PDA

View Full Version : 2001 195 Hull


TCrate
03-20-2008, 09:27 AM
Does anyone know if the hull on a 2001 195 is the same as the 95-97 195 hull?

6ballsisall
03-20-2008, 09:30 AM
Yes. It's also the same hull as the 1995-1997 Prostar 190 and the X5

flipper
03-20-2008, 09:38 AM
One thing I don't understand, if the '91-'94 is arguable the best hull design ever, why don't they do another run of them?

6ballsisall
03-20-2008, 09:44 AM
One thing I don't understand, if the '91-'94 is arguable the best hull design ever, why don't they do another run of them?


Spray at shortline........ to many skiers today running 35' off or better that wouldn't put up with the spray those boats put out. (although I agree, that was an incredible hull)

flipper
03-20-2008, 09:48 AM
Spray at shortline........ to many skiers today running 35' off or better that wouldn't put up with the spray those boats put out. (although I agree, that was an incredible hull)
Well, I guess that's why I didn't know....never been close enough to deal with spray.:o

6ballsisall
03-20-2008, 09:49 AM
Well, I guess that's why I didn't know....never been close enough to deal with spray.:o


You and I both brutha!! ;)

TCrate
03-20-2008, 09:55 AM
I have a '92 190 and the wake is excellent but on a windy day at 28 off I have issues with spray. That wake at 28 off and 34 MPH is flat as can be!

BrianM
03-20-2008, 09:55 AM
I assume you meant is the 2001 195 hull the same as the 95-97 190 hull since there was no 195 in 95-97.
There is a great write up on the 95-97 190, Sportstar, 19 Skier, 195, X5 hull (http://www.tmcowners.com/teamtalk/attachment.php?attachmentid=20360&d=1175286436).

east tx skier
03-20-2008, 10:35 AM
Spray at shortline........ to many skiers today running 35' off or better that wouldn't put up with the spray those boats put out. (although I agree, that was an incredible hull)

They supposedly knocked it off up to 38 off in the 94 PT boat. The 95--97 also has the higher freeboard (sp), rough water ride (and a bit more interior space) advantage over 91--94, which used to be a huge complaint among the skiers who now complain about cruise controls with course times more than .02. seconds off of actual (take it easy, it's a joke).

BrianM
03-20-2008, 10:53 AM
They supposedly knocked it off up to 38 off in the 94 PT boat.
You keep saying this about the '94 PT boat but that was like what a half a dozen boats? I still want to see this supposed hull mod. The last picture that was supposedly of the mod looked the same as any other 91-94 to me.

wakeX2wake
03-20-2008, 10:56 AM
35-38 off... does that even get out off the swim platform?

east tx skier
03-20-2008, 11:04 AM
You keep saying this about the '94 PT boat but that was like what a half a dozen boats? I still want to see this supposed hull mod. The last picture that was supposedly of the mod looked the same as any other 91-94 to me.

I'd love to see one, too. My information is from Bret on this forum. I believe he promo'd for MC for several years. From his explanation, he has reached under one of the 94 PT boats and felt this mod. He described it as if someone had taken a rat tail file and carved out a very small section of the spray relief pocket about an inch forward of where it meets the transom. To me, it sounds like a little hook on the pocket. The only picture I've ever posted is one I drew based on his explanation of the mod. So I'm not sure which one you're talking about. But yes, there aren't many 94 PTs out there. But as it was described, I wouldn't be surprised if you could look at a picture of the boat, even close up, and not see this.

Jim@BAWS
03-20-2008, 11:17 AM
One thing I don't understand, if the '91-'94 is arguable the best hull design ever, why don't they do another run of them?

MasterCraft does...its called the 197. The 197 was born from that
hull era. Expanded and refined

Jim@BAWS

flipper
03-20-2008, 11:21 AM
MasterCraft does...its called the 197. The 197 was born from that
hull era. Expanded and refined

Jim@BAWS
Thanks, learn something new everyday.

BrianM
03-20-2008, 11:50 AM
But as it was described, I wouldn't be surprised if you could look at a picture of the boat, even close up, and not see this.
I have read the description many times before. BUT In order for it to knock down the spray that much it would most definitely have to be pretty readily visible to the eye especially when compared to the 'normal' hull.

east tx skier
03-20-2008, 12:12 PM
I have read the description many times before. BUT In order for it to knock down the spray that much it would most definitely have to be pretty readily visible to the eye especially when compared to the 'normal' hull.

Well, in my conversations with Bret on the subject, there was nothing to indicate to me that he was not being truthful about it. If I ever am up close and personal with a 1994 PT, I will give it a feel. But until then, I'll take him at his word. As I mentioned before, I think the hull change was as much about interior space and rough water ride than anything else. They could've put longer spray pockets on the 91--94 hull and been done with it if it was just about spray.

BrianM
03-20-2008, 12:15 PM
Well, in my conversations with Bret on the subject, there was nothing to indicate to me that he was not being truthful about it. .
I'm not calling the guy a liar. Anyone with a boat that shines that well has got be a stand up guy. I just think his memory may have faded a bit on the subject over the last 14years.:o

east tx skier
03-20-2008, 12:20 PM
I'm not calling the guy a liar. Anyone with a boat that shines that well has not be a stand up guy. I just think his memory may have faded a bit on the subject over the last 14years.:o

I know, you just called him forgetful. ;)

If I recall the story correctly, he was at a tournament in 1994 after he was no longer a promo driver. He was told about the mod by the driver or someone connected with the boat. Upon hearing this, he reached up under the pocket to feel it. In my opinion, that's not one of those boat flew off the test lake memory faded stories. Pretty specific account if you ask me.

But hopefully, Bret will read this and clear it up for us first hand as I don't have the PM saved any longer.

Dave@BAWS
03-22-2008, 11:24 AM
Hmm, interesting subject as I have one of the two 93 PT's and am pretty sure mine has not been modified. Jim and I will have to take a look and let you all know.
The best thing I did on mine was to run a 4 blade instead of the 3 blade which took care of the small rooster at 22 and 28 off. I have never had a spray problem, but then again, I do not run into 35-38 off :rolleyes:

Jim@BAWS
03-22-2008, 11:44 AM
Hmm, interesting subject as I have one of the two 93 PT's and am pretty sure mine has not been modified. Jim and I will have to take a look and let you all know.
The best thing I did on mine was to run a 4 blade instead of the 3 blade which took care of the small rooster at 22 and 28 off. I have never had a spray problem, but then again, I do not run into 35-38 off :rolleyes:


I ran 41 in Dave's boat one time...Oh we are talking rope length
not MPH My bag !!!

Actually I could probably run 41 off behind his boat...I move the boat WAY to the right and ski around the boat bouys and the outside bouys. Makes it ALOT easier that way !!! HA HA HA

Jim@BAWS

Jim@BAWS
03-22-2008, 11:45 AM
http://www.tmcowners.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=9470


Dave's BOAT...AWESOME to say the least

Jim@BAWS

JLeuck64
03-22-2008, 12:01 PM
I don't think I own a rope that goes into 41 off!!! Would be fun to try it sometime in open water though...

Ric
03-22-2008, 05:54 PM
One thing I don't understand, if the '91-'94 is arguable the best hull design ever, why don't they do another run of them? because the current hull is better than an 91-94 190:)