PDA

View Full Version : I was drooling over the new PS190 @ MC's website...


flya750
03-02-2011, 08:30 PM
and I came across this new tid bit of info..

What is technologically advanced gelcoat ? anyone know? ;)

I think with the new interior on the MC's.. the PS190 is the new bad *** in town no question for die hard slalom guys...

I've done a lot of analyzing the new SN200 and I like it but I think if you get a SN200 you have to get the 409 and that is a ~30% increase in fuel consumption.. so to me.. that means the MC pulls ahead ;)

I still don't like that MC billet dash board... I do like the new steering wheel however. I would like one of those for my older PS190.

But wow... this is the first time I actually would consider any other boat over my '97 PS190. w/LT1...The new PS190 just look awesome man...WOW!..:D

.......back to MC's website for more drooling.. ;)

flya750
03-02-2011, 08:37 PM
thought I would add a little eye candy to sweeten' the post ;)
..the ice will be gone soon ;)

Double D
03-02-2011, 09:26 PM
Now that you put your 190 infatuation out there for all of us to see, I looked up the 190 and said, "hey that looks like a 197". So I checked and just realized that the size spec's on the 190 are the same as the 197. Length is 19'-8" and width is 91". So its just like the SN200 with an option for closed or open bow. Do you or anyone know who developed that scenario first? MC or CC?? If I am behind the game a bit, kiss my butt!! ;) Its not like I have been shopping for a new boat....

Sorry for the threadjack....:rolleyes:

east tx skier
03-02-2011, 09:37 PM
The 190 is gorgeous, but I'm not sure why you'd have to get the 409 with a SN 200. I haven't heard too many complaints about the Excal in that boat when it is paired with the right prop.

DooSPX
03-02-2011, 09:52 PM
I believe the 197 and 190 have been the same mold since the introduction of the 197. One with open bow, one closed bow.

MIskier
03-02-2011, 10:42 PM
The 190/197 have been on the same hull since their introduction, 190 has always been a little lighter.

East,

The reason a lot of guys are going for the 409 is because the 200 hull represents a little more than a 20% increase in wetted surface area over the 196. The way that the extra 20% is designed also adds a huge amount of drag which means on short lakes or at altitude getting up to speed nice and quick can be a problem.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=495961537015&set=a.421466652015.197338.549632015&theater

east tx skier
03-02-2011, 10:52 PM
I believe the 197 and 190 have been the same mold since the introduction of the 197. One with open bow, one closed bow.

The 190 EVO was released in 2001 and the 197 was released the following year.

east tx skier
03-02-2011, 10:54 PM
The 190/197 have been on the same hull since their introduction, 190 has always been a little lighter.

East,

The reason a lot of guys are going for the 409 is because the 200 hull represents a little more than a 20% increase in wetted surface area over the 196. The way that the extra 20% is designed also adds a huge amount of drag which means on short lakes or at altitude getting up to speed nice and quick can be a problem.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=495961537015&set=a.421466652015.197338.549632015&theater

I understand. I have heard of people needing a little more at altitude for sure. I just wasn't sure how that differentiated it from the 190 in those same circumstances. :)

The 196 was crazy quick with minimal power. I think it was something like 0--36 in 4.8 seconds with the 350.

MIskier
03-02-2011, 11:04 PM
I understand. I have heard of people needing a little more at altitude for sure. I just wasn't sure how that differentiated it from the 190 in those same circumstances. :)

The 196 was crazy quick with minimal power. I think it was something like 0--36 in 4.8 seconds with the 350.

Yes if you look at the bottom of the hull of the 200 all of those leading edges that you see create a huge amount of drag, but this has a nice side effect of being able to dampen the response of ZO. The 190 hull really isnt terribly efficient either with the large hook...but still far more efficient than a 200 in the hydrodynamic respect.

flya750
03-03-2011, 03:30 AM
East,

One of my requirements for a closed bow ski boat is of course performance and I just think the SN200 w/350 doesn't have what it takes to get my $$$ and the 409 w/ gas prices just kills the SN200 for me... If I'm subjectively reviewing them all I just think the MC pulled farther ahead.. or the SN missed a gear so to speak ;)

Now.. can anyone answer my original question ? What is this new advanced gelcoat that MC claims to have?

JohnE
03-03-2011, 09:03 AM
I've heard the rumblings that the SN200 is a huge gas hog with the amount of wetted surface, and possibly with the larger motor that is preferred in that boat. That some ski schools are so unhappy with their new gas bills that they are switching to MC. I can't offer any proof, just a tidbit I heard. Take it for what it's worth.

Shooter McKevin
03-03-2011, 11:24 AM
I was talking to Jaret Llewellen at the boat show about the SN200. He said that the slalom wake is great but it is too slow for jump and fly. Of course he was working for MC at the show.

Sorry flya, haven't heard anything about the gel. Probably just marketing, ie 9 minute abs!

east tx skier
03-03-2011, 11:49 AM
East,

One of my requirements for a closed bow ski boat is of course performance and I just think the SN200 w/350 doesn't have what it takes to get my $$$ and the 409 w/ gas prices just kills the SN200 for me... If I'm subjectively reviewing them all I just think the MC pulled farther ahead.. or the SN missed a gear so to speak ;)

Now.. can anyone answer my original question ? What is this new advanced gelcoat that MC claims to have?

I'm not suggesting you buy one or the other. Doesn't really matter to me. I'm not buying a 200 either. But, as mentioned above, the 190/197 has not been known as the swiftest boat out of the hole with the base engine or MCX. The hooked hull has long been known as the culprit for both improved wake and handling and the expense of lower top end due to more wetted surface and drag.

I don't subscribe to WSM any more and would like to see the data comparison on acceleration between the two boats with the 350s. Most of the guys I have heard complaining about the 200 are former 196 owners who were used to their nimble little closed bows designed as closed bows. Their complaint was largely that CC was now designing open bows and glassing over them and calling them closed bows. They have become accustomed to the view and handling of what they refer to as "true" closed bows. Being familiar with the view from the cockpit of a SN, I wouldn't want to give it up for bow seating either.

But I also know of 200 owners who say that with the 350, it takes about 1/4 throttle to get most skiers up and going in the course. There is plenty to read about on BallofSpray about people who have done comparisons with fuel usage as well. The 200 does indeed use more fuel than the 196. I think there is a comparison in fuel usage between it and the 197 as well. Worth a read if you're interested in the data some of the owners have collected.

Having not driven one, I don't really know how it performs. My only basis of comparison is the 196 versus the 197, both of which I drive regularly and concerning which, I have a pretty solid opinion.

As for the advanced gelcoat technology, I doubt the formula has changed. But MC may have started spraying it differently or being a little more liberal with its application. Probably marketing hype, but don't know for sure.

Shooter McKevin
03-03-2011, 11:57 AM
That reminds me...did they even do a 2011 BBG? (new thread)

east tx skier
03-03-2011, 12:02 PM
That reminds me...did they even do a 2011 BBG? (new thread)

It's possible it wasn't recognizable as a "guide" and was tossed out with advertisements in my mailbox.

/just kidding. Haven't subscribed to WSM in years.