WakeWorld (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/index.php)
-   Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=3183)
-   -   What do you think of this boat? Good for wakeboarding? (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=781874)

otown_dave 07-21-2010 1:32 PM

What do you think of this boat? Good for wakeboarding?
I was looking at possibly picking up a Nautique 2001 & ran across this .

wake77 07-21-2010 1:42 PM

I don't know. Barefoot boats are designed to produce as small a wake as possible, but maybe someone has some better insight on this.

samhanna 07-21-2010 1:45 PM

Yes it will throw a good wake. My old friend had this exact type of boat. I think the only difference is the size of the motor in the boat. The hull is going to be the same. Just need to add weight

tailgate 07-21-2010 1:52 PM

thats quite a big engine for that size boat...

cwb4me 07-21-2010 1:56 PM

i had a nautique excel and the barefoot nautique was the same boat bigger motor. i would imagine its the same here you need more pull at higher speed to barefoot. like sam said just add weight for bigger wake.

ldr 07-21-2010 1:56 PM

It's definately a different hull than the normal 2001.

wakedoctor 07-21-2010 2:07 PM

I looked at these when we were boat shopping. The 2001 SN and 2001 Barefoot SN are two different hulls. From hear say, again, FROM HEAR SAY, the wake is not the same vert wake as the 2001 SN but it is close and a good wake. Plus you got the extra weight of the 8.1.

I don't know. Barefoot boats are designed to produce as small a wake as possible, but maybe someone has some better insight on this.

So were the 2001 SN.

paublo 07-21-2010 2:16 PM

I can't speak to that boat's specific wake, but the wake on any boat at 21-24 mph will be completely different than at 40-45 mph barefoot speed.

craig_f 07-21-2010 8:31 PM

My understanding of these boats was that they were designed to have less hull in the water at barefoot speeds, so like 34+ MPH. The decreased amount of hull in the water increased top speed, and that is very good for barefooting. (If you've never barefooted before I seem to recall that a 200lb. guy should be going 40+ to barefoot) This is why the Ski-Pro boats, and if I remember right some Sangers, had I/o's, to increase the top speed for barefooting. I would also guess this would be why a hardcore barefooter yould replace the standard 454 with the 502.

My GUESS is that this boat is capable of producing a good wake, but might take some more weight than a 2001 to get there. How much the "more lift hull" (I have no other idea how to describe it) forces the boat out of the water at 24-25 mph I have no idea, but it is going to work against you a little. I could also see this reducing the "vert" of the wake, but this is all pure speculation. If you like to wakesurf, I could see the increased v through the rear of the hull being a good thing, this seems to be the hull feature that all the really good wakesurf hulls have in common.

I would love to test drive this thing though, with that motor, it has to be an absolute beast! Gotta be worth borowing a couple of sacks and offering the guy to pay for a tank of gas to try it out.

otown_dave 07-22-2010 9:47 AM

It would have no problem pulling that's for sure!

formfunction 07-22-2010 10:26 AM

The reason for the deep v hull on the barefoot is to lower the prop and in turn lower the wash in the middle making a cleaner table for footing.Also it improves the top end by slicing instead of displacing.They do have nice wakes but not as tall as the 2001.

tripsw 07-22-2010 5:23 PM

I'm pretty certain I know who did this conversion, making it a high quality one if I'm right. For wakeboarding the 2001-wake will be slightly better, but this must be tons of fun to drive!

flux 07-23-2010 11:07 AM

Is that the original engine?? EFI, not carbed. Also a Merc, not a PCM

Also check out the digital gauge center. Pretty cool.

After some research, the barefoots came with a 454 chevy block PCM engine. So that's an updated engine with the crazy gauge center. Interesting

flux 07-23-2010 11:15 AM

I'd ask if they have a different trans in there too, that's not original gear. Not necessarily bad as the EFI engines are way easier to maintain than the carbed engines.

Duh, they mention it in the title, i should try reading for a change.......

Interesting boat, that's for sure.

bill_airjunky 07-23-2010 11:29 AM

Interesting updates on the boat. I'd say there is only ONE way to be sure........Give the guy a call & take it for a test ride!!

07-23-2010 11:59 AM

That thing is awesome!

wakebrdr38 07-23-2010 12:48 PM

The deep v in that boat caused more lift than the original sn 2001. Created a better table for footing and higher speeds. From all my years of owning an 86 sn2001 and following the forums, I have been told the barefoot did not throw the same great wake as the 2001, supposedly still a good wake just not great due to the extra lift. Definately has had the engine replaced. The original engine should have been a pcm ford 351 or the optional pcm chevy 454 which was more popular in the barefoot model and pretty rare in the sn2001.

sanddragon2004 07-23-2010 9:24 PM

very similar hull to the excel. ive owned both, the deeper v is a lil musshy but produces a nice wake when sacked out. I noticed that wake was better in shallow water like the delta as opposed to deeper lakes.

sanddragon2004 07-23-2010 9:25 PM

a sn2001 def throws a preffered wake though over that year bf. besides you can get a sn2001 for prob half the price if you shop around. (i sold my last one for 2800bucks with a tower) and a new 300hp motor.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 7:26 PM.