The G21 is Here!

[NautiqueJeff]

I"ll bet dollars to donuts that trailer is wider than the legal limit.

100% guaranteed. Anything wider than the rubrail of the G-series boats is over the limit. Those guide poles alone make that trailer over the limit.

[Brichter14]

How is a boat like this not over the limit?

[FunkyBunch]

Here is another one sitting at Buxton now that has a different trailer and its above the wheel wells.

[NautiqueJeff]

How is a boat like this not over the limit?

That's gotta be over the weight limit for the truck at least.

As far as being over width, most states will issue you a permit. In VA and NC, I believe it is about $100 per year. With the permit, you can be over the width and still be legal.

[scottb7]

I think nautique planned it this way intentionally. They sold a ton more g23's then they ever would have had the g21, g23, and g25 come out at the same time. I think many g23 owners were duped by the timing.

[core-rider]

I finally was able to get a look at the G21 at my local boat show this past weekend. Not much else to really look at compared to the G23, but I did start to notice small differences. All these I've never noticed in pictures mainly because of location.

Transome cooler missing
No leather wrap on the grab handles
Bow filler cushion doesn't have Seadek on the underside when flipped
The tower was made different at the tow point. I was told that was to keep people from bumping their heads since the cockpit area was shorter, the tower was closer to the walk-thru entry.

After talking with the Nautique rep/friend of mine it sounded like these were not options, just deliberate changes made to keep costs down when comparing a G21 to G23. Compared to the G23 sitting beside it both boats were optioned similar except for the G21 had the 409 engine and the G23 had the 450 and appearance package. The G21 cost was $119K and the G23 was $133K. I guess with the same engine, appearance package, and those other missing pieces the G21 would have cost right at the same as the G23. Makes me ask even more why bother with a G21 when you can get 18" more boat for almost the same price. They are both not going in a standard garage anyway so might as well get the bigger of the 2.

[vision]

I guess with the same engine, appearance package, and those other missing pieces the G21 would have cost right at the same as the G23. Makes me ask even more why bother with a G21 when you can get 18" more boat for almost the same price. They are both not going in a standard garage anyway so might as well get the bigger of the 2.

Agreed. I think the difference would be some lakes have boat length limits and there are mumblings that the G21 has a steeper wake which can be preferred. The decreased wetted surface would allow a smaller engine compared to the G23, but certainly the 200lbs weight difference is incredibly minimal.

But I must admit a G22 and G25 would make more sense than a G21, G23, and G25.

[Laptom]

I think the G-line will work out fine. It is clear, even with the normal SAN line. It would be complete if they bring out a SAN250 for 99k.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn GT-I9505 met Tapatalk

[Miljack]

I think nautique planned it this way intentionally. They sold a ton more g23's then they ever would have had the g21, g23, and g25 come out at the same time. I think many g23 owners were duped by the timing.

Scott, not sure of your implication here. Are you of the opinion that had CC started with a G21, that people wouldn't have purchased the 23 and 25's?

If you think back to the timing on the introduction of the G23, no other manufacturer had developed any real "breakthrough" boats. MC was trolling the new Xstar, but hadn't yet announced a production date. CC was taking a real risk in developing and selling a boat which was going to be approx. +50% in price above their current 23' "flagship" wakeboat. The market spoke LOUDLY in their acceptance of this technology/packaging/price point, and CC EXCEEDED their original sales goal for the G23. At the time, the 25 was in development, but the 21 was an "idea."

If you think about it, how much does two feet of fiberglass cost on a wakeboard boat? Why would anybody "settle" for the 23, when the 25' is another $xx more, what's another $xx grand when you're way north of a $100k for a toy?
From some of the other statements on the G21 (I have not yet seen one), sounds like CC was doing all they could to differentiate the "little brother" so that the up market boats had some additional features to help their owners justify their extra $$. CC probably also looking to save some $$ for margin to help with the market driven sales point of a 21' tow boat...

My opinion on the G line is that there will always be demand for the 3 different lengths, and CC nailed the sweet spot with the 23. The 21 and 25 will round out the line for different tastes/demands, but both will trail the 23 in sales quantity by a large margin...

[scottb7]

What does, "the 21 was an idea" mean? A 21 foot boat is not a new idea. You are implying that a 21 foot g boot was not ready to come out at same time. And you know that for a fact because who told you that, and you believe that why?

I believe correct craft with their resources could have come out with any size g boat any time they wanted. For instance the could have come out with the 21 and 23, rather then the 23, and 25.

I believe it was purposeful. I don't have a problem with it being purposeful. I don't care. But yes, I think it was quite strategic.

[jbwake]

I think Mikjack is on the money with regards to the timing of the development.

I certainly don’t believe CC had the finished 25 and 21 designs ready to go when the 23 was released.

Mates of ours who are also the dealer have reliably told us that the 23 was developed first and then it was relatively easy to adapt that design to a 25, whereas the 21 took considerably more work to get right.

[Miljack]

What does, "the 21 was an idea" mean? A 21 foot boat is not a new idea. You are implying that a 21 foot g boot was not ready to come out at same time. And you know that for a fact because who told you that, and you believe that why?

I believe correct craft with their resources could have come out with any size g boat any time they wanted. For instance the could have come out with the 21 and 23, rather then the 23, and 25.

I believe it was purposeful. I don't have a problem with it being purposeful. I don't care. But yes, I think it was quite strategic.

Scott,
it's COLLLDDD here in the south, and we're months away from getting to play again, so..."hot stove league" it is!

My statement regarding the G21 means, in my opinion, they had a "design concept" G21. No a 21' boat is not new, but a $110k MSRP G21 "base model" was certainly breaking new territory...

I guess I don't understand why you feel "holding back" the G21 introduction was a strategic play, to what end? CC did have to do some work to clear the 210 & 230 price points, but did so in a way that made sense, and also supported the G series pricing, and in the end didn't destroy CC's used values in the market place. At the time of the G23 introduction, CC had NO idea how successful they would be with that model. Forecasts are made by smart marketing and sales people, but the rubber doesn't hit the road until a buyer puts his $$ for a boat...

your shot :-)

[scottb7]

Me thinks thou protests too much.