Best Wake in Class

are we talking only on the ski nautique hull? or all CC in general?

I have a no wake zone hull...properly weighted +2000 lb throughs nice solid wake...

For barefooting it has some serious turbulence on the table.

I slalom ocassionally and crossing the wake seems to be fine. Anyway I can´t compare much.

kapla wrote: are we talking only on the ski nautique hull? or all CC in general?

All models. Some of these guys have been in so many boats that they know the difference between models, years, etc. Would be cool to have all that info in one place for reference.

The best slalom boat would be the newest Ski Nautique (200). The next best slalom boats would be 196/Ski Nautique from newest to oldest (TSC2/3, TSC1, No Wake Zone, 2001). The 206 probably fits between the TSC1 and No Wake Zone. The 2nd gen direct drive Sport/Air fits between the No Wake Zone and 2001. I would consider all 1990+ Ski Nautiques to be very good slalom boats. Slaloming behind the BFN is like tripping over a knee high curb. The older 16' boats (Skier/Tique/Mustang) throw pretty big wakes even at slalom speeds- but theyre VERY soft- so if your ski is on edge you can slice right through.

The best barefoot wake goes to the BFN. The table is sweet. The wake is still big though. No other CC Ive footed behind has what I would call a "good" barefoot wake... though if youre not doing wake crossings it doesnt really matter. I havent footed behind the 200, but the TSC2/3 has the best table of all the prior SN's- the No Wake Zone and 2001 require a long rope to get behind the turbulance. Anything with 300+ hp is going to give you pretty much all the speed you need for 1-footers, save for maybe the new 343hp 200. The 240hp 2001 and No Wake Zone boats are marginal for 1-foot speeds (~41-42 on a good day), IMHO. Ive footed behind the older boats a handful of times but havent ventured any wake crossings that I can remember. Stock power from a 302 powered 16' boat is about on par with the base 351w Ski Nautiques... adequate but not overwhelming.

Wakeboarding isnt really my thing, but the best shaped wakes in my opinion (not counting all the dedicated wakeboats of the last 15 years) would be the 2001, followed by the No Wake Zone. TSC1 and newer SN's have small, round wakes. The BFN throws a big wake, but its rampier and has a washy lip compared to the 2001. The older 16' boats have narrow, steep wakes- so theyre fun to play around with.

I want to barefoot behind a first generation Sport Nautique. Something tells me it has the table shape of the Barefoot Nautique at the height of a No Wake Zone. I want to experiment with this hull.

When posting please specifie if it is a Ski or Barefoot model boat
Thanks

An '87-88 2001 with some weight is hard to beat. A good solid wake.

TimD, any reason a 82-86 or '89 2001 would be any different than the '87-88?

Eric, its probably worth mentioning that you have a '71 Martinique- same hull as the 2nd gen (1970-1981) Ski Nautique.

Was looking at a 89 Sport to import at one stage. There is not a lot of info on their wake characteristics. They look to have a reasonably flat hull at the rear compared to a deep v like a BFN.

lewy2001 wrote: They look to have a reasonably flat hull at the rear compared to a deep v like a BFN.

Which I believe would make the wake shorter and more skiable. The hull looks A LOT like the Sanger DX hull. The DLX and DXII is almost identical except that outer set of lifting strakes stop 1' short of the transom. The table on the DLX is very nice even w/o the plate.

GlassSeeker's DX.

Any thoughts on the various 2001 configurations for slalom? I used to ski behind an '83 some years ago. I remember a pretty good "bump" at the wake at 30 mph/15' off.

'82-'86: Original hull/deck/motor
'87-'88: Original hull/New deck that moved the cockpit forward ~4"
'89:      Original hull/same deck as '87-'88, but w/PowerPlus trans

Did the changes through the years improve the slalom wake much?   

David the slalom wake on my 89 is average to OK. I don't think you will be setting any world records though. My slalom technique is probably worse than the boat though. I have upped the slalom speed to 34-35mph and that does help with the "bump".

Recently tried a Acme 470 3 blade prop and the rooster tail was much worse at slalom speeds than the 4 blade 422. This was due to the increased rpms required I think.

Hollywood I wonder where CC got the hull design for the 1st gen Sports from? It is very different to their normal hull shape with no small v down the spine of the hull and a integrated swim platform. Would like to see some wake pictures at slalom and boarding speeds. The 89 Sport I was looking at was Azeus17's the price was down to $7000 before it sold. He sent me a lot of pictures but no wake pictures.

I can't say if the 1.23 tranny makes any difference because the only other inboard I have driven was a 2000+ Air V drive.

We are very happy with our '89. Usually don't even fill the fat sacs full. I myself don't get air so the wake is just bumps for me to cross.

My son, on the other hand loves the curls ...

lewy2001 wrote: Was looking at a 89 Sport to import at one stage. There is not a lot of info on their wake characteristics. They look to have a reasonably flat hull at the rear compared to a deep v like a BFN.

GREAT boat for wakeboarding..

I just sold my 1992 sport, the same boat and same hull. The wake is wide and needs weight (+800lbs) to become high, but it's always clean and hard. I would say it can produce a wake that is of the same quality as the super sport Nautique (1996) that I have bought, which is the same boat as the 1996-2005 super air Nautique.

This sounds great, however, there is a downside: As soon as you let go of the power, the huge swell behind you is going to catch up with the boat. In a normal Nautique this is not a problem, however with the 1989-1992 sport Nautique has a ramped rear end and the water will overflow into the boat. You can prevent this by steering away from the wake, so no problem, but a novice pilot will result in wet feet.

When the weather turns bad, and you are boating on the open sea, this boat needs to be as empty as possible. I have been in a weighted down boat and there have been occasions where I've actually beached it to prevent sinking.

I prefer 06-09 for slalom. I don't like the 22 off bump on my 86 but if you are on edge it doesn't matter. I haven't got to ski a 200 yet but Mark tells me the table is fire on your feet while barefooting. The wake behind my friends 01 is great as well for slalom. I know skiing at tournaments in college slalom the Malibu had the biggest bump but it was soft and Mastercraft was just tall hard and terrible.

TRBenj wrote: Slaloming behind the BFN is like tripping over a knee high curb.

Same for the late 80s Martinique. Sometimes need climbing kit... Also the wrong shape for wakeboarding.