Need Help On Pricing - 1991 Nautique Excel

[ansoNSB]

Hello Planet Nautiquians,

I'm new to boating and after my more than addicting river vacation last year at Parker/Lake Havasu/Colorado River. I have decided to go for the plunge and buy my first boat. I was about to make the mistake and purchase a D-Drive but realized a V-Drive is more compatible with the activities I want to appreciate on the boat. Without having pesky ballasts rolling around the floor.

I went to go look at a 1991 Nautique Excel V Drive today. The boat is a 2nd owner, 350 V8 (260 hrs.), 2 batterys, perko switch, tower, basic marine cabin speakers, bimini top, mediocre gelcoat, interior is the original '91 pink and teal (needs to be replaced), hull in immaculate shape. Needs a bilge pump.

The guy is asking $10gs. I have been reading that V-Drives in 90's boat are hard to come by. Not knowing if thats true or not what do you think is a reasonable offer?

Thanks in advance,
Anson

[surroundsound64]

If you haven't, you might check on correctcraftfan.com. They typically handle boats from the early 90s and before more than this forum. That being said, it may be a bit high but doesn't sound too far off for a low time v-drive in overall good shape.

[ansoNSB]

Thanks!

[shag]

That boat should have a 351 PCM motor. Also, with "mediocre gelcoat and an interior that needs to be replaced - 10K sounds a bit steep. Hows the trailer and is it original? Does the motor run good? Sometimes (not all the time) low hours are not good for a boat. How about a few pics?

[bhectus]

Anson, I replied over on CCFan but I'll add a bit here also. I know you don't want to worry about fat sacs in the cockpit area but I'd much prefer that over a crappy boarding/surfing wake. The v-drive BFN/Excel hulls are lackluster at best for board sports. Especially after you've ridden behind a 1st or 2nd gen Sport Nautique or a SS or SAN. If your budget is around 10k you should be able to pick up a 1st gen Sport and you will be MUCH happier with the wake it throws. The Excel/BFN hulls are deep V hulls and the wake at boarding speed even loaded down is downright awful. The lip curls over washing it out and you end up plowing through it rather than popping off of it. My personal experience with it back in circa 2000 when we had it loaded w/6 people and about 1,000 lbs of ballast and at 75' line length was I hated it. Plus, I have yet to hear from anyone reputable saying they have the magic formula for a clean surf wake. Again, it washes out.

[surroundsound64]

While it probably SHOULD have a 351, it may not. Distributor in back = chevy. Distributor in front = ford.

[grkero]

a crappy boarding/surfing wake. The v-drive BFN/Excel hulls are lackluster at best for board sports. Especially after you've ridden behind a 1st or 2nd gen Sport Nautique or a SS or SAN.

Probably the most false post on this thread. I still own a 91 BFN and would strongly disagree. Have you wakeboarded behind one of these hulls before?

[Chexi]

My limited experience with this hull is that it has a good wakeboard wake, but not a good surf wake. For hydrofoiling, it is great. My only concerns would be (a) wood stringers in 1991 (I don't think they changed to all glass until 1992) and (b) pro-tec issues with the engine (assuming the Ford). If the stringers and engine are good, I think 10k for this hull is a good deal.

[bhectus]

Probably the most false post on this thread. I still own a 91 BFN and would strongly disagree. Have you wakeboarded behind one of these hulls before?

Did you even read my entire post? Or did you just stop after I hurt your feelings and smash the reply button? Sorry if you feel that way but you're obviously biased since you own one. They're great boats, don't get me wrong. Awesome barefoot table, great for cruising on a big choppy lake with your friends, but the wake for boardsports is sub-par at best. Compare the v-drive BFN/Excel for its wakeboarding wake to a 1st Gen Sport Nautique, a 82-89 2001 hull, or even a NWZ hull Nautique and I'd pick any of those before the BFN/Excel ALL DAY LONG.
The deep V hull is what causes the wake to wash out. Show me any other inboard wakeboard boat out there with a deep V.

[jtryon]

for a couple grand more you can get into a sport or even a super sport nautique which will give you a much better wake and also composite stringers. in the long run, it will be worth it to spend the little extra now. granted, the ones priced in the 10-13k range go quick so you have to be ready to jump on one, but you'll be better off than with that excel. good luck!

[grkero]

Did you even read my entire post? Or did you just stop after I hurt your feelings and smash the reply button? Sorry if you feel that way but you're obviously biased since you own one. They're great boats, don't get me wrong. Awesome barefoot table, great for cruising on a big choppy lake with your friends, but the wake for boardsports is sub-par at best. Compare the v-drive BFN/Excel for its wakeboarding wake to a 1st Gen Sport Nautique, a 82-89 2001 hull, or even a NWZ hull Nautique and I'd pick any of those before the BFN/Excel ALL DAY LONG.
The deep V hull is what causes the wake to wash out. Show me any other inboard wakeboard boat out there with a deep V.

I know you said you hated it, but did you actually ride it in 2000, 14 years ago? You have a good memory of things you hate

My 05 SAN's wake is the most sensitive to weight balance I've ever seen, way more than the BFN. I do not have issues with washout. I cannot speak to the surf wake, but then again the SAN/SS is not built for the surf wake. It takes burying an entire corner of the boat under water to produce something worth surfing.

Bottom line, the BFN is a great wake for the beginner to intermediate level. I've had all different people ride behind my boat, beginners to intermediates. People don't complain about it, in fact I get a lot of good feedback because it is a smoother pop, and more predictable.

To the OP, anytime you want, come out with us and check it out for yourself. That goes for anyone in the NorCal area.

For what it's worth, here's a picture of my wake with about 600 lbs in the back.
wake by grkero, on Flickr

[surroundsound64]

I know you said you hated it, but did you actually ride it in 2000, 14 years ago? You have a good memory of things you hate

My 05 SAN's wake is the most sensitive to weight balance I've ever seen, way more than the BFN. I do not have issues with washout. I cannot speak to the surf wake, but then again the SAN/SS is not built for the surf wake. It takes burying an entire corner of the boat under water to produce something worth surfing.

Bottom line, the BFN is a great wake for the beginner to intermediate level. I've had all different people ride behind my boat, beginners to intermediates. People don't complain about it, in fact I get a lot of good feedback because it is a smoother pop, and more predictable.

To the OP, anytime you want, come out with us and check it out for yourself. That goes for anyone in the NorCal area.

For what it's worth, here's a picture of my wake with about 600 lbs in the back.
wake by grkero, on Flickr

What speed is that? You gotta be close to 30.

[bhectus]

? The whole port side wake is washed out. And if that is loaded with 600lbs of ballast then you just made my point for me.

[grkero]

What speed is that? You gotta be close to 30.

More like 22 mph, lol. I just put this up for a little better idea, not a great video, though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqKtJMPVFbs

[grkero]

? The whole port side wake is washed out. And if that is loaded with 600lbs of ballast then you just made my point for me.

I think you are being a little picky calling white water on a lip completely washed out. But hey, I'm not here to prove my point anymore. I'll let you keep rollin' with your hate... from 14 years ago LMAO.

600 with 2 people really isn't a whole lot of weight. My typical setup was 400 in the back and 800 midship.