons around the hull too"

Doesn't seem like a very logical way to accomplish the goal when there are perfectly good fitting covers that grip around the gunwales and actually provide more sun protection.

I've seen my neighbor's SAN sit through a literal hurricane with a custom cover that doesn't button down and it never came off of the boat.

[GoBig]

If the 97 sport had the slant transom, which I believe it did, then it is not really the non-pro hull version. 97 and earlier was the same hull as the super sport, and is actually an even better wakeboarding hull than the pro or the 98-99 Airs, which are the non-pro version of what he is talking about. The trade-off is no stern locker in the 97 and earlier sports. The hulls between 97 and before versus 98-99 are relatively close, but there are small differences. I believe the 98-99 nose part of the hull slants back at a little flatter angle, making it appear a little sleeker than the 97 and earlier. That sleeker appearance comes at the cost of not having quite as good of a wake. All that said, you can still get a great wake out of a 98-99 Sport/Air.

Chexi - you're right, my bad. I forgot that when they redesigned the hull in '98, they did away with the DD version of the SS hull, which was then the "Sport" model. The redesigned Sport/Air and Pro-Air hulls were specific for those models and no longer shared with the SS/SAN. Now I remember why those early (pre-'98) Sports were such gems...thanks for the refresher...

[Miljack]

@GoBig, I checked my fuel usage last year, and I found that I burned 5.5 gallons per hour while wakeboarding, skiing and surfing over a few hours, we also cruised a little bit to pick people up and then to take the boat out of the water. All of this was on a smaller lake(~3000 acres), and I didn't have to go very far to pick up or drop off people.
My boat has the Python engine, so I don't think the fuel usage on my boat is that much different than the other boats/hulls I've seen people post for fuel burn. BTW, we had 10 (!) on the boat that day...

YMMV :-)