Forums
NautiqueParts.comNautiqueSkins.com - Correct Craft Upholstery and Part
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 2001 model vs barefoot hull
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

2001 model vs barefoot hull

 Post Reply Post Reply   
Author
Faceplant View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July-27-2013
Location: Otter Lake , Mi
Status: Offline
Points: 403
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Faceplant Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: 2001 model vs barefoot hull
    Posted: August-28-2014 at 12:59am
Tried searching to no avail to see if there is a difference . Is the 2001 model hull the same as the barefoot hull ? Iv'e been searching for a 87 - 89 2001 model mainly for wakeboarding but also slaloming . Came across a couple of barefoots . I know that most barefoots had 454 as opposed to the 351 engines ( I actually would prefer the 351 myself ) . Realize that the 454 would be heavier which would be added ballast but other than that , is there much difference ?
Back to Top
ncdoubleup View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August-08-2010
Location: Statesville, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 164
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ncdoubleup Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August-28-2014 at 2:05am
I can only speak from my experience of owning both a SN with a 351 and a BN with a 454, but there is alot more difference than just weight when speaking of just the engine. The 454 will smoke the 351! But having said that, we have a 1990 Barefoot now with a 454 and the wake for wakeboarding with no weight and only a few people is really quite impressive. We've yet to weigh it down, so I don't know how big it could really get. Running at 35 - 37 the wake for slalom skiing looks like it would be pretty decent. I don't slalom myself, but it's good for crossing while barefooting. A very good question on the hulls, from what I understand they are very similar, if not the same, but that would be a question for experts other than myself. :)Hopefully they will chime in here. I'd love to know the answer myself. I know there are several on here that have the 2001 and they seem to be great for pretty much everything.

If you get a chance to ride in a BN with a 454, I'm sure you'll like it. What you won't like it the fuel mileage. It really sucks! Unless you plan on pulling 6 barefooters at a time, the 351 should do well.
Back to Top
Frankenotter View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: August-26-2012
Location: Milwaukee
Status: Offline
Points: 1072
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Frankenotter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August-28-2014 at 2:49am
Totally different hulls. The BArefoot Nautique is NOT a good slalom wake. It doesn't handle anything like the SN hull and from what others say, the wake is not the greatest for wakeboarding.

It sounds like for your purpose, the standard SN 2001 hull would be the best. You can load it with ballast to wakeboard or keep it natural to slalom.
1999 Ski Nautique 196
Back to Top
Orlando76 View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: May-21-2013
Location: Mount Dora, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 3108
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Orlando76 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August-28-2014 at 2:56am
Actually there's quite a difference bt the 2001 and the BFN. The BFN is a vee hull, slightly wider too I believe. The stock 454 BFN's I've seen were far from impressive IMHO. I've raced 2 bfn 2 diff times with 2 2nd gen SN and both times the lil guys won. The slalom wake will be better on the 2001, like mentioned before, BFN wake isn't bad but that's at footin speeds, back it to 32-36 and it's gonna grow.
Back to Top
TRBenj View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: June-29-2005
Location: NWCT
Status: Offline
Points: 21107
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TRBenj Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August-28-2014 at 8:03am
Despite some familial similarities on the deck and interior, the hulls of these 2 boats are about as different as 2 similar sized boats can get. They share nothing in terms of skiing performance.

We love our bfn but it has a very limited application, IMHO. Great barefoot table, smooth in rough water and fast in a straight line... Those are about the only things it does well compared to a SN. Handling is far better in the SN, as are the wakes for just about every skiing discipline short of barefooting- the bfn throws a large wake with a big flat table, but the ramp and lip are not well suited for lower speed watersports like wake and trick, IMHO. The SN is a superior all around boat.

This has been discussed at length several times, so search out those threads and you'll see some wake and hull pictures.
Back to Top
tullfooter View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: March-02-2007
Location: White Lake, MI
Status: Offline
Points: 2225
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tullfooter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August-28-2014 at 9:25am
I finally rode my slalom ski behind my BFN. Not an easy wake cross when laying it down. It's one of the worst wakes I've crossed while slalom skiing. Barefooting; it's great, especially if the water conditions aren't perfect. Contrary to what Tim said, there is another thing the 454 BFN does well; pull away from the dock. The sound is boss.   
Play hard, life's not a trial run.
'85 BFN
'90 BFN



White Lake, Michigan

Back to Top
oldcuda View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: June-22-2010
Status: Offline
Points: 474
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldcuda Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August-28-2014 at 9:31am
So a 2001 hull with a big block that's what I've been thinking.E mailed the owner on the Brown one in Ga but no response think it's gone now said needs motor.Have a BB in garage w/72c all ready for a new home
Back to Top
TRBenj View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: June-29-2005
Location: NWCT
Status: Offline
Points: 21107
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TRBenj Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August-28-2014 at 10:14am
Originally posted by tullfooter tullfooter wrote:

Contrary to what Tim said, there is another thing the 454 BFN does well; pull away from the dock. The sound is boss.   

I disagree... In terms of holeshot, if propped appropriately, a SN with 351w will come out of the hole almost dead even with a BFN with a 454... The bigger prop required to keep the big blocks revs in check up top slows it down out of the hole to the point where they perform similarly. Of course the big block gives you almost a 5mph advantage up top. If propped the same, the big block is quicker (but won't still have the full 5mph advantage up top).

As far as sound goes, stock vs. stock, with 3" outlets, mufflers and compression in the mid 8's, there is not a big difference in tone between the 2. The small ford may actually sound better! Adding compression, metal in the exhaust, elimination of mufflers, increasing hose/outlet size changes the game though.
Back to Top
Hollywood View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: February-04-2004
Location: Twin Lakes, WI
Status: Offline
Points: 13510
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hollywood Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August-28-2014 at 10:46am
Tim, obviously, nailed the description of the BFN quite well. The Barefoot is only a few inches longer and only wider at the transom. The seating is actually identical so cabin space isn't much different. Difference in weight, with the same engine, is only 150 lb.

Back to Top
Faceplant View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July-27-2013
Location: Otter Lake , Mi
Status: Offline
Points: 403
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Faceplant Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August-29-2014 at 12:12am
THANK YOU . Will keep my eyes open for a 2001 model then .
Back to Top
DMH View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July-25-2014
Location: Milwaukee
Status: Offline
Points: 134
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DMH Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August-29-2014 at 5:40am
Here's a few 2001's that match your criteria.

87 - 89 2001's For Sale
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Copyright 2024 | Bagley Productions, LLC