PDA

View Full Version : 91 vs 88


cwright
10-11-2006, 04:32 PM
I acquired an 88PS190 earlier this year and have been busy adding the TLC it had missed for a while. Even though every outing has produced another thing to fix, I have thoroughly enjoyed have a MC DD finally after years behind an IO. I have been a little disappointed in the size of the rooster tail and have taken to shortening my line to get in front of it. After recupping my prop, I am now at 35 off, but really enjoy skiing there (open water) as there is no wake at all and the acceleration across the wake is awesome. I recently read that the 91-94 MC Prostar hull was (or is) considered a better slalom hull than the 88. They are known for smaller rooster tails, less spray at short line, and a flatter wake generally. There is a 91 PS190 for sale in my neck of the woods with 600 hours, and the photos would lead me to believe it is in good shape. Asking price is $11,900. My 88PS190 has 256 hours, and I believe I could sell it for $10,500 to $11,000.

1. How valuable is the hours difference? I will put on about 80 per year, so the 350 hour difference is 4.5 years worth of use. Is 600 really that much diferent than 300?

2. How much better is the 91 hull vs the 88? Should I jump all over this, or would I be disappointed that the 91 is about the same as my 88?

3. Or should I pass on the 91 and hold out for a 94 with EFI?

The answers to these questions are pure opinion, but I place a high value on the opinions posted on this forum. Anybody care to share your views?

Archimedes
10-11-2006, 04:49 PM
I say hold out for a 94, but as a former owner, I'm biased. I can't imagine a better slalom wake than the one behind that boat. The EFI is great. If I were in the market for a pure slalom boat, that's the boat I'd buy.

Don't wait to long though. They ain't gettin any younger.

east tx skier
10-11-2006, 05:08 PM
I expect you will like the wake, but at 35 off, the spray may still be an issue unless you go to 95 or newer.

rodltg2
10-11-2006, 05:09 PM
im a bit confused on why you would choose to ski at 35 in open water unless you are running that in the course as well. to each his own i guess. the hull is the same so a 91-94 will all ski great. i had the carb motor in the 93 and loved it.

BrianM
10-11-2006, 06:03 PM
Just get a new prop for that '88 and call it a day. If you have a 1:1 the Acme 13x12 will basicly eliminate the rooster tail. Here is a picture of my old '88 at 36mph with the Acme and as you can see the rooster tail is all but gone. I agree with the above. Unless you are going to upgrade to a '94 for the EFI or a '95 or newer for EFI and NO Spray (what I did) I would stick with the '88.

Oh and I also think that you are a little ambitious on what you can get for the '88. Even in excellent shape with low hours I think $9,500 is going to be about all you will get.

cwright
10-11-2006, 08:15 PM
excellent feedback so far guys

note to rodltg2... only because I can (I guess). I just kept shortening until I got in front of the rooster tail, and at 35 I hit the magic mark. As long as it's open water I figure why not?? If I ever go back to the buoys (an event that has become rare now that my lake changed it's rules to property owners only) I supposed I'll be screwed, but for just open water I can't determine a negative consequence. Is there one that I'm missing? PM me if you will, I'm very interested in yor feedback on this point.

Note to Brian M...wow, that wake photo is pretty impressive. I need to buy another prop anyway so that I have a spare for vacations, suppose I should buy the CNC'd ACME and try it before I get too excited about different hulls. Why drop to the 12P. I notice others have dropped to 13X12 as well. PM me on this (if you will) to avoid getting too many topics started on this thread at one time. I appreciate the help.

BrianM
10-11-2006, 09:38 PM
Why drop to the 12P. I notice others have dropped to 13X12 as well. PM me on this (if you will) to avoid getting too many topics started on this thread at one time. I appreciate the help.

Do a search on Acme props and you will find lots of info. Here is the short version. The 13x12 Acme is what they reccomend on the 1:1 boats for someone that basicly skis. Dropping to the 12 will give you substantially better hole shot. The beauty of these CNCd 3 blades is they have a lot of surface area and excellent balance. You should see a nice increase in the hole shot with no loss in top end. You will also get less of a rooster tail, a just slightly softer and 'foamier' wake and a vibration fre ride. Putting the Acme #541 (13x12) on my '88 made a huge performance difference. Made almost as big of a difference on my '97.

east tx skier
10-11-2006, 09:51 PM
I did a review of the acme versus the oj 13x12 3 blade. Milkmania is hosting it again and it is linked in the FAQ.

cwright
10-11-2006, 11:34 PM
just to keep this from turning into another prop thread, if I upgraded to the Acme 13X12 CNC on my 88, would the difference between the 88 and the 91/94 hulls be
1. dramatic, (this is the best choice I ever made)
2. hmmmmm, (a little better but still battling rooster tail)
3. no diff, (why did I bother selling my 88)

Also on my mind is giving up the low hours. Even though I have a problematic boat, the engine is strong, sounds great, and I believe will be the last thing to give me issues. If I go up to the 91/94 series I'm going to have to accept higher hours. Does it matter if the boat has been well cared for?

rodltg2
10-12-2006, 01:44 AM
im sure there are alot of different opinions, but in mine i would say do what makes you happy. unless your a tournament skier , ski at what speed/length makes you happy and have fun. the only harm in it i see is that if you do go back to course skiing at a longer length. it can re-enforce bad habits. otherwise do what you want. my only concern skiing at shortline would be getting hurt or taking a bad hit/fall that i couldnt handle from not getting the experience from a slow progress down the line.
as far as the new boat purchase goes, dont buy it for for wake performance alone. make the choice based on other needs as well.

H20skeefreek
10-12-2006, 08:01 AM
just to keep this from turning into another prop thread, if I upgraded to the Acme 13X12 CNC on my 88, would the difference between the 88 and the 91/94 hulls be
1. dramatic, (this is the best choice I ever made)
2. hmmmmm, (a little better but still battling rooster tail)
3. no diff, (why did I bother selling my 88)

Also on my mind is giving up the low hours. Even though I have a problematic boat, the engine is strong, sounds great, and I believe will be the last thing to give me issues. If I go up to the 91/94 series I'm going to have to accept higher hours. Does it matter if the boat has been well cared for?
In my opinion the difference would be negligible if you aren't in the course. If you went to 15 off, you'd be behind the bump, and wouldn't have to ever worry about it. I don't know what speed you are running, but as you increase speed, the wake does get smaller (the rooster tail never really does though).

shepherd
10-12-2006, 08:52 AM
Just get a new prop for that '88 and call it a day. If you have a 1:1 the Acme 13x12 will basicly eliminate the rooster tail. Here is a picture of my old '88 at 36mph with the Acme and as you can see the rooster tail is all but gone. I agree with the above. Unless you are going to upgrade to a '94 for the EFI or a '95 or newer for EFI and NO Spray (what I did) I would stick with the '88.



Brian, did the new prop have any effect on reducing the spray that you know of? I know that spray is primarily due to hull form, but maybe the small (if any) effect on fluid flow across the stern of the boat due to a new prop may effect the spray as well (?).

ntidsl
10-12-2006, 09:00 AM
yeah I am still cracking up from when I read about a guy on here skiing 41 off...I was like "holy cow" who is this guy? Then I found out he was skiing open water...I guess what ever makes you happy...

When I free ski though I like to relax, enjoy nice slow turns, and just enjoy the mellowness of skiing...sorta like a relaxing sunset cruise or something...15 off 34 mph and work on smooth turns and form...

ntidsl
10-12-2006, 09:03 AM
how does thoe old 88s and 91 track driving through a course...just curious? I had an 87 supra ts6m and loves kiing it and driving it but I coudln't imagine pulling a guy 35 off through a course with it...A buddy has an 88 supra at out lake and i hate driving it...the PP sucks...and the tracking...man thats tough...I think I was more tired than he was after a 35 off pass, 34 mph...

BrianM
10-12-2006, 09:17 AM
Brian, did the new prop have any effect on reducing the spray that you know of? I know that spray is primarily due to hull form, but maybe the small (if any) effect on fluid flow across the stern of the boat due to a new prop may effect the spray as well (?).
The prop had no effect on spray. Once you got to 28 off you would start getting some nice spray in the face. Even at 22 off if you had a head wind you would be getting some spray. I only occasionally get into 32 off and there you were starting to fight golf balls being launched off of the side of the boat.
how does thoe old 88s and 91 track driving through a course...just curious? I had an 87 supra ts6m and loves kiing it and driving it but I coudln't imagine pulling a guy 35 off through a course with it...A buddy has an 88 supra at out lake and i hate driving it...the PP sucks...and the tracking...man thats tough...I think I was more tired than he was after a 35 off pass, 34 mph...
I think the '88 tracked pretty good in the course. After I made the prop change to the Acme it tracked and held speed even better. After I put Perfect Pass in the boat the guys I skied with liked driving and skiing behind it better than almost every boat in the club. It really was a nice boat to drive and ski.

ntidsl
10-12-2006, 09:23 AM
I'd like to get aboat like this for a project...I'll start doing some reserach on hull...86-88 sounds like good years

east tx skier
10-12-2006, 10:21 AM
Brian, did the new prop have any effect on reducing the spray that you know of? I know that spray is primarily due to hull form, but maybe the small (if any) effect on fluid flow across the stern of the boat due to a new prop may effect the spray as well (?).

I have some general info on the spray mod they made on the 94 190 PT boats if you're interested.