Here is a pic of the 08' Supreme. I like the looks of it. I rode behind one last year and like the wake and the feel inside the boat, looks like they are really stepping up there game. I goin to have to check this thing out when the local shops get them. <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/511775.jpg" alt="Upload">

wow, throwin down the flake, loks sick. you cant beat the price and with a black scorp your dialed motor wise as for build quality would love for some owners to chime in. ae these boats holding up? whats the max weight/persons in that boat? whats stock ballest? and is that tower the same as the sanger tower?

Whats up Bryan! I dig the blue Metal fake too. I rode behind a 2002 and the wake was ok but the 07' I rode behind was dope. Also the inside of the 07' boat was a lot better than the 02'. So I bet the 08' is just as nice. IMO this boat looks legit! Can't wait to check it out in person.

Well they're trying to make it look better, but it's the same old boat ... nothing special about the hull, the ride, the quality or the wake. It's still a price-point boat. Every year all the manufacturers try to give their boats a nicer appearance, so I don't see anything too special. Nice metal flake, maybe you'll find Bass Pro Shops selling them soon. <img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/rofl.gif" border=0>

Some pics of my 06, &amp; wake, &amp; sacked out. "Nothing Special?" <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/511803.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/511804.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/511805.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/511806.jpg" alt="Upload">

Some pics of my 07, &amp; wake-only internal sacks and 1 big one in the bow at time of shot-so not fully sacked. "NOthing Special" either i guess huh. Shhhhhhy...! <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/511813.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/511814.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/511815.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/511816.jpg" alt="Upload">

deltadave i agree. its the same old supreme. i'm not a fan of the metal flake at all.

IMO they are a lot better than they once where. I have had friends with Supreme's that where very happy with them.

The V220 has not changed the hull.... but the wake kicks a$$... The boat is very similar to the original X-Star... which I assume that not too many people had issues with... <BR> <BR>Lacefield... I the love the new RZ2... which it looks like you are gettting... love the look... love Tiges overall... never like the wake performance though.... <BR> <BR>So I guess it all depends what you are getting the boat for... if the wake isn't the only reason you are getting the boat... then the RZ2 is a great choice... if you want the best wake out there... I don't think RZ2 is in the top... not saying the Supreme is either... but I think the Supreme has a nicer shaped wake then the Tige's. <BR> <BR>Why change the hull when it has been a good performer?

No. Nothing special. That's not to say it's a bad boat or that their owners are not happy. But it is from an old design. Their current hull is based off the old 210 "Medalist" that Genmar designed in about 1991 when they owned them. When Leo bought it from Genmar he got rid of the built-in swim platform, made it a v-drive and made the transom square. You can still see the similarities between the top deck and design even today. Ski Supreme has not designed a boat from the ground up since they bought them from Genmar nor have they built anything innovative. All they have done is stretch the hull, improve the interior, the dash, the graphics and so on. Their appearance is better, I'll give them that much. If you look at the 1991 hull and the 2008 hull, it's basically the same. Putting checkers on it or even metal flake on basically a 16 year-old design doesn't change the fact that it is a price-point boat that's not innovative nor really interesting. <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/511828.jpg" alt="Upload">

one thing that most people don't take into consideration when looking at pics of the wakes is the hardness of the wake. my RZ2 with 2600lbs in it has a wake thats about as hard as a brick wall. it may not be as big as a x-star or a loaded down 23 foot BU but you can always count on the hard wake and not blowing thru it. i've had many people board behind my boat, charge into the wake and get bucked onto their back because they underestimated it.

Dave, Not saying you are wrong, and what you said didn't bug me at all. I don't have a Supreme, I think it looks good and for the price is a very good buy, but just have one thing to say about this. <BR> <BR><i>"All they have done is stretch the hull.."</i> <BR> <BR>Thats what all companys do. The SAN 210 was almost identical to a hull that Chris craft has using for 30 some odd years. The old X-star (x-1) was a MC205 around same hull since the early 90's late 80's. Hell the new X-star is based off a Deck boat. And Most all other wakeboats are I/O hulls that they make little changes to. So don't knock a boat company for that its just easier and cheaper for all the companys to do that than to make a total new mold. And smart IMO. If it works why change it. Later BG <BR> <BR>(Message edited by bigpapaf1f on October 16, 2007)

im with ya BG, but when ever i hear the old saying "if it aint broke dont fix it" i just wonder what the heck c.c. was thinking?<img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/uhoh.gif" border=0> i.e. sante

BG, Tony likes the shape of the Supreme wake. I have heard that Supreme has a completely new designed boat coming out soon. New Hull that is designed by a guy who designed one of the malibu hull's. Pickle Fork also.

I really like the look of that blue boat. I think one of the better looking boats out there. Not a big supreme fan but if i saw that boat out on the lake I'd do a double take.

I owned an 02 220, before I bought my Sanger V215. Supreme is a good boat, I had nothing but good experiences, never had one warranty issue.

*********** <BR>"Thats what all companys do. The SAN 210 was almost identical to a hull that Chris craft has using for 30 some odd years. The old X-star (x-1) was a MC205 around same hull since the early 90's late 80's. Hell the new X-star is based off a Deck boat. And Most all other wakeboats are I/O hulls that they make little changes to. So don't knock a boat company for that its just easier and cheaper for all the companys to do that than to make a total new mold. And smart IMO. If it works why change it. Later BG" <BR>********** <BR> <BR>Whoa. Whoaaa doctor. Serious, serious fact checking in need there... Setting aside that you must have meant Correct Craft and not Chris Craft - they based the Super Sport hull very very loosely on the barefoot nautique/excel hull - and maybe by proxy the hull of the Ski Nautique 2001 - which when it was being first cut in 1994 as a 1995 model year boat was then just over a 10 year old design - not a 30 year old mold. Even at that they didn't simply enlongate it. Next - the Xstar is based on a deck boat? Really? Tournament inboards are based on IO hulls? Huh? Whaaa? No offense but wow - thats quite a lot of misinformation in one post. Really I don't mean to offend but we've got to come correct here... <BR> <BR>(Message edited by juniorhawk on October 17, 2007)

I have an 06 V220 have had a ton of fit and finish issue's that should have been caught and fixed at the factory before they were delivered to the dealer. Nothing major but a lot of little things that add up to one big pain in the as*! <BR> <BR>Supreme/Kal Kustoms/Fineline likes to argue over warranty work and say things that are cosmetic should not be honored, I bet with a Supra, BU, MC or larger mfg. they would be all over fixing it and getting the highest customer satisfaction, not with Supreme. <BR> <BR>My advice is you get what you pay for, I regret buying a 38.5K for a Supreme V drive when I could have ponied up 5-8k more and got a hella better built boat, but thats my lessons learned, steer away from Supreme at all cost (IMO).

the 2001 inspired the sport nautique, which inspired the super sport nautique which is the pre 07 210. if you look at a pre 07 210 and a 2001 up close they really are similar. the wakes are even really close, the 2001 is narrower though. someone on here has the pics of a 2001 and a 210 together and its cool to see really similar lines on both boats. i definately disagree with d and v drive boats being based on I/O's. the two different hulls are night and day different. I/os have a deep v, while older direct drives dont with the exception of a few, and then v drives have more (210 compared to 2001) but still not as much as an I/o. oh yeah and correct me if im wrong but i believe the direct drive came out way before the I/O and possibly even the outboard. the direct drive is a very simple design and i think thats what makes it so awesome, especially if you are a do it yourself kinda guy with your first boat like me <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0>

Eric, I ment, Correct Craft, Sorry I was on my way out the door from work and was thinking way ahead. The 2001 was around way before 1994! It was around in the 80'. So that 20 someodd years. There was a guy on here that posted a few pic's of his Correct Craft(pre 2001 I think it was a 70's model, it was posted a year or so ago) that the Hull was very close to his 210. And Yes, I hate to brake it to you but the X-star was BASED off a deck boat, So was the Tomcat. and yes some of the new deep v Wakeboats (not dd) are BASED off I/O molds! <BR> <BR>(Message edited by bigpapaf1f on October 17, 2007) <BR> <BR>(Message edited by bigpapaf1f on October 17, 2007)

BG- you looking to buy a new boat this year?

I was under the impression that the pickle fork design came from Racing boats like Mr. Brendel and his dad used to build in the day. deck boats? can you substantiate that in some way?

Ben C: we'll see if they really come up with a new hull from the ground up or if they just "splash" a boat from another manufacturer and build off of it, that's their usual m.o. Yes, many boat manufacturers have modified hulls to minimize the cost of molds and new models. Sometimes they work and sometimes they really don't work. The current Ski Supreme boats came from that 1991 Medalist. It was a large inboard built to appeal to families. It really didn't work well for skiing or handle very well. Ski Supreme isn't a bad boat and they have made efforts to improve their boats over the years. It is built and marketed as a price-point/value boat. Nothing wrong with that, it is what it is and it's nothing special. I would bet if any of their owners could have chosen to buy ANY brand for 39k they would not have bought the Ski Supreme.

I have had friends that sell MC, and other ppl in the boat building industry tell me that the X-star was based off a deck boat. The MB maybe a little different. But the back of it looks nothing like any Race boat I have ever seen. Again in no way do I think its a bad thing!! I also am not sayin any thing bad about MC or The X-star. I love a dumped X-star wake. That is just what I have been told buy many ppl.

BG, CIE KONG (bigpapaf1f) I run the site The2001.com so I am definitely aware of that boats' history - you should re-read the post. The 2001 hull was run from 82-89. It very clearly and naturally grew to be the base of the Sport Nautique. But the true genesis of the SAN hull came from the 90's versions of the Barefoot Nautique and Nautique Excel - mind you the v-drive variants not the direct drive ones from the 80's. So my point was that when the Super Sport hull was being cut, in 1994, the original Ski Nautique hull was just over 10 years old. Not 30.

START HIJACK <BR>Does anyone else think the flat plate where the board racks are type towers are kinda ugly? <BR>(In no way bashing supreme or any other boat company, just thought the towers are wierd looking) <BR>END HIJACK

Kinda weird how both MC and Supreme both started putting that weird arrow looking thing in the same spot of their boat(s). <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/65921/512250.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR> <BR>And yes I'm that bored. But don't let me stop you guys from discussing everything that doesn't have anything to do with the title of the thread.

When discussing Supreme, I think it is really important to discuss which one. The thread started with a V232. I can state clearly that the 232 wakeboarding wake is piss poor. At least on the 2006 model I have been behind. Maybe for a beginner just learning to get across the wake it is OK, but it lacks pop, and multiple ballast configurations do not fix it. <BR> <BR>The pics of the 220 wake look impressive, and certainly whoever is riding has no problem getting air with it.