Sales Domination

**Edwin** · 10-06-2003, 09:39 PM

216 test drive

Was fortunate enough to get to test drive and ski behind an 04 Sport 216 this evening. To do a real world comparison, I brought my 01 Malibu Sunsetter LXi along to drop in the water and ski immediately after the 216. Here were my thoughts:
Styling / interior design- It's obvious that the fit and finish of the 216 far exceeds my LXi. The layouts are very similar (makes me wonder what boat CC was modeling the 216 after :lol: ). My LXi has storage under two of the 3 back jump seats, the observer seat on the LXi opens with the seat back, then the bottom removes. I question if the 216 observer seat will open completely if a bimini top is installed. Might be an issue. The 216 observer seat is a seat and half (maybe), the LXi is a full two seater. Walk thru space from observer to motor box is more open on the 216, but either boat will require observers to move their legs to allow passengers by. Trunk is larger on the LXi, might be easier for smaller people to get things out of as it's not as deep as the 216. 216 trunk looks like it will hold a ton of stuff, but will require piling things on top of one another. Overall - I could go either way here, but the CC fit and finish is outstanding.

Holeshot performance - 2 adults, 1 child on board - holeshot was great behind the 216. Actually, exceeded my expectations (330hp Excalibur motor). This has been a beef with my LXi (325hp Monsoon motor), but has recently been fixed with a bit of prop work tweaking the stock 13x14 OJ 4 blade into a 13x12. Overall - the nod goes to the 216.

Handling - slow speeds such as docking, loading on trailer, picking up a skier, the LXi is hands down better here. The dealer readily admitted that the slow speed manuvering was not as good as smaller CC's.
- skiing speeds - CC was slower to turn, req'd a much more deliberate attempt at making the boat change directions. Not bad at all, just different. LXi on the other hand has the steering wheel feel of a 96 Crown Victoria and changes direction very easily. It turns sharper, faster, and stayed flatter in the turns than the 216.
Overall, no question the LXi is better here.

Wake quality at skiing speeds - skied 30mph, 15 off for the wife, 15, 22, and 28 off at 34mph for me. 216 at 30mph is not it's strong suit. At 30mph, the boat has not lifted out of the water completely resulting in a big hump in the middle. I had no issues zipping across it, but a non-edged ski will launch. On the other hand, the LXi is very nice at this speed. Much smaller, no where as turbulent as the 216.

Bumping the speed at 15 off helped tremendously, much better but still a decent bump. 22 off at 34 has you right in the rooster tails...keep the ski on edge and it's not too big of a problem. Non-edged and the ski took to the air. 28 off was great, no reason to think shorter than 28 would be anything less than ideal. At 34 mph, I'd say the difference between the two was even more noticeable. There's just not that much there behind my LXi, especially at 22 and 28 (where I happen to ski the most)
If I were the only one to ski behind the boat, I'd say the 216 wakes would be fine. However, since we normally ski as a family, the less skilled skiers need every bit of assistance they can get. To compare the two, the LXi wins this part hands down.

Tracking - wife commented that the 216 tracked better than the LXi, rarely even felt a pull even into 28 off. This isn't the case for our LXi as I do have to fight powerful skiers a bit. 216 it is, no questions asked.

This was the best test drive I've ever been on...truly helped me make my decision and won't think twice about it. Being able to drive / ski the two boats back to back is the way to do it, at least for me. The differences between the two are readily apparent. I was hesitant about the 216's slalom wakes after watching the Waterski magazine video - the CC marketing guy basically recognizes that the 216 is targeted toward the wakeboarder who also skis a bit. I have to say I agree with him - this boat is no where as slalom focused as the the 206. Given that we ski 95% of the time, I think I'll stick with my LXi.

**Hollywood** · 10-07-2003, 12:04 AM

Edwin, kick *** review.

**Edwin** · 10-07-2003, 03:15 PM

Thanks for the positive feedback HWood. I truly wanted the 216 to be "the" boat for me. It's an easy fix - buy a 206. Down side is that I'll have to alter our boating habits and not take day trips as often, decreasing the importance of storage. If I buy a place on a lake, the storage issue becomes a moot point.

**get6** · 10-07-2003, 03:55 PM

i agree with hw....excellent review, edwin. out of curiosity, how would you compare the ski-ability of the 206 against your lxi and against the 216, if you can remember, at 30 mph for your wife and at 34 mph at 15/22/28 for you? i have about convinced myself to sell my 95 sport, which has been bulletproof, and buy a 196 since we ski the course at a small lake 95% of the time. although my kids might like the 206 a little better, i am concerned about it being a half step inferior to the 196 for the slalom course. thanks again!

**Edwin** · 10-07-2003, 04:50 PM

Get6- if the 206 would accept my ski in the rear locker, I'd order one today. The 30mph 206 wakes were not as smooth as my LXi, but they were soft. 34mph, 15 /22 off 206 are outstanding, 28off had a noticeable bump. Didn't ski anything shorter than 28 off behind the 206.

Ways the 206 is better than the 216 - wakes are smaller at all line lengths I skied, more nimble driving, a tad snappier out of the hole (weighs a bunch less), cheaper than the 216.

216 over the 206 - rear trunk that can handle a full size ski (not everyone can ski on a 66" ski), uh, uh, guess that's it.

It's been interesting to compare the CC and Malibu. The hull design of the CC puts much more boat in the water (helping tracking), added strength in pull is noticeable (very strong pull, don't seem to slow the boat down at all behind the CC). Chop the power on the 206 and it drops in the water fast. 216 takes a bit longer, my LXi seems to glide for ever. That smoother hull design of the Malibu is noticeable right behind the boat (you can see the entire transom while skiing, CC has a lot of turbulent water coming out behind the boat).

I haven't skied behind the 196, can't comment there. IMHO, you'd be hard pressed to have a beef with the 206.

**SGY** · 10-07-2003, 04:59 PM

206 vs. 196

Edwin. Very nice review. You have to be a man of conviction and discipline not to convince yourself to buy a new toy. Well done.

I too would like to read your comparision of the 216 and 206.

I've heard numerous different comparisons between the 206 and the 196. Several people have told me that the 206 skis exactly the same. Andy Mapple responded to my email saying that the 206 wake is "different" from the 196 wake at 15 and 22 off. He did not say it was inferior, just different. Others have told me that from 28 off and beyond there is no difference but at 15 and 22 off the wake is a "bit" bigger--similar to the Malibu and MC wakes.

Finally a CC representative told me that the 196 is their premiere ski boat and has wakes at long lines that are a bit better than the long line wake behind the 206. But the CC representative told me that I would be pleasently surprised comparing the 206 wake to my 99 SNOB wake--smaller and softer at all line lengths.

I'm trying to arrange a demo next week in Orlando and will see for myself.

**get6** · 10-07-2003, 06:54 PM

sgy..thanks for the info and please let us know how your 196 demo goes. i am very interested in your impressions. your comments are consistent with what i have heard about the 196 vs 206 comparison. similar at 28 and beyond but the 196 is a little better at 15 and 22. both in real terms are probably very acceptable, tho.

edwin...dunno your current career, but you have a calling as a boat tester for waterski magazine! thanks again for the info. i agree that it is insane that a 67 inch ski won't fit in the 196/206 rear locker. i have a 67 inch goode that i am all but certain won't fit. it is not such a big issue for me because we ski on a small lake, but for folks like you it seems to make the rear locker nearly completely wasted (or at best suboptimal) space. curious why they did not give the locker another inch or two. there is room to do so.

btw..i am guessing both the 196 and the 206 without some additional weight or passengers are really amateur hour for wakeboarding wakes. if you load them up, they are probably ok, though.

**Edwin** · 10-07-2003, 08:52 PM

SGY - have to agree w/ the CC rep. Last Nautique I tested before this generation was the TSC hull, 99 SNOB. Great skiing boat, 206 is as good, if not better. Having a small child, the climb over dash wouldn't work. Can't count the number of trips back and forth the little ones make during a day. Maybe they'd stay put a bit better in a playpen design, but I haven't found a kid yet that stays content when they're confined. For me, content kids mean more time on the water.

Get6 - asked the same question, as it's unlikely that a majority of full sized adults slalom on a 66". Comment has been made by the dealer that the 206 is identical to the 196, just chop it in half and add a foot or so in length. A bit longer spray pocket here, a bit longer XXXX here, the result out the back is going to be a bit different. I'd strongly recommend a test ski behind the 206...it's a great ski boat.

I appreciate the kind words about the boat review - two comments. 1) Boat reviewers at Waterski have to worry about ad sales for the upcoming issue. Given that, it will be a cold day in h*ll before you see a honest, gut feeling kind of a review out of them. Too bad, but ads keep their magazine alive. 2) I'd love to do this for a living, however I've become accustomed to the current lifestyle I live. I hate to even think of the response from the wife when I told her the Benz, Rover, and house had to go...I'm (we're, sh's a domestic engineer) becoming a writer. I work my tail off to afford the nicer things, getting to share the experiences with great folks on a site like this is gratifying in itself.

To be honest, the worst part of this whole process has been letting the dealer know I'll have to pass on the 216. The guys at (shameless plug) Extreme Power Sports www.extremepowersports.com have been nothing short of awesome to deal with. They are the epitomy of what you want in a dealer - there to sell / service boats because they love the sport. Yeah, they'd like to make a few $$ at it, but it's obvious that the $$ is not the driving factor in the sales process. I hope to be able to buy a boat from them some day...
Edwin

**get6** · 10-08-2003, 02:36 PM

edwin - i will give the 206 a ride, hopefully at the same time as a 196 so as to do the type of comparison you did. thanks again. i am with on the lifestyle implication of a job change to a writer. at my home, my guess is i would get the boot before she would move to a different house because i wanted to take a lifestyle job. in any event, i found your review concise and insightful and think you may be a natural reviewer, if not for profit, then for fun and the benefit of the rest of us!

punched up the extreme power sports website. they look like good guys. i only wish they were closer than 2000 miles.

**skinautique** · 10-08-2003, 03:48 PM

Edwin, Just out of curiousity, is the trunk the only real issue for you? If so, what is the problem with the storage under the passenger seat? If that is settled, just go with a 206 and have a blast! By the way, don't look at the wake behind any of the newer Nautiques. Yes it looks ugly with all of the turbulence. But in reality, everything that is white and foamy looking is all soft. Anyways, thanks for the review!

**Edwin** · 10-08-2003, 06:04 PM

SN - the trunk is the main issue for me. I'll do some digging and see if I can utilitze the storage space in the port gunwhale for my ski.

Mrs. Edwin likes the bigger boat ride of our LXi. The LXi rides pretty well in decent chop, the 206 rode much more like a full bore comp boat. I think I should be able to over come that objection with the wife, need to make sure the timing is appropriate. Her other objection revolves around the depth of the bow seating area. She's worried that the low freeboard in the nose will be dangerous for kids. Again, easy to overcome as all bow passengers need to stay seated when we're underway (boat rule).

**skinautique** · 10-08-2003, 06:14 PM

Kind of shocked about the chop comment. I beat the snot out of a 206 and a 216 and was very surprised with how well they rode in the chop. But everyone is on a different lake with different chop.

**Edwin** · 10-08-2003, 06:56 PM

She's got no issue what so ever with the 216 ride quality...as good as the LXi, feels even better given the rock solid construction. The 206 felt more like out MC Prostar 190 in the chop. She's spoiled, but we just had a talk at dinner. Being a salesperson by trade, this is not a problem, but minor irritation. I'll get my CC at some point in time. Worst case scenario, I'll order a 206 and just happen to bring it home one day. That's what I did when I bought her a Range Rover...she didn't seem to mind.

**SGY** · 10-09-2003, 11:09 AM

Get the 206 now

Edwin, it's always later than you think. Get that 206 now.

I'll be in Orlando on Monday and will test the 206 with Jeff Warner. I have to say that Jeff is a great guy--always there with the infomration I need. And, now, with less than a week's notice he has set up my test ride/ski. That is what makes a customer come back again and again.

I'll post my thoughts Tuesday.

Steve.

**thutch** · 10-14-2003, 09:10 AM

I have questioned my dealership on this issue and the lack of Nautiques (CC) on the local waterways. From what I get, CC isn't real worried about increasing market share as they are maintaining Quality and Maintaining Market share. If they increase market share too much, they may sacrifice quality, and they are not willing to do that... Well, not exactly what was said, but the idea I got from the conversation..

The owner also quoted me some figures of incomes of each boat owner. Apparently, the average Nautique owner is very well off. He also gave me the Rolls Royce example.. Rolls doesn�t sell as many cars, but do they care?�

for the record and the way this conversation is going.. I went from a 15' tri-hull(bought while in college for 1500 bucks) - to a 90 ski Nautique(graduation present to self).. and most recently just got a 03 Super Air.. Cost defiantly was a consideration, but after doing the numbers, I based my decision on wanting the best boat (SAN has the best wake) most convenience (no need to add sacks beyond the factory tanks and a little lead) and resale.. It will cost about 5K a year to own the boat, hopefully a little less with the treatment it receives. I also am paying for luxury and satisfaction... I know (at least in mind, which is the only thing that counts to me) I have the best boat and I have some of the amenities that others do not..