Standard Boats Review Log Out | Topics | Search | Register | Edit Profile | User List
Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Moderators | Help/Instructions
WakeWorld Discussion Board » >> Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles Archive » Archive through July 28, 2009 » Standard Boats Review « Previous Next »
By Luker (xbones) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 8:52 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
After a heated WW thread about these boats, I received a call from Phil Shearer about coming down to OTown for a demo. Since we were already planning a cable trip for the following weekend it was a no brainer. I wasn’t able to ride since I’m 8 weeks post ACL reconstruction, but I did some driving and filming while my buddy Jeff took a set.
The Boat –
Being a Nautique guy, I love the classically inspired look; which is quite obviously based off the SN2001. The new wrap and Monster Tower are a real step up from the original white w/reverse tower. The interior of the boat is nice and simple, with good quality vinyl and carpet. The seating arrangement is just like the old boats, which is probably the one thing I would change. I would arrange the rear of the boat to be a bench facing the rider (like the new Nautiques). I told Phil this and he noted it wouldn’t be a problem to change if the person buying the boat requested that type of setup. The captains chair was the shiz and I’ve never been in a more comfortable one. I loved the single gauge design and the visibility of the gauge was perfect. I understand other have said the location of the gauge or the single gauge design is a problem… but I loved it.

Driving –
As expected the boat handles like a dream. It turns on a dime and tracks very straight. The GPS speed control system is great for getting on plane and turning… you just pin it and leave it for the entire set. There was no on/off the throttle in the turns, or anything like that. Because the boat’s design is very narrow, the boat sways a little side to side when the rider cuts hard in/out. Its noticeable, but it doesn’t pull you off track and it’s to be expected with this size boat. With 1500lbs and a 160lb rider, the thing launched on plane with complete ease. The 350 is probably way overkill for the size and weight of the boat… but it makes driving it fun! The windshield is low making visibility is great. You probably wouldn’t want to bring a lady out that wants to keep her hair nice though  You can easily talk to your rider over the glass during pickups and having the extra visibility definitely outweighed the cabin wind.

Wake-
We had 1050lbs of sand in the boat; 550 spread across the rear, 250 on either side of the motor housing, and 3 full grown guys up front for a total of right around 1500lbs. I think we could have squeezed another 500lbs in the nose, but much more and you’d probably sink her. The wake cleans up nice at around 22mph at 75ft. Jeff rode at 85ft at 24.7mph, with super clean wake on both sides. The boat is not very weight sensitive, we never had to move a person or bag throughout the whole set… it stayed clean on both sides the whole time which is SOO nice. As far as size goes, obviously we aren’t talking about a big boat, so the wake was smaller than Jeff is used to, but he was stoked on its hardness and consistency. It wasn’t too steep or two mellow and looked solid from the boat. You can judge for yourself, since I tried to get a bunch of wake footage in the video (below).

All in all, this boat is not for everyone… if you are looking for massive wake with a boat you can slam with 4K… this isn’t the boat for you. But for an all around great ride, nice hard wake, reliability (4 year warranty) and great value at under $30K… this is hard to beat. Phil is a great guy and I can assure you if you buy a boat from him he would do everything in the world to take care of you. He just seems like that kind of guy.

Anyway, check out the footage and their site:

http://vimeo.com/5624837
http://standardboats.com/default.aspx

 
By GD (greatdane) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 9:05 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Very cool. Next, make a v-drive version -- a super efficient v-drive closed bow wake machine.
 
By Fro-Z (froese) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 9:16 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Dang - no Vimeo at work! I'm really surprised that there wasn't any side/side roll. With such a similar hull to the SN2001, how is that?

Can't wait to watch the vid...

 
By Jeff (innov8) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 9:27 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Pretty impressive for a boat under 30g's.
 
By ColoradoWakeAlliance (epic1) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 9:35 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
was I the only one who thought the wake was a bit small?
 
By Fro-Z (froese) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 9:49 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
1k lbs of ballast seems kinda light? I can do 1800lbs plus 4 peeps in the boat without any problems...
 
By ixfe (ixfe) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 10:15 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
I really enjoyed the video, nice work! Your rider is very good... looked very comfortable back there pulling all those tricks. I hope to be there some day.

On the boat... I love the profile and size. The wrap is GREAT! But I can't stand the plain interior. Looks like a fishing boat to me. This alone would keep me from buying this boat... even at the $30k price point. I'd rather buy a used v-drive with an open bow, or spend a little more to get a Moomba, Supreme, etc.

Also, why did they build it as a direct drive if it's supposed to be a wake boat? Does that save money? If so, I don't see how. Can't they just as easily make it a v-drive? Maybe it's in the works.

On the other hand, I wonder how the slalom wake is. I would think it would be good, but they didn't put a pylon in there. So who knows???

Finally, is it just me or does that boat look odd riding so high on the trailer. Seriously it looks like it might roll off onto the road.

(Message edited by ixfe on July 16, 2009)

 
By Patrick (jetskiprosx) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 10:19 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
I wonder what the cost will be with the TDI engine!
 
By Luker (xbones) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 10:35 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
The V-Drive Diesel with the VW engine is in the initial phases of design according to Phil. He believes he can bring it to market for under $40K.

The wake was a little small, but the hardness definitely helps with pop. That was Jeff's first set ever behind that boat so it shows the wake is predictable and consistent for sure.

 
By Jeff (innov8) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 10:50 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
looks like a TDI v-drive is in the works from the vid.
Whoops Lurker already said that.

(Message edited by innov8 on July 16, 2009)

 
By GD (greatdane) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 11:19 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
The v-drive will want to have a huge built in tank in the bow to balance out the boat. Next, add the pure vert system and I am sold!
 
By Brett Yates (polarbill) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 11:28 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
IXFE, they are working on a diesel vdrive according to the video. Also in my opinion a direct drive can be just as good of a wake boat as a vdrive. The wetted surface would still be the same. The only thing that makes a vdrive have a better wake out of the box is they are a little heavier and the weight is in the rear. The biggest advantage of a vdrive is that it has a more appealing layout and large storage areas next to the engine to conceal ballast.

The slalom wake is not that good on the 2001 if I remember correctly. They screwed up bad enough on it that it became a great wake machine. Although the slalom wake is probably better than 95% of the boats out now.

 
By Sinko (sinkoumn) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 11:31 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Great review, thanks much for the post.

After watching the vimeo vid, is the swim deck mounted really low? Looks like if you weighted the boat at all it would drag (or be 6" underwater when stopped) - did you notice anything like that when out for the demo?

 
By ixfe (ixfe) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 11:34 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Brett, thanks for the reply. Makes sense.

Do you think the mold they used forced them to do a direct drive? I'm just thinking if they had no limitations during design, they probably would have picked v-drive, no?

Anyway, just curious.

The video was great! Did I already say that?

 
By Brett Yates (polarbill) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 11:38 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
IXFE, there is athread floating around that has an old 2001 nautique that was turned into a Vdrive so it can be done. They probably had the original 2001 hull mold and now have to make a vdrive version somehow using that mold. I would assume there would be a few little things they would have to change. By the way, a vdrive 2001 would be awesome. I don't even know if you need a diesel though. Just give me a 351 with GT40 heads and I would be set. It would take probably over 1000 hours to make the diesel payoff.
 
By GD (greatdane) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 11:47 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Yes, the vdrive is desired [or required] for passenger comfort and storage. Just hide the ballast and add rear facing seats to make it a huge winner.

(Message edited by greatdane on July 16, 2009)

 
By GD (greatdane) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 11:54 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
This boat should already get great fuel economy compared to the XSTARS/WAKESETTERS of the world, so why bother with the diesel? I would knock out the gasoline solution first.
 
By GD (greatdane) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 12:01 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I have always thought that this sounded like a winner...

CC 2001 hull; closed bow; cab forward; vdrive; purevert; rear facing seating; simple quality interior; simple gelcoat options; nice tower with a big bimini and nice racks -> SOLD.

IMO, its the only boat a company needs to build -- excellent/efficient wake production and comfort for 4 to 6 people on the boat.

 
By Brett Yates (polarbill) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 12:05 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
GD, I agree with all the things you just said. I probably would do away with the single gauge as well depending on how much they cost. I would rather have a PP gauge and then standard electric fuel, oil pressure, water temp and volts. Those standard gauges are like $30 each and the senders are less than that.

I wonder how much that all in one gauge costs Standard or the end user?

 
By Trapper (canucked) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 12:34 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I'm thinking v-drive may not be as big a deal comfort wise on a boat this small. It may be more cozy than you would want. The direct drive allows the seating to be a bit more spread out.

V-drive or not the boat is great IMO.

 
By ixfe (ixfe) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 1:08 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
GD - The boat you describe would be a winner. I don't think I'd buy it, simply because I need the larger interior my boat offers (lots of kids and guests on my boat). However, I think there would be a BIG demand for such a boat at the $30k msrp price point. Think of all the 205V variants you see on the water. That boat isn't big inside either. The buyer who might be interested in a used X-1 is the just the type that would jump at a brand new V-Drive Standard as an alternative to buying used. I bet it would be compete well against Moomba Outback V as well.

Just curious, why closed bow? If it's needed to keep the cost down, then so be it. But if it's for some other reason, I fear it might turn off many buyers.

 
By GD (greatdane) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 1:27 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I figure close bow since the bow would be paltry with a cab forward design. The cab forward design will optimize the cabin seating area (whats most important). Plus, you gain an extra seat in the cabin with no walkway. You also need to fill the bow with ballast to balance out the motor in the back. Thats my thinking.
 
By GD (greatdane) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 1:31 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I wake boarded behind a buddies closed bow PS190 a few times. It was hard to sack out in the bow. It sucked to crawl over the bags next to the motor. It also sucked to sit in the far back away from the people in the front under the bimini. It also sucked to have very little storage. Otherwise, it was a great nimble wake producer.
 
By ixfe (ixfe) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 1:37 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
^^^ I like it! I had forgotten about "cab forward" factor. I'd agree on maximizing cabin space. The idea of a big bow ballast tank that's pure vert is very good.

From what I understand, pure vert is not an easy thing to design into an existing boat mold. Wouldn't they have to redesign the stringer system to accommodate those large, under-the-floor tanks (see pic)?

Anyway... fun to dream about.

Upload

 
By GD (greatdane) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 1:41 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Yes, purevert is not easy and may not work for the bow ballast. The bow ballast would likely need a separate tank and pump to fill above the water line.
 
By Nickbot (nickbot) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 1:57 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
maybe a dumb question...that i could probably get answered by checking their website...but, does this boat have wood stringers??
 
By Kevin Hoye (wakebrdr38) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 2:17 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
These were my thoughts from the v drive 2001 post. Funny that a lot of people are saying the same thing. I had been thinking this for a couple of years, always wish I could own a company that could do it.

"I think a wake version done buy a company would be perfect with a sac up front, 100 pound tanks in the back and two 400 pound or so tank built in the center on either side of the gas tank and make the rear and middle ones a pure vert system.

Everything would be hidden and with middle tanks under the floors on left and right side of the gas tank and small rear tanks on left and right you could probably really customize that wake for surfing or for how picky the boats are about the steep wake washing out on one side due to the narrowness of the boat.

That boat would sell like crazy and probably fetch 30-35."

 
By Jon (jon4pres) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 2:20 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
The wake does not seem to have the trough that my 2001 has. Did you get any pictures of the hull??
 
By Brett Yates (polarbill) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 2:24 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I think the purevert thing might not work well on this boat. The beam is really narrow which would leave very little room on the outside of the stringers to fit tanks. It might not be worth the added cost of doing it because you might only get a total of 200-250 a side.
 
By ixfe (ixfe) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 5:16 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Hahaha... this is fun. We should all start a boat company. Clearly we enjoy the design process.

At the very least we should become consultants.

 
By Roddyrod (wakeslife) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 5:50 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
That wake looks small. Think you could dump another 1000 on top of that?
 
By nu bu (05mobiuslsv) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 6:39 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
^^^ I'd say it looks really small, odd given it's such a narrow boat.
 
By Adam Barry (adambarry) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 6:51 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
looks like I might have to start looking into these considering my boat is being sold because we cant afford it hahahah
 
By Mike K (mike2001) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 7:04 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Only suggestion I have on this current setup, possibly change the clam shell so it opens up in 2 pieces, like newer direct drives. That way if you have to open the engine box, the fat sacs and anything else laying on the floor doesn't spill into the bilge.
 
By Sander (tripsw) on Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 7:37 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
At the very least we should become consultants.

Y'all are, I'm sure Phil is reading along. Even more so, apparently a V-drive is in the making, I'm pretty confident the V-drive 2001-topic had a voice in that. I'm pretty anxious to see that V-drive as well.

PureVert: if I'm correct 800 lbs PureVert is an option.
Swimplatform: is indeed pretty low now, Phil is aware of that. I'm sure that'll be different on future boats.
Wooden stringers: nopes.
Interior looking dull: just pick a color instead of the grey and it'll look a lot fresher.

Luker, thanks for taking the effort to put this review together.

 
By Luker (xbones) on Friday, July 17, 2009 - 6:13 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
I really enjoyed doing the review and the boat exceeded my expectations.

As far as the swim deck comment... That was one more thing besides the interior re-arrangement I would have changed that I forgot to mention in the initial post... it needs to come up at least 6-8 inches... it was completely buried with the boat weighted, but quite an easy fix.

Fuel efficiency... if I remember correctly Phil said fuel consumption was something like only 4 gallons an hour which is AMAZING... $10-$12 bucks for that kind of riding time is awesome... And the diesel would be better I would assume.

 
By Phil Shearer (standardboatco) on Tuesday, July 21, 2009 - 4:37 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Upload
 

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions Administration
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
WakeSpace is owned by eWake, Inc.
Copyright © 1996 - 2010, All Rights Reserved.
WakeSpace@WakeWorld.com