Mid 90's Nautiques ?

[lucey]

What were the best years for the 90s Nautiques ? What threw the best wake and what was the configuration ? Any info ?

[Rick]

RE: Mid 90

The only "questionable year" would be the 94 with throttle body FI. If the 94 your looking fat is carbed then no worries. The TSC hull was first introduced in 98 I beleive.

[Daryl]

RE: Mid 90

what is wrong with the 94 TBFI (curiosity is always a good thing

[SGY]

RE: Mid 90

Hey Rick, I'm pretty sure the TSC was introduced in 97. A friend of mine still has a 97 TSC Ski Nautique. The 94 TBI has a very aggressive fuel delivery curve--i.e. akin to flushing a toliet. Way too much fuel. PCM introduced a fix in mid 94 which solved the problem for the most part. The fix was installed under warranty. If you call PCM with the engine seriel number they'll tell you whether the motor you're looking at has the fix. By the way, if the 94 TBI works correctly, it is smoking fast. Faster than any other Nautique I've been in--including new ones and the GT-40 Nautiques.

[darrel409]

RE: Mid 90

93 was the first year of no wood, no worries construction

[pj]

RE: Mid 90

I wouldn't say that no wood means no worries. you could have plenty of worries with other non-wood items. however, you won't have problems with the stringers rotting out on you.

[darrel409]

RE: Mid 90

Correction, no rotting wood worries on 93 or later.

[Rick]

RE: Mid 90

Your right TSC was introduced in 97. TBFI isn't "bad" it was just finncky. That's why they went to multiport injection the next year. Your right about power, the TBFI was a smoker. The difference being the fuel is shot into the throttlt body versus into the individual cylinders. I wasn't aware of the fix PCM offered.

[Jesse1]

RE: Mid 90

I had '91, '94 and '97 Ski Nautiques. For slalom wakes, the '97 with the TSC hull was the best. It was also the quickest handling of the three. The '94 was the fastest. The '97 had a 310 hp GT40, the '94 had a 300 hp Pro Boss with a 4 barrel carb, and the '91 had the 240 hp 351. My favorite was the '97 because of the low wake.

[DavidF]

RE: Mid 90

I have a '93 SN with the '95 TBI engine and am having heck getting it to run properly. Idle stability and excess fuel delivery are the two main issues. But dang does it pull hard.

[SGY]

RE: Mid 90

I've heard from CC that actually the carbed 351, if tuned right, could run a faster top end that fuel injected motors. On the 94 TBFI motor, the PCM guys told me that the TBFI had a fuel delivery rate that would satisfy a big block racing set up.

[DavidF]

RE: Mid 90

I have talked to two people about the '95 TBI engines. One was my local CC dealer head mechanic and the other was a representative from CC Corporate (Owners' Reunion). They both commented that the TBI engines were the strongest engines of the day. Now, what I do not know if there is more than one version for any given year (i.e. Proski or Proboss). They stated that the four valve TBI flowed 900 CFM of air and the fuel to go with it. Since the hardware was made by Holley, this suggest the early Holley Commander or 4d(i) setup, which indeed was intended for high output engines in excess of 400hp. I believe this is the reason for the tendency of the TBI engines to run rich at low revs...something I have heard from several sources is normal. Mine just runs too rich as I am blowing black smoke and sometimes flooding at idle to the point that throttle response is gone and leaving a fuel slick on the lake. Gotta get it working properly.