Articles
   
       
       
Pics/Video
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WAKE WORLD HOME
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > >> Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles Archive > Archive through June 17, 2007

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    B. Eriksen (scanboarder)      Join Date: Feb 2005       05-29-2007, 11:41 AM Reply   
Looking at a couple of ski nautiques,
one 92 and one older - not sure how much- ,
and i was wondering what the difference is from model to model.. ski-air-super etc.

Probably been done already but still...
Help, please?

(Message edited by scanboarder on May 29, 2007)
Old    Brian Bedell (partyb)      Join Date: Dec 2001       05-29-2007, 12:00 PM Reply   
I'll help. Try the "search" feature.
Old    B. Eriksen (scanboarder)      Join Date: Feb 2005       05-29-2007, 12:05 PM Reply   
lawyers... can't get a decent answer from any of them unless to pay for it..

Seriously, if you search nautique you get thousands of hits. I just don't have the patience so i put my neck out there hoping the helpful ones would outnumber the smartasses...
Old    rod (rodltg2)      Join Date: Oct 2005       05-29-2007, 12:08 PM Reply   
well i know 92 and earlier you wont find a super or air. i think the 2001 which is the prefereed hull for older nauty's for wakeboarding went to 89 i think...?
Old    Ian Brown (wakereviews)      Join Date: Sep 2006       05-29-2007, 12:23 PM Reply   
Yeah, the 2001 was from 81 - 89 (maybe 82). I had a 92 Sport and that was a great boat. Air came out in 88 with the Super Air in 99. Before that was the Super Sport from 95 (i think) which is considered a really good wake boat and i think might even have the same hull as the 99 - 06 SAN (not 100% on that one though). Air Nautiques are all direct drives, Super Airs are vdrives. An Air is a great crossover boat, SAN is wake sports. Sport is a good crossover as well, Ski Nautiques, other than the 2001 hull you might have trouble getting a good wake from.
Old    B. Eriksen (scanboarder)      Join Date: Feb 2005       05-29-2007, 12:30 PM Reply   
right.. so basically stay away from ski models no matter what year.
That was ecxellent info, thanks.
P.S thanks for the onlyinboards stickers i got. Gonna slap'em on just as soon as i can find a decent boat.
Old    B. Eriksen (scanboarder)      Join Date: Feb 2005       05-29-2007, 12:34 PM Reply   
so i'm guessing this is an older ski-nautique and not the 2001. right?Upload
Old    Brian Bedell (partyb)      Join Date: Dec 2001       05-29-2007, 12:41 PM Reply   
That looks like a 2001 but the decal for the "2001" fell off.

Didn't you know attorneys don't actually do anything, we just tell people what THEY should do? :-)
Old    B. Eriksen (scanboarder)      Join Date: Feb 2005       05-29-2007, 12:48 PM Reply   

My bad Brian. Thanks for the pro bono advice tho.

Here's a couple more pics. How do i tell the 2001 from the non2001 ??

Upload
Upload
Old    Ian Brown (wakereviews)      Join Date: Sep 2006       05-29-2007, 12:50 PM Reply   
sorry, Air came out in 98.... saw I messed that up above...
Old    Nacho (denverd1)      Join Date: May 2004       05-29-2007, 12:52 PM Reply   
that is a 2001. if its before '82 or after '89 its probably not a 2001. if its within those years and looks similar to the pic you posted, chances are its a 2001.
Old    B. Eriksen (scanboarder)      Join Date: Feb 2005       05-29-2007, 1:17 PM Reply   
thanx nacho. still wonder how i can tell just looking at it tho...
Old    E.J. (deuce)      Join Date: Mar 2002       05-29-2007, 1:25 PM Reply   
http://www.the2001.com/
Old    Leo Lasecki (malibuboarder75)      Join Date: Jan 2004       05-29-2007, 1:58 PM Reply   
That is NOT a 2001. The front scoop doesnt match any of the scoops for the 82-89. Also the hull is different. That looks like a CC mustang.
Old    Jon (jon4pres)      Join Date: May 2004       05-29-2007, 2:18 PM Reply   
definetly NOT a 2001.
Old    Darren Yearsley (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       05-29-2007, 3:59 PM Reply   
Yup Mustang I think
Old    Ryan (rkinsell)      Join Date: May 2005       05-29-2007, 4:56 PM Reply   
not a 2001
Old    Mikeski (mikeski)      Join Date: Aug 2003       05-29-2007, 11:55 PM Reply   
Not a 2001. That is a 1980 or 1981 based on the windshield and the front scoop.

The 2001 has a step in the lower side corners of the hull and the V above the prop, both traits common in SAN's to 2006. The V eliminates the rooster tail and cleans up the wake. The lower steps let the back of the boat sit deep in the water creating a steeper wake.

Back
Upload

Side
Upload
Old    Stephen Higgins (srh00z)      Join Date: Jun 2003       05-30-2007, 12:18 AM Reply   
That actually looks like a 79, 80 or an 81 Ski Nautique. I have seen that hood scoop and transom on one of those models, I just can't remember which. The Mustang is smaller. I have a buddy who had a 77 Ski Nautique and it has a different transom but a similar hood scoop. That boat looks clean, but I would try and find the 2001 hull if you can.
Old    Mike O'Callaghan (greenpinky)      Join Date: Apr 2004       05-30-2007, 6:01 AM Reply   
Looks like a '78 or '79 Ski Nautique. I've got a '78. For sale too.

Like these guys said, looks for the hull differences (cut outs, 'bump' at transom). The biggest difference of all is that the 2001 is a foot longer than that hull, and the pre 2001 hull is only 6' 4" wide.

That hull will still kick up a good wake though. A little steeper than the 2001.

(Message edited by greenpinky on May 30, 2007)
Old    B. Eriksen (scanboarder)      Join Date: Feb 2005       05-30-2007, 6:32 AM Reply   
yeah, i just heard from the seller that it's a 79 Ski Nautique.
So seriously, compared to the 18 ft I/O we're riding now.. how much better would the wake be with something like this?

Thanks guys.

Edit : We're running 1500+ lbs ballast in the I/O

(Message edited by scanboarder on May 30, 2007)
Old    Tim (srock)      Join Date: Mar 2002       05-30-2007, 7:17 AM Reply   
I could not imagine sitting on a black interior on a sunny day. Hot hot hot.
Old    Brandon Holmes (bmh2208)      Join Date: Apr 2004       05-30-2007, 7:31 AM Reply   
The wake will be much better than your I/O. But still not as good as a 2001. I had a 77 that had the squared off end. The wake was pretty good, but very very steep. I moved up to the 2001 and it mellowed out and is much more like my '03 SAN.

If it was me I would add in a few more dollars to get the better wake and alot more room.
Old    B. Eriksen (scanboarder)      Join Date: Feb 2005       05-30-2007, 8:18 AM Reply   
problem is there's not a whole lot to choose from over here.

I thought about importing from the u.s. but the taxes are insane!! There's a horsepower tax. Apx $23 per HP. Then there's shipping, apx $4000. Then there's the standard 25% tax that goes on top of the whole thing summed.
A $10 000 boat in USA would run me apx $ 23 000 before it hits the dock over here.. And then there's the issue of having it CE approved which is almost impossible, and you won't get it out of customs til it's cleared in every way.
Old    B. Eriksen (scanboarder)      Join Date: Feb 2005       05-30-2007, 8:22 AM Reply   
how bout this 92 SN then? transom looks similar to the 2001, doesn't it?

Upload
Upload
Old    Stephen Higgins (srh00z)      Join Date: Jun 2003       05-30-2007, 8:37 AM Reply   
Those will produce a pretty good wake if weighted properly from what I know. Correct Craft made some revisions to their hulls after they quit producing the 2001 hull to make the wake smaller and this boat falls into that category. I know people who ride behind these and are very pleased with the wake overall, it will still have a nice shape to it. 1992 or 1993 was the last year for wood floors and stringers so check them out before buying to make sure they are in good condition.
Old    Nacho (denverd1)      Join Date: May 2004       05-30-2007, 8:44 AM Reply   
i noticed the split glass and hull. but yea, the vent is totatlly different. thx for the clarification
Old    B. Eriksen (scanboarder)      Join Date: Feb 2005       05-31-2007, 6:09 AM Reply   
ok, so obviously the '92 costs more than twice the '79.. still it's within range so the real important question is :

Which is better for wakeboarding?
Old    Brad Chesley (bchesley)      Join Date: Apr 2001       05-31-2007, 1:02 PM Reply   
92 will be. I sold an 81 (flat bottom) to get a 2001 hull (V and steps on side) because the 81 was rampy and not near as clean a wake. On the 92 the major difference is some spray relief pockets and its a little longer. Its still a good boat.

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 9:27 PM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2012 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us