94 or 91?

I'm looking at a couple boats, and have never owned any of the newer boats. I'm looking at a 94 ski Nautique and a 91 Ski Nautique. They are both in good shape the 91 is a little nicer and more loaded with options.

From what I have read I think these boats are the   same hull in the water but have some cosmetic differences above water. Also the same in the engine box. Am I right about this?

Any Opinions on pros or cons between these two boats?

Wasnt '94 also the first year they offered TBI instead of the carb? I think the major issues to consider between the two years are;
wood stringers vs fiberglass
carb vs injection (if 94 it has it)
points vs Protec (if 94 has it)

93SNautique wrote: Wasnt '94 also the first year they offered TBI instead of the carb? I think the major issues to consider between the two years are; wood stringers vs fiberglass carb vs injection (if 94 it has it) points vs Protec (if 94 has it)

Correct. The TBI motor was offered in '94. Both boats are likely to have the ProTec. With the exception of the base 240hp/1:1 combo, all motors had it.

Brings to mind;
If you can't dazzle with Data;
baffle them with Bull Sh#t....

Read the 1993 Brochure in the Reference section to hear Correct Crafts description of the fiberglass stringers. That is the year they first introduced them. I have never heard about any kind of composite stringer failure. Anyone else?

How many hours are on the 91 and 94?

Overall condition is really important but having no wood is a HUGE plus in my opinion. I'm pretty bad about worrying about stuff on the boat, so to be able to cross "Boat possibly rotting" off the list is a huge plus for me. I believe the argument FOR wood is the vibration absorbing abilities of wood, but the newer boats are smooth and quiet so I'd imagine that argument doesn't carry much weight.

I replaced my floor and stringers in my 73 CeeBee Avenger........... I swore I would never do that kind of job again !!!

GO WITH COMPOSITE

I took a close look at 94 yesterday and I'm a little confused about what I saw. The motor is a Ford 351 by PCM, but has a Holly Carb on it. I thought every thing in that era was fuel injected? I was expecting the large red plastic cover on top the engine, but what I found is a black square plastic thing covering the spark arrestor on the carb. The valve covers are red and say PCM on them. Also the prop looks smaller than what I expected.
The seller is the original owner of the boat and says he has not had any thing changed. The boat has a little over 400 hours and he says he has had only oil changes and tune ups.
I am I looking at a very base package?
Any feed back on this motor?

79Tique wrote: I took a close look at 94 yesterday and I'm a little confused about what I saw. The motor is a Ford 351 by PCM, but has a Holly Carb on it. I thought every thing in that era was fuel injected? I was expecting the large red plastic cover on top the engine, but what I found is a black square plastic thing covering the spark arrestor on the carb. The valve covers are red and say PCM on them. Also the prop looks smaller than what I expected. The seller is the original owner of the boat and says he has not had any thing changed. The boat has a little over 400 hours and he says he has had only oil changes and tune ups. I am I looking at a very base package? Any feed back on this motor?

Sounds like a stock carbed setup to me. Seems like a really nice boat! The carbed motor was definitely an option at that time.

Larry, my 95 is a carbed HO proboss w/gt40 heads. All my paper work says 300+ hp.
BTW: this is an old pic and everyone here yelled at me to get that Fram oil filter off there...which I have!

ryanandrews wrote: 79- i have a 1994 and it has a holley 650 4 barrel carb on it....not a huge diff between 265 and 300 unless your a big time barefootr..

All carb'd PCM 351w's came with 600CFM Holley's. The base motors were rated either 240 or 255 hp (depending on whose literature you read), while the HO motors were rated at either 285, 290 or 300 (again, marketing differences, not hardware).   The engines rated at ~260 were the Proski (non-HO TBI). But I digress...

Personally, I have a strong preference for the classic graphics on the '91. If there are no soft spots in the floor and all the bolts going into the stringers are tight, I would have no problem purchasing the boat. Check the motor mounts as well as the bolts holding the angled aluminum that supports the rear floor (you need to remove the engine box and back seat to remove the panel). If the '91 is in better condition with more features than the '94 for the same price, then I would go with the '91. Both boats will ski the same, and besides the composite construction, the difference are pretty minor. The '91 having converted from the Protec is a plus, as is the PerfectPass (a $1k+ option if you were to add it later). Also inspect the interiors very closely. There is $2k-3k worth of vinyl in there, so if anything needs to be recovered on either boat, the cost can add up quick.

If the '94 has the HO motor, that would make the decision a little harder. The base motor pulls plenty strong, but the top end is lacking if you do much barefooting. It will get the job done, but expect it to top out around 41 with a footer in tow. Add 3-4 MPH with the HO motor. Of course, you can easily add the heads to the base motor if youre so inclined.

trb-i thought that the base was 265 and the ho motors were 300+..correct 600 on the carb

im looking in my owners manual and its states this about engine horsepower model plb=190 pl&rc= 215 pl&rd= 240 and model pl&rp =285..says nothing about 300 hp. yet, the sales brochure says the 5.8 pro boss 300+ hp engines..

Who's Larry?

The Dude is very confused.

You may have it if you want. I took it out on the the lake last night and it has a cracked block!
Ran like sh*t, but looked nice. I told the guy selling/ trading and he claimed not to know about it saying he had not used the boat this summer. I let it go, but said I was not interested in the boat. Told him he could buy my Tique if he wanted
and he might.
I'm gonna make an offer on the 94 today. By the way the 94 is one of the "240" hp with the 1:1 trany that you guy's mentioned. I'm a bit excited about it though as it seems to be in great shape and it's tech that I know about.