Which boats put out the best wake without sacs
 

and easy on gas for under $15K and no wood stringers with a really reliable motor ?
thanks ahead

This would be a good boat, but I am not sure if you could get it for under $15K
http://austin.craigslist.org/boa/2281108032.html

Or this one.
http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/cs...280502469.html

Your asking a lot for all that, the best wake you will find with the least amount of weight is the ski nautique 2001 from 1983-1989, although it has wood stringers. Another good one would be the Super Sport Nautique from 1995, although you will find a much higher quality SN 2001 for under 15K than a super sport. In my experience, these nautiques require less weight than any other boat for a good wake (including the SAN 210). I have a sport nautique and it needs a lot more extra weight for the wake to get good because it is a bigger direct drive. Keep in mind that I have been behind a lot of different boats (tige 20i, prostar 205 and 205v, sunsetter lx and vlx, centurion trutrac, supra 21v). I have also heard good things about the sanger 210 but I have never rode one because they're all out in CA.

Wish I could afford this. http://www.chooseyouritem.com/boats/.../10278710.html

Wow. Just missed this deal. http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/m...tml?1266621228

You guys know your stuff. Keep em coming.
thanks

K R a good wake is in the eye of the wakeboarder.MANY DIFFERENT STYLES out there.Only you can choose the right one for you.Demo some boats and see what you like.Then you will know what to shop for.GOOD LUCK.

You should be able to find circa 1998 Air Nautique 210s with the Ford GT-40 at that price. I turned one down for $12k when I was looking last year because I opted for a 23' v-drive for $1,300 more. I saw a lot of them with asking prices around $17k that could likely be had for $15k.

With no sacks I'd imagine that you'd better look hard for a V-drive though although a direct drive with a little bit of strategically placed ballast might offer better fuel efficiency than a comparable v-drive and no ballast due to the lack of power wasted through the v-drive.

I'm sorry Jeff, but your post is not accurate. There is no such thing as a 1998 Air Nautique 210. In 1998, there was a Sport Nautique and an Air Nautique, both of which are direct drive boats on the same hull, with the only differences being graphics and options (i.e., the 1998 Air Nautique had the first wakeboarding tower of any boat and a hard tank ballast system). These were never called 210s. Also in 1998, Correct Craft made the Super Sport (which later became the 210, but not to be confused with today's 210, which totally changed in 2007). The Super Air Nautique (v-drive) was introduced in 1999, when Correct Craft added its first generation tower (the same as on the 1998 and then 1999 Air Nautiques) and first generation ballast tanks to a Super Sport.

There is considerable confusion around this topic, because the hull shape of the Sports (direct drive) were basically the same as the Super Sports (v-drives) from 1995 (maybe 1994, but I think 1995) through 1997. However, in 1998 Correct changed the hull shape of the Sport and (the newly introduced Air). The telltale sign on a Nautique direct drive as to whether it is essentially the same hull as a Super Sport/Super Air is if there is no stern locker, then yes, if there is a stern locker, then no. Or, if the transom is slanted, then yes, if not, then no. The 1998 and 1999 Sports/Airs are still very good wakeboard boats when properly weighted; however, they are not "210s".

Finally, $12k for a 1998 Air (if in good overall condition) is a very good price. Personally, I prefer the 1999, because in 1999 they went with the modern bow playpen with removable center cushion, and much better access to the under seat storage area in the bow. Otherwise, the 1998 and 1999 are virtually identical. In either case, if you can find one with the 2nd generation folding Flight Control Tower (i.e., someone already replaced the 1st gen), that would be better, because the first gen flight control towers (like most 1st gen technologies) is significantly inferior.

You could look at an older Tige- but prior to 2003 ( I think) they have wood stringers. But seriously, that's so not an issue if the boat's been well cared for. The wood that is used in a Tige is soaked in a treatment then encapsulated in fiberglass. They warantee for life these things and I have never heard of a Tige having an issue with the stringers or the hull as a whole. They are very heavy boats and in a V drive, you'll get a pretty good wake with no ballast- that used to be Tige's schtick!
Under $ 15k- you're going to need to go back to the late 90's most likely- have fun.

I have no idea which one of these will throw the best wake with no ballast. Here are some options though from onlyinboards.com

http://www.onlyinboards.com/Details.aspx?ID=28091

http://www.onlyinboards.com/Details.aspx?ID=27510 (I am guessing a soft spot in the floor means wood stringers so this one might be out)

http://www.onlyinboards.com/Details.aspx?ID=27412 (needs a tower)

http://www.onlyinboards.com/Details.aspx?ID=26706

http://www.onlyinboards.com/Details.aspx?ID=26651

http://www.onlyinboards.com/Details.aspx?ID=27402

http://www.onlyinboards.com/Details.aspx?ID=27652

Not sure how good the wake will be with no ballast, but this one has composite stringers and is priced alright.
http://toledo.craigslist.org/boa/2287809059.html

Another with composite stringers...
http://cleveland.craigslist.org/boa/2255147658.html

How would this Deep-V compare in wake to the unloaded SN2001?
http://www.boats.com/boat-details/Cobalt-200/118697401

First in your list is head and shoulders above the rest, if the listed data is real.

For that price range and no wood stringers pretty much nothing! lol

Sorry, I was referring to a 21' '98 Air Nautique. It's been a year since I looked at boats so I guess I added the "210" because it was a 21'.

No worries. A 98 Air is still a great boat, even if it's not a 210.

Not sure on how it would compare but for $10k you can get a very nice SN2001 or plenty of more roomier inboards. Figure another $1000+ for a tower and $1000 for PP (necessity to enjoy riding behind an I/O unless you have a really good driver who is always available) and that I/O gets up to the $12k entry price into open bow composite boats.

For under $10k and composite you'd be looking at '80s Mastercrafts, like Prostar 190 and such. Great if you want to slalom but there won't be much wake there. If you want to keep it under $10k you might want to consider boats with wood stringers and floors. Just give lots of scrutiny when looking them over to be sure they're solid. Having owned both an I/O and an inboard I would never consider buying another I/O if I wanted to ride behind it. I'd take an old SN2001 (or even Prostar 190) any day of the week over a brand new Bayliner/Cobalt/whatever small I/O.

Is this price a little high for over 900 freshwater hrs.? What are your thoughts on the rack/pylon?
http://mankato.craigslist.org/boa/2247359290.html

Can someone tell me how reliable the 5.8 is in this?
Is this a good price for 350hrs.?
What difference is this Excel hull from the '85-'89 SN2001 for wakeboarding?

http://www.boats.com/boat-details/Co...xcel/115030801

Excels are supposed to have pretty good wakeboarding wakes. A little wider than the 2001s I believe. But I have not been behind either, this is just what I have heard. The Excel is a v-drive, so you get the v-drive layout with more room to add weight. The only reason the Excel is not listed in the top budget wakeboard boats is that there were not that many of them made, so they were left out as more of a niche boat.

No offense but there are some mistakes even in the corrections here in this thread.

And in all honesty it's a really confusing picture so who's to blame? Nobody is.

Here's what I have on the matter:

By 1998 Correct Craft had an established brand line called Air Nautique.
Some VERY few people had the V-drive version by then (a Super Sport based boat) but not named the Super Air Nautique yet and YEARS from the 210 stuff. Some had the direct drive (2 variants, a Pro Air and an Air were made in 98, as a 99 model year boat. The team was pretty quick to slag on the Pro variant - hindsight says the non-pro was the better boat. More hindsight says the Super Sport was overlooked for about 4 years too long, because once people caught on to that, it was over. It was all the wake team folks wanted, by late 1999 at the latest.

Some people had the Super Sport in late-prototype forms by early 1994, team members and some CC employees thought the thing was way too ugly to take off - even questioned dumping it. So at first it wasn't all that liked, being compared to a bathtub. Then people got behind it. Then the got behind it with a pylon or tower equipped. Then they weighted it...........

Done. You know the rest. Pretty widely considered to be among the best hulls ever made for the sport, about 12 years running. I agree. Though I LOVE the early X-Star (direct drive ProStar 205) and would never count it out in a decision like this.

Also, just please forget about that 'good on gas' part. It isn't happening.

The Barefoot Nautique v-drive/Excel v-drive vs 82-89 Ski Nautique 2001 debate has been thrown around so many times, and I honestly don't think there is any other answer than this: The Ski Nautique 2001 makes for a hell of a good wake boat and the same applies to the Excel. They BOTH influenced the Sport Nautique hull (and thus the Super Sport) but it's just easier to draw the distinction to the Super Sport for many because of the v-drive. It ends there. Some say the DD Barefoots ride a little higher and have a smaller wake but I can't confirm. I can say with ease that a nice Excel is a rare and excellent find.

No offense taken Erik. You have just improved my Nautique knowledge.

Don't overlook the Sanger V-210.
Arguably one of the best "out of the box" unweighted wakes, right up there with the Supersport, and the Prostar 205

Just curious why there are no "good on gas" boats? My Sanger V210 runs at about 4-4.5 gph decently weighted but not slammed, and I know a few folks with bigger boats, that are in the 8 to 10 gph range. I guess "good on gas" is more of a comparison statement between different boats.

Yep, 4-5 gph for me too, and I check it every time out.

I go heavy on my V215 and get 6-7 gallons an hour.

Hey - anytime. I love talking about this stuff. PM me if you want. I could talk about this all day.

The Sport Nautique is so awesome - I favor it so highly these days even with the v-drive dominance. It doesn't really matter all that much. Remember that Parks was doing double flips, 1080s and stuff like that behind direct drive MasterCrafts in the 90s. And I wrote a long-ass thing when I saw that Sport Nautiques were going for 10 grand. That's incredible. It's a total breakthrough.
http://www.wakeboardreport.com/archi...r_sport_n.html

Anyhow, the Super Sport Bathtub business was a hotly debated thing for awhile with Correct Craft. They had a hit on their hands but had issues marketing it.

Huge boat. Deep draft (by a few inches but still). And a markedly different profile than other Correct Craft models. should it be the analog to the 1st gen 226? Just a big family boat? They just didn't know what to do. I'm glad someone had the cojones to notice the thing is a tank and great for wakeboarding. It probably came from the team!. "Hey guys, we put 1000lbs of water in that thing and Dean Lavelle did a 20 foot high raley! I remember that from an old issue of Launch for goodness sake.

Also there's a pretty famous picture of Chase Heavener doing some huge bananas trick behind a Super Sport or first generation Super Air Nautique that pretty much put it on the map for good. It was either that same year or maybe a year later that MasterCraft followed suit and made a v-drive 205 - also an incredible boat. I know I go crazy over Correct Craft and seem biased but in this case - those 2 boats, from those 2 manufacturers, to me are equals in this case.

But they are not Toyota Priuses. So when people ask how the gas consumption is on a v-drive loaded with 1500lbs of ballast and 5 bodies it reminds me of someone going to a Lamborghini dealership and fussing about the gas mileage on a v12 Murciélago. If you're fussing about that - you're just looking at the wrong car.

Sorrry for the long post but its a trade off. An unweighted ProStar 205 direct drive, a ProStar v-drive, a Sport Nautique direct drive, or a Super Sport Nautique produces the best wake unweighted and only gets better when weighted properly. I don't consider this an opinion but a fact. And argument can be made for that Excel and early v-drive Wakesetters but from 100% hands on experience, its those bigger Correct Crafts and MasterCrafts that got it right, first.

See me?

Sanger is where it's at. Relatively inexpensive. Great wake. Good size, space, storage. DLX for direct drive. V210 for v-drive. Both wakes are awesome. They do have wood stringers, but they use a chemically treated wood that they claim cannot rot. I loved my DLX. Great boat.

Sangers are so rare where I am from. I have seen one, ever. I have heard good things about them, but I think the rarity of those boats hurt its credibility in this thread. Not trying to start sh*t either - seriously I've heard they are great - but they seem to be a west coast thing. Do you agree?

Sanger is lower production numbers and on the west coast. I've never seen one here on the east coast either on the water or for sale. It is what it is. Sanger has a great reputation and makes a quality boat as far as I know. They made some sick jet boats back when the day and transitioned to wake boats. I personally wouldn't pay $60k or whatever for a boat with wood, simply because when I buy things it's to keep them for a long time. I certainly wouldn't drop $60k on a a wake boat and not expect to have it until I die. 20-30 years from now it'll need stringers. Not my thing when there are better options in the long term for $60k. Water will find a way, given enough time.

Also note Tige held out until early-mid 2000's before going to composite stringers. They were marketing wood construction as a positive (which it may be) in the form of a quieter more solid and smooth ride.

20 to 30 years from now when you need stringers they will be installed for free by Sanger! Lifetime warranty! Wood stringers are by far better for more than a few reasons but we won't open that can. lol

I guess I should chime in here because I have an the very rare open bow Excel. I can't comment on how it compares to the 2001 because the last time I rode behind one of those it was new and I was on a kneeboard. We foil, and don't run weight other than stereo batteries and a few bags of ice, don't really need too because we can get plenty of air without the wake at all. The nice thing is this translates to less than 5 gal an hour, and we have had a weekend that averaged out to a little over 3 as our best.

The wake on the Excel is not quite as steep as the classic Nautique wake, but it is just as solid. It also differs in that there is no trough, it rises from the surface instead of coming up out of a hole. This is all because the Barefooters wanted it that way which was the intention of the boat in the first place. Correct Craft's thinking of a barefoot boat was that it should mow the water flat, that the reason for the v hull. The v hull runs all the way through the Excel and the ride is wonderful for a boat that small, the only boat wakes I slow down for are other Nautiques and 25 foot and larger I/O's.

The only real downside that I see to the boat is it is probably the worse handling Correct Craft ever made, again, it was made for barefooters and they don't need to turn around quickly at 45mph. Thats really the only thing I can think of, there are other issues that I hear from others like space, but when you carry at least 3 foils with you regularly you don't have space in anything. They are worth a look when you find one, I've only seen one other in person.

Steal a loaded 05 VLX :)

Haahah - Hard for me to imagine how anything handles worse than a Super Sport loaded down with ballast. Don't get me wrong - I believe you - I am just saying the Super Sport didn't improve in that area.

It's actually embarrassing sometimes. Been behind the wheel of this kind of boat for 26 years and with a loaded SAN I feel like I'm driving the water-based version of a 2500 Suburban, full of lead, and with no ability to back up in anything but a wiggly, laboring, almost straight (but maybe 3-5 degree arc to port. "I'll come around" I always say. Embarrassing. Rookie! First time out?

Those open bow Excels are VERY rare. I think they only made like 35 of them! Almost positive on that.m Rare boat. Really nice.

Ah yes, Erik, I thought I recognized your name from somewhere. It was partially due to you that I bought my 99 Air. It has been a great boat, and even after I installed an impeller-based ballast system with 2x 400's in the rear, 450 in the ski locker and 550 in the bow (integrated sac), it still handled very well. Note, I did not fill up the bow completely, as that would throw off the 60/40 ratio. I just neede a bit more than the ski locker could provide.

I will be very sad to see that boat go, but it has been sold pending water test. Now, I will get to start the boat projects all over with a 2000 Super Air. I will undoubtedly miss the superior handling and easy access to the engine that the 99 Air has.

How about this one???

Attachment 12633

Cool, I didn't realize it was that rare. My thought on the handling are greatly influenced by the fact that I came from a small DD which could effortlessly turn back down it's own wake to go get a downed rider. The Excel requires lots of labor to attemp things like that. One thing that is nice though is it took 250 hrs of trying before I managed to stick the bow. My wife and I noticed that it would make it through some terrible situations the first or second trip out, we got there from the poor handling. After that I was on a mission to see if I could dunk it, but never could when the opportunities were there. Finally we were pulling some kids on a tube Labor Day weekend on a big open lake and I managed to get about a 5 gal bucket in the front from a 4 foot roller I set up for the tube, didn't even make the bildge pump work though.

Once you weight it, you'll readily be able to swamp it to your heart's content.

My highlander only can tow 3500lbs, so I might go with that one.