Tweet
I'm moving from an '88 Barefoot to a newer v-drive, (budget will limit me to mid-2000s vintage) which will be used for surfing, skiing and tubing (sadly not in that order, at least until the girls get a little older). The lake I frequent is generally a zoo, so limited opportunities to ski but still am planning to get in some runs. I'm a recreational skier of 30 years and don't want something that will have a bigger wake than my Barefoot did, which was very big, but still well-shaped, when compared to my buddy's 2005 ski nautique wake. I'm curious if a 2006 SANTE 220 with hydrogate would have a smaller wake than a 2006 SANTE 210 without it and if anyone has any idea on relative wake sizes versus such an old boat. I've thought about, but don't think I want, a SV 2111 because I don't like the seating you have to give up with the walk through transom.
-
-
I had an 05' 210, and at slalom speeds, it has a fairly noticeable wake..... I know it was bigger than a 88 SN, can't remember about that era BF though, :/
On a good note, that 05' had an awesome goofy surf wave with some weight in the boat. -
Neither are bad wakes at high speed, but the 91" beam '06 210 is going to have a smaller wake than the 98" beam 220"[URL="http://www.ridebutter.com"]http://www.ridebutter.com[/URL]Comment
-
I've ridden both, and you can't go wrong with the classic 210 hull. Sack it out and it is big enough for anyone to do anything on.
As long as you're not trying to regularly take out 8-10 people, I'd stick with the 210.
I remember way back when they introduced the 220. Was supposed to be the next "super air". Didn't end up being anything special and took the 230 hull to take that title. At least to me anyways. I still prefer the new 210 to the 230 only because its not a tank.Comment
-
The '88 BFN wake was meaningfully bigger than the SN wake of same era--much deeper v-shaped hull and you couldn't do "power slides" with the stern out in a sharp turn like in the SN. So what I'm hearing is the hydrogate vs. non-hydrogate isn't enough to offset the extra 5" of beam and 200 lbs in terms of wake size for a slalom wake. Can anyone comment on the wake shape difference between the two and how much does the hydrogate really matter ? There will be little or no wakeboarding behind whichever boat I buy, and don't currently intend to add ballast. And a 230 is definitely not an option--too big, even if it weren't too much money.
Thanks for sharing the wisdom.Comment
-
I found an old thread from years ago that I posted pics of a few Nautiques I had at the time. I think its safe to say that across the board CC has kept the same general design of the hull. In my experience, they all exhibit very similar characteristics.
You're ahead of the game by already going CC. If I were you, I'd be looking at something that will have a better resale value. That being said, stay away from the SV's, 220s, 2007 210 (weird seating arrangement). I'd be looking for a 2003 210 with a colored top deck, or a 05-06 210. I skied a little behind my old 210, and will be much more nimble and feel like your BF compared to any of the newer bigger boats.
http://www.planetnautique.com/vb3/sh...ique-BloodlineComment
Comment