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

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    JR Smith (wakintime)      Join Date: Jul 2011       04-14-2012, 9:43 PM Reply   
Really confused. Not trying to start any wars. Just need some objective opinions on which one. Using mainly to wakeboarding. Just starting wake surfing. Love both wakes but only had limited time on both. Any opinions would be appreciated. Please no bashing! Just help a really confused guy. Thanks!
Old    Matt (MattieK27)      Join Date: Mar 2010       04-14-2012, 10:37 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakintime View Post
Really confused. Not trying to start any wars. Just need some objective opinions on which one. Using mainly to wakeboarding. Just starting wake surfing. Love both wakes but only had limited time on both. Any opinions would be appreciated. Please no bashing! Just help a really confused guy. Thanks!
Both are great boats. My personal preference is Nautique, but thats just me. One thing I will say, I have never heard complaints about the current gen 210's wake, I have however heard some negatives about X2s. I really don't think you could go wrong either way.
Old    DBC (ixfe)      Join Date: Aug 2008       04-14-2012, 11:44 PM Reply   
^^^ What Matt says is generally true from my WW experience. I haven't been behind either boat, but typically the 210 gets higher praise here... that's all I have to go by. Bu t there are plenty of X-2 fans.

Seems like an odd comparison. Wouldn't you normally compare the 210 to the X-15...?
Old    Steve Marks (Marksy)      Join Date: Feb 2012       04-15-2012, 12:12 AM Reply   
I would choose the 210, I am currently doing the ground work before making the final decision.

I haven't been in the x2 yet so I might have to check it out but here is why I love the 210 in no particular order

1. Wake!
2. Fly high plug in extra ballast system
3. Seating!! Rear facing options
4. Handling

I could keep going on.

The interior finish isn't my favorite when you add bold colors but when it is done correctly and simple using grey, whites and tones alike I think it takes on the classy clean finish of a Malibu interior.
Old    Darren Yearsley (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       04-15-2012, 2:09 AM Reply   
I've ridden behind both, I like the 210, the X2 I feel is too wide and steep for its size, not a fan.
Old    Kevin Skonnord (kskonn)      Join Date: Mar 2011       04-15-2012, 4:35 AM Reply   
I have an X2 and my neighbor has a 210. We ride behind both of them all the time, both wakes are great when properly weighted. I have the fly high plug n play on my X2 and he has on his 210. The X2 wake is wider, my X2 has more interior room and storage. Both are great boats, riding both of them often makes me confident in telling you that you will be happy with either choice. I prefer my X2 but prefer is the key word. It all comes down to personal preference.

The other advice I would give is that if all things are close pick the boat that has the best service department/dealership supporting the brand in your area. My neighbor is probably going to by an X25 for his next boat, mostly because the Mastercraft dealer in our area is phenomenal and the Nautique dealer is not.
Old    Seahawks #1 Fan Robert T (cwb4me)      Join Date: Apr 2010       04-15-2012, 5:37 AM Reply   
Like Kevin said you can't go wrong with either boat. I think the 210 has the edge in wake quality and the X2 has the interior layout and space edge. Both are top quality boats and the dealer/service dept. could be the deciding factor. Sometimes ease of service can really make the difference for a enjoyable boat ownership experience. Good Luck!
Old    Troy Deschamps (TroyD)      Join Date: Jan 2012       04-15-2012, 5:38 AM Reply   
I would look at the X-15 as well if you are considering the X-2. Love my 210 but find it too small.
Old    Justin Bishop (jrbishop4)      Join Date: Mar 2007       04-15-2012, 2:20 PM Reply   
X2 is a great boat and the wake is good if you add the plug and play but the wake is wide. For a 20' boat there is TONS of room. I have never rode behind a 210 so i have no input. I went with the X2 because I got a great deal on it and my dealer is great to work with. Demo both because it comes down to what you like. Good luck.
Old    Justin Bishop (jrbishop4)      Join Date: Mar 2007       04-15-2012, 2:23 PM Reply   
If you are storing in your garage one more thing to look at is if it will fit. X2 is know to be too tall to fit is some garages. I had to replace my 7' door with a 8' door. Not sure if this is a problem with the 210.
Old    JR Smith (wakintime)      Join Date: Jul 2011       04-15-2012, 7:01 PM Reply   
Thanks for your input. Now I am going to throw a wrench in. Checked out a MB 21 wide body and the ballast and wake were sweet. Plus it is less exspensive. My question is that it did not seem to cut through the water like the mc and cc. It seemed to bounce more on top of the water and did not feel as responsive or track as well. Was that my imagination? Loved the price but since I want to keep this boat for awhile everything needs to be good. Any input?
Old    Johnny (johnny_defacto)      Join Date: Sep 2006       04-15-2012, 8:26 PM Reply   
you are doing the right thing by test driving. only you can make this decision, otherwise you will get a mixed bag of opinions, but that is what you asked for.... so here is mine.

x2 wake is wide, small boat but packs a lot of space in it somehow, turns very poorly... i rode behind one once, factory ballast plus a few sacks and people, not impressed but it was not heavily weighted, and did not get to play with it. x2 owners seem to love their wakes.

MB, nice boats, nice wakes, even nicer price.... turns poorly, has a lot of cab space due to shorter bow and shorter sun pad. if stock ballast will be enough for you now and into the future, then the ballast system is excellent. if you will want more weight over stock, then the ballast system is terrible. you will have to fill sacks by hand (bummer when spending 50K+ on a boat that you still have to throw pumps and hoses over the side...), or start drilling holes in your hull, adding pumps and wiring for switches... leaving you with hands-free operation, but also leaving you with 2 different ballast systems...

210- my choice if the price is good to you. Fun wake, gets great with more weight (you will most likely need more than stock eventually), can piggyback sacks into current ballast. Been told it handles excellent and turns great too, but I have only driven one heavily weighted and it felt like a tank to me.

have fun shopping... drive and ride everything
Old    JR Smith (wakintime)      Join Date: Jul 2011       04-15-2012, 8:47 PM Reply   
Johnny
Thanks for your input. You pretty much see it like I do. I just wanted the input since you don't have all that much time when you demo. I thought maybe I still wasn't seeing the full picture.
Old    Kevin Skonnord (kskonn)      Join Date: Mar 2011       04-16-2012, 6:52 AM Reply   
To echo Johnny's statement, with a couple extra thousand pounds both the 210 and the X2 seem to handle the same. I will say I noticed a marked improvement on my 2011 X2, even fully loaded with ballast and people it turns very well and with min effort. I don't think anything changed though.
Old    Tampa Wake (tampawake)      Join Date: Mar 2008       04-16-2012, 7:53 AM Reply   
I have been in both boats behind both boats and currently own an old school X Star. To me this is a no brainer. I would take the 210 all day long over the X2. Not sure its apples to apples. Think you would have to compare the X25 to a super air 210. Then your looking at a SUPER tuff choice.
Old    Brett Yates (polarbill)      Join Date: Jun 2003       04-16-2012, 7:59 AM Reply   
Johnny, I see the point you are trying to make with the MB ballast system and not being able to piggy back right away but in my opinion the concern about it is completely overblown. Even if you have to drill a couple extra holes and add pumps/bags it isn't a big deal. The other 2 boats mentioned have holes drilled and pumps installed. In the end if you want extra ballast in any of them you are adding sacks that take up storage. The difference being that the MB ballast is a much quicker system that holds more weight thus giving it a much better stock wake then either of the other boats. Look at the pictures of the stock wake of the MB or the stock wake plus a few hundred puonds in the bow.

JR, was the MB bouncing/porpoising at higher speeds? If so the 21' MB's seem to do that at higher speeds. There is an easy fix for this. Order a boat with a trim plate. This will keep the nose down and stop the porpoising. Another nice thing about the plate is it will also allow you to adjust wake to the rider's preference. If they want a mellow wake put the plate down, if they want a steeper wake leave it up. Also, if you start running a lot of extra wake you cna use the plate to get on plane quicker which will save you some gas.

I like the X2 and the 210. But you get everything and more with the MB for what should be at least 10k less if not 20 or 25k less.
Old    Johnny (johnny_defacto)      Join Date: Sep 2006       04-16-2012, 8:55 AM Reply   
"Johnny, I see the point you are trying to make with the MB ballast system and not being able to piggy back right away but in my opinion the concern about it is completely overblown. Even if you have to drill a couple extra holes and add pumps/bags it isn't a big deal"

LOL!!! that's crazy talk right there... I guess you are not one of us who's budget for a depreciating luxury is at $50k. You think that drilling 3 big holes in the bottom of your brand new boat, buying and installing 6 pumps (or 3 reversible), installing and routing dozens of feet of ballast hose with anti syphon's or one way valves, pulling and running wire to the pumps and installing switches, routing vent lines and drilling 3 more holes in the side of your boat, all while avoiding the factory gravity 3 tank system and its components and wires "isn't a big deal"... well, I do. It is asinine.

If you don't surf and you are an average wakeboarder, then extra ballast is not a concern and the MB system is excellent. But if you surf, then stock weight will not cut it, even though you can probably surf the mb's with a stock set up. So go ahead and brag about your ballast that fills up in 60 seconds while you sit over your rear locker dicking around with your fat sack and pump for 5 minutes, burping it every minute.... knowing that you will be doing this again up in the bow after you are done.

I do not see, sir, how it could possibly be overblown in your opinion.

Last edited by johnny_defacto; 04-16-2012 at 9:03 AM. Reason: i need to turn off "auto-correct"
Old    Johnny (johnny_defacto)      Join Date: Sep 2006       04-16-2012, 9:00 AM Reply   
kevin, do you have a turning fin on your 2011? I don't recall if mc offers it, or if it is stock, or if it is not offered at all. I don't think the x2 I drove had one.
Old    Swatguy (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       04-16-2012, 9:05 AM Reply   
I am with Tamp as well as a few of the others. I own original Xstar and spend a ton of time in new 210 as well as x2.

I don't see where the X 2 has more storage than a 210. I would argue they are pretty identical in storage and cockpit space.

The X2 handles like a slob for a 20ft boat. It has no tracking fins and. They walk like crazy when weighted. Also the new Mc ballast timers and towers have had nothing but issues. It takes a ton of weight to get a wake out of the X2. The surf ocket is small as well.Their towers even for 2012 are still trying to patch bandaids that have ben going on since 05. While still a quality well built boat it just doesn't stack up to the 210. And trust me my family has Bern die hard MC people owning 13 mc's over the years.

The only factor that could possibly whining you over is the wake shape.and as we all know that plays a huge factor and is all preference. As well as the ilmor option.

If u put the x 2 next to the 210 wake shape a non factor, the 210 rides better, handles better, tracks better, needs less weight, surfs better, has a bit more ayyention to detail,and is overall a much more rider built and useful , better quality boat. While still a peaky wake Nautique has mellowed it out just enough for my liking compared to the older 210.

I also think if you are looking at a 210 and an MB 21 the more comparable and competing boat in the MC line would be the X 15. If u put an X15 next to a 210..........Now you are talking more and more of a toss up, but I again would take the 210 hands down.

Last edited by xstarrider; 04-16-2012 at 9:11 AM.
Old    Brett Yates (polarbill)      Join Date: Jun 2003       04-16-2012, 9:09 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny_defacto View Post
"Johnny, I see the point you are trying to make with the MB ballast system and not being able to piggy back right away but in my opinion the concern about it is completely overblown. Even if you have to drill a couple extra holes and add pumps/bags it isn't a big deal"

LOL!!! that's crazy talk right there... I guess you are not one of us who's budget for a depreciating luxury is at $50k. You think that drilling 3 big holes in the bottom of your brand new boat, buying and installing 6 pumps (or 3 reversible), installing and routing dozens of feet of ballast hose with anti syphon's or one way valves, pulling and running wire to the pumps and installing switches, routing vent lines and drilling 3 more holes in the side of your boat, all while avoiding the factory gravity 3 tank system and its components and wires "isn't a big deal"... well, I do. It is asinine.

If you don't surf and you are an average wakeboarder, then extra ballast is not a concern and the MB system is excellent. But if you surf, then stock weight will not cut it, even though you can probably surf the mb's with a stock set up. So go ahead and brag about your ballast that fills up in 60 seconds while you sit over your rear locker dicking around with your fat sack and pump, burping it every minute.... knowing that you will be doing this again up in the bow after you are done.

I do not see, sir, how it could possibly be overblown in your opinion.
Haha, the X2 and the SAN both have holes drilled, hoses and wires ran, switches, etc..... It is not really any different to do it after the fact. 2 pumps, hose, switches and 2 bags if you are just looking for the extra weight for surfing is probably 1500-2k. Have the dealer install it and count it all as part of the sale price of the boat. The boat is still going to be far less then the Mastercraft or Nautique but will have more interior room and similar build quality.
Old    Brett Yates (polarbill)      Join Date: Jun 2003       04-16-2012, 9:19 AM Reply   
By the way, if you were adding just a bag to each rear compartment for surfing you would only need 1 hole drilled in the bottom of the boat since you would only ever be filling one rear bag at a time. The other nice thing is you would get to choose exactly how you want the ballast to be setup which a lot of times is better then what the manufacturer chooses since they are just choosing what is the cheapest.
Old    Johnny (johnny_defacto)      Join Date: Sep 2006       04-16-2012, 10:27 AM Reply   
Okay, yes, if you only surf one side, then only 1 hole will need to be drilled in the bottom of the hull, plus one for the vent (unless you want to burp the sack as it fills which would be dumb). If you surf the other side then again, 2 more holes. plus, the mb's do not have front ballast and everyone I know that rides them has a bow sack on the front seats... so even with surfing, you want some weight up there.... 2 more holes.

I get it, it is obviously not a big deal to you, and yes, have the factory add all that extra ballast and you will have a boat will a ton of ballast for a lot less than an mc or cc. I absolutely agree. I just think it is funny to buy a wake boat in 2012 and have to drill holes or put fat sacks everywhere. Its a gripe i have with all boat manufacturers, not just mb. A lot of them are offering a plug n play system that gets you 3k+ in ballast from factory, but not everyone. And to have 2 separate systems in a wake boat to get more ballast is definitely not a good thing.

Yes, the x2 and san have holes drilled, hoses and wires. Imagine if there was either boat priced $5000 less than normal price, with no ballast. I would not buy it even if I could have custom ballast installed for less than $5000, saving me money. The point is, most people do not want to have to modify their brand new perfect boat in such an intrusive way, most people cringe at that thought.

If MB could find a way to add sacks to the stock ballast somehow, then that would make that system truly amazing. As it sits now, it is a "cute" idea, but for me it doesn't work, and one of the reasons I crossed mb off my list fairly quickly.
Old    Miguel (migs)      Join Date: Aug 2006       04-16-2012, 10:48 AM Reply   
You can never go wrong with a SAN 210. period.
Old    Kevin Skonnord (kskonn)      Join Date: Mar 2011       04-16-2012, 12:56 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by xstarrider View Post
I am with Tamp as well as a few of the others. I own original Xstar and spend a ton of time in new 210 as well as x2.

I don't see where the X 2 has more storage than a 210. I would argue they are pretty identical in storage and cockpit space.

The X2 handles like a slob for a 20ft boat. It has no tracking fins and. They walk like crazy when weighted. Also the new Mc ballast timers and towers have had nothing but issues. It takes a ton of weight to get a wake out of the X2. The surf ocket is small as well.Their towers even for 2012 are still trying to patch bandaids that have ben going on since 05. While still a quality well built boat it just doesn't stack up to the 210. And trust me my family has Bern die hard MC people owning 13 mc's over the years.

The only factor that could possibly whining you over is the wake shape.and as we all know that plays a huge factor and is all preference. As well as the ilmor option.

If u put the x 2 next to the 210 wake shape a non factor, the 210 rides better, handles better, tracks better, needs less weight, surfs better, has a bit more ayyention to detail,and is overall a much more rider built and useful , better quality boat. While still a peaky wake Nautique has mellowed it out just enough for my liking compared to the older 210.

I also think if you are looking at a 210 and an MB 21 the more comparable and competing boat in the MC line would be the X 15. If u put an X15 next to a 210..........Now you are talking more and more of a toss up, but I again would take the 210 hands down.
The original X star is not a good comparison. The original X star became the X2, the X2 became the current X1 and the new X2 is totally different. The new version of the X2 has a lot more storage than the SAN210. It is also a completely different Hull than the original X star.
Old    Nauti 210 (brett33)      Join Date: Apr 2011       04-16-2012, 1:24 PM Reply   
210 gets my vote. The X2 is a great boat, but I personally think the Nauti trumps it all day long.
Old    Tampa Wake (tampawake)      Join Date: Mar 2008       04-16-2012, 1:33 PM Reply   
Kevin Xstar and I were not comparing the 205v hull X2 to the new 210. Just stating we own mastercrafts so we obviously like the MC brand. My statements were all based on the current X2 hull aka the 20ft length boat with a 96inch beam. Again if money is not an issue and I have to choose between an MC X2 vs a CC 210 all current hulls its a no brainer 210 is the easy call. Now if you want a closer apples to apples comparison in my opinion that would be the X25 a 21'6" length and 102" beam and the current 210 21' length and 98" beam then I would be in a HUGE quandary. Probably get me leaning to MC at that point. Just dont think the X2 and 210 are compared equally. Everything X Star said is correct as well.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kskonn View Post
The original X star is not a good comparison. The original X star became the X2, the X2 became the current X1 and the new X2 is totally different. The new version of the X2 has a lot more storage than the SAN210. It is also a completely different Hull than the original X star.
Old    Kevin Skonnord (kskonn)      Join Date: Mar 2011       04-16-2012, 1:56 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny_defacto View Post
kevin, do you have a turning fin on your 2011? I don't recall if mc offers it, or if it is stock, or if it is not offered at all. I don't think the x2 I drove had one.
Johnny, I might. I must have something. I am reading all these posts about how poor the X2 handles, how it walks when weighted etc... I do not have any of these problems, not say they are not out there but again I think often this comes down to personal experience and preference. The X2 has a pretty deep hull which certainly changes the feel. I can still steer with little effort and it tracks great with the extra weight and people in the boat.

My lake is pretty well split up with Nautiquie and Mastercrafts, we all ride and drive each others boats. I can honestly say that none of us have ever noticed much difference in handling, getting on plane, etc... Perhaps we are just not in tune enough with these things, and perhaps there are differences that to some are big.

I will just again say that I love both of the boats referenced, the best boat I have been behind recently is the X25 with the Fly high system, that was a great boat out of the box.

I might also be more of a realist or more in check with my wakeboarding skill level, but I would think for most people the wakes that any of the X series Mastercraft boats, SAN boats, Malibu, MB etc.. throw will not limit us from doing what we want to do.

I still maintain that it often comes down to service support, and personal preferences. I am not into many of the new electronic/technology devices that are coming out on the new boats so I personally could be happy with any of them. I have gotten into a lot of boats and have always walked away saying "wow that was a really nice boat." I have never felt the need to compare or demote other brands to justify my purchase.
Old    Kevin Skonnord (kskonn)      Join Date: Mar 2011       04-16-2012, 1:58 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by tampawake View Post
Kevin Xstar and I were not comparing the 205v hull X2 to the new 210. Just stating we own mastercrafts so we obviously like the MC brand. My statements were all based on the current X2 hull aka the 20ft length boat with a 96inch beam. Again if money is not an issue and I have to choose between an MC X2 vs a CC 210 all current hulls its a no brainer 210 is the easy call. Now if you want a closer apples to apples comparison in my opinion that would be the X25 a 21'6" length and 102" beam and the current 210 21' length and 98" beam then I would be in a HUGE quandary. Probably get me leaning to MC at that point. Just dont think the X2 and 210 are compared equally. Everything X Star said is correct as well.
ahhh gotya. The X25 is my favorite boat in the MC lineup right now.

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 5:09 AM.

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