PDA

View Full Version : Is this claim true?


gts-20
06-14-2011, 07:19 PM
http://links.bonnierenthusiast.com/servlet/MailView?ms=NDg3OTQ0NAS2&r=NDYwMjkyOTgwMQS2&j=MTc5NDkwMDQzS0&mt=1&rt=0

Waterski magazine's article claiming that the new Sport Nautique 200 is the only record capable V-drive. What about the Prostar 214v? I could be wrong, but I thought it was record capable and AWSA certified before the new SN200v was even designed.

DooSPX
06-14-2011, 07:28 PM
I'm pretty sure you are correct gts!

GT500 MC
06-14-2011, 07:55 PM
I thought my '10 x14v was 3-event certified by AWSA and record-capable. Guess it doesn't really matter for an amateur like me--I would have bought it anyway.

Jim@BAWS
06-14-2011, 08:01 PM
http://links.bonnierenthusiast.com/servlet/MailView?ms=NDg3OTQ0NAS2&r=NDYwMjkyOTgwMQS2&j=MTc5NDkwMDQzS0&mt=1&rt=0

Waterski magazine's article claiming that the new Sport Nautique 200 is the only record capable V-drive. What about the Prostar 214v? I could be wrong, but I thought it was record capable and AWSA certified before the new SN200v was even designed.

All HYPE...so it is capable! So is the 214V...Do you see it pulling an event?..it is all in the wording ALL HYPE!!!

Jim@BAWS

captain planet
06-14-2011, 09:59 PM
Wow the tower on that thing is ugly.

thatsmrmastercraft
06-14-2011, 10:11 PM
Wow the tower on that thing is ugly.

Worse than a Bu tower.

JohnE
06-14-2011, 10:18 PM
It must be true....I read it on the internet....

Is it possible that MC didn't submit the 14V for approval this year? If so it doesn't change that the 14V was certified and nothing about the boat has changed to affect it's performance in an adverse way. I don't have time to go on awsa now.

DemolitionMan
06-14-2011, 10:23 PM
I received a post card in the mail about the 200.

MIskier
06-14-2011, 11:25 PM
The boat doesnt have to be retested every year unless there are "significant changes" to the design.

I rode in one of those 200's a couple of weeks ago and def would not drop the 65k+ for such an ugly boat.

plunk77
06-15-2011, 10:12 AM
as much as it looks like waterski magazine, its not. its a promotional Nautique website. So that explains why they would say that (at least a little.)

plunk77
06-15-2011, 10:13 AM
although it is pretty neat if you scroll down that Nautique makes an all electric boat. I wonder if that is really functional?

scott023
06-15-2011, 10:18 AM
Wow the tower on that thing is ugly.

Worse than a Bu tower.

X3. Wow. That's heinous.

shepherd
06-15-2011, 10:23 AM
Wow the tower on that thing is ugly.

It looks like it got bent after running into a low overpass while trailering.

But then, ALL towers are ugly IMO.

shepherd
06-15-2011, 10:27 AM
although it is pretty neat if you scroll down that Nautique makes an all electric boat. I wonder if that is really functional?

I read a review about the electric ski boat a while ago - forgot where, probably linked from the Waterski forum. IIRC, the batteries are only good for about 1 or 2 short sets, and then you have to take it back to the dock for an overnight charge.

MIskier
06-15-2011, 11:30 AM
although it is pretty neat if you scroll down that Nautique makes an all electric boat. I wonder if that is really functional?

I took a spin in it a few weeks ago when a local dealer had it. The EE responsible for the design said that they are getting 32-36 slalom passes at 36mph which would be 4-6 sets. The boat is only an engineering prototype and marketing tool right now.

east tx skier
06-15-2011, 11:36 AM
I don't care for the tower either. One of our club members test drove and skied behind one in January and traded his 206 for it on the spot. I haven't gotten to ski behind it yet, but apparently, it's got a pretty nice ski wake, at least nice enough for a course skier to trade in his 2006 direct drive.

As for the AWSA approval, the 214v was approved in 2009. Unless something has changed, that approval is good for 2 years. So it maintains that approval for 2010.

I think the distinction lies in the fact that the 214v was approved for class c events only (somebody correct me if my memory on this is inaccurate). The Sport 200 has the same approval for 2010 as the SN 200, 190, 197, etc.

To say that it is hype is to say that the 214v's approval was hype. Frankly, I don't think either claim is any more or less hype than the other.

87MCProstar
06-15-2011, 12:19 PM
Eastie, love the bottom of your sig. Explains it perfectly! Sorry for thread jack

Shooter McKevin
06-15-2011, 12:44 PM
although it is pretty neat if you scroll down that Nautique makes an all electric boat. I wonder if that is really functional?

I took a spin in it a few weeks ago when a local dealer had it. The EE responsible for the design said that they are getting 32-36 slalom passes at 36mph which would be 4-6 sets. The boat is only an engineering prototype and marketing tool right now.

I love the Electric Powered Ski Boat thread (http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/showthread.php?t=39440). One of my all time favorites. I tried to give it a bump once before but I guess it's run it's course.

east tx skier
06-15-2011, 04:50 PM
Eastie, love the bottom of your sig. Explains it perfectly! Sorry for thread jack

Thanks. Every time I think about changing it, I read it again and decide to leave it alone.

east tx skier
06-15-2011, 04:51 PM
I love the Electric Powered Ski Boat thread (http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/showthread.php?t=39440). One of my all time favorites. I tried to give it a bump once before but I guess it's run it's course.

I could have sworn I read that that boat pulled a tournament recently.

Ski-me
06-15-2011, 05:09 PM
After watching the video, I actually like the boat. It shows it being very multi-functional but also looks like a decent ski wake. I'm not horified by the tower either.......I've seen better but I've definitely seen worse!

Nice lookin' boat.

MIskier
06-15-2011, 05:16 PM
I could have sworn I read that that boat pulled a tournament recently.

At Masters it pulled Mapple and one of the LaPoints

east tx skier
06-15-2011, 09:23 PM
At Masters it pulled Mapple and one of the LaPoints

And then they charged it for 8 hours. ;)

I kid. I kid.

CantRepeat
06-15-2011, 09:31 PM
It must be true....I read it on the internet....



Yup, I ran 38 off today, while skiing backwards!

trickskier
06-15-2011, 09:52 PM
I received a post card in the mail about the 200.

Can you mail order one and aviod paying state sales taxes?

10ptmust
06-16-2011, 02:44 AM
I think the distinction lies in the fact that the 214v was approved for class c events only (somebody correct me if my memory on this is inaccurate). The Sport 200 has the same approval for 2010 as the SN 200, 190, 197, etc.

This was my understanding as well. The SN predecessor to this boat was also class c, which is why I considered it when I transitioned from my DD to my v drive.

kskonn
06-16-2011, 03:36 AM
And then they charged it for 8 hours. ;)

I kid. I kid.

WE no your kidding, they charged it for 16 hours.

shepherd
06-23-2011, 05:34 PM
The EE responsible for the design said that they are getting 32-36 slalom passes at 36mph which would be 4-6 sets.

Right. That's only a couple short sets for me. ;)

aquaman
06-23-2011, 05:47 PM
Wow the tower on that thing is ugly.

Uggh....that tower looks like the designer changed his mind! :eek:

CC has had better looking boats in the past.

JohnE
06-23-2011, 05:56 PM
As for the AWSA approval, the 214v was approved in 2009. Unless something has changed, that approval is good for 2 years. So it maintains that approval for 2010.

I think the distinction lies in the fact that the 214v was approved for class c events only (somebody correct me if my memory on this is inaccurate). The Sport 200 has the same approval for 2010 as the SN 200, 190, 197, etc.

.

The 214V was certified for record capable. I do think that one of the N's were certified as class c. That was the distinction at the time. The 214V was the only record certified v drive.

east tx skier
06-24-2011, 12:07 AM
Wouldn't that be class R? The limitatiion on the 214v was C when it was introduced. But you are correct that, back then, no CC drives had a certification. But now, they have a drive with the same certification as the 197.

JohnE
06-24-2011, 10:31 AM
Wouldn't that be class R? The limitatiion on the 214v was C when it was introduced. But you are correct that, back then, no CC drives had a certification. But now, they have a drive with the same certification as the 197.

Yes, class R. I'm 99% sure that the 214V was certified as record capable since it's introduction.

TX.X-30 fan
06-24-2011, 11:12 AM
I think some here are certifiable.

east tx skier
06-24-2011, 11:15 AM
Yes, class R. I'm 99% sure that the 214V was certified as record capable since it's introduction.

After the current year, USA Waterski drops all of the details from its AWSA Certification History page. So all you'll see is certified or not. It's sort of splitting hairs, I know, which is really why it's a bunch of marketing hype. You'll rarely, if ever, see a v-drive pulling a tournament. I don't know what Class C is, frankly. But I remember the distinction being made at one point or another.

If you're really interested, call the AWSA and asking for the original certification info. I don't know that I care enough about it to do that, but that's the best way to know for sure. If my memory is wrong about the "class c" thing, my sincere apologies for putting out any incorrect information.

east tx skier
06-24-2011, 11:18 AM
I think some here are certifiable.

Are you standing up and introducing yourself? ;)

-V-
06-24-2011, 11:29 AM
what are classes? and is there a list of accronyms out there?

east tx skier
06-24-2011, 11:40 AM
Class C: standard local tournaments in which all ratings other than Open may be earned (whatever that means).

I'm starting to think my old fart brain may be failing me and that it was the 211v that was class c approved. One of them was.

east tx skier
06-24-2011, 11:46 AM
Okay, I lied. I am curious. I just emailed AWSA.

/Yes, TX30, certifiable.

east tx skier
06-24-2011, 12:00 PM
I don't know, but if you want to dig, I'm sure you can find it on usawaterski.org.

I'm starting to think my old fart brain may be failing me and that it was the 211v that was class c approved. One of them was.

east tx skier
06-24-2011, 12:02 PM
Okay, I take it all back. Thanks to google docs, 214v approved with MCX, 1.56:1; OJ, 4, 13.7 x 17.5, and Zero Off.

Link to Source (http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:ZgWIpv50aEwJ:www.schnitzskis.com/images/Towboat_Comm_Report_12_2008.doc+2009+awsa+approved +tournament+towboats&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESh3DzkJQFpWzM7wXX7h3FxnOO0MoQitcp7Evu82 dZ75G_JF_nvqV73hEwhraaVu9b3QqrbVub6BlZoonQSbnnSpXh fJ9JKuizoI-WW7mID82IyQAWsNCqEioySAiimmdgX1MjP4&sig=AHIEtbQPVEVLPS53YXWhT4H3wIkSIuSazw)

My sincere apologies for the incorrect information previously. I must have been remembering the CC 211v being approved in 2005 or thereabouts for Class C.

So the record certifications, assuming no changes, i.e., Ilmor engine, are good for 3 years.

Finally, it looks like that WSM article is incorrect. Probably worth noting that MC's website states, "[T]he ProStar 214v is the only V-Drive boat to receive three-event World Record certification from USA Waterski."

Not exactly. :)

JohnE
06-24-2011, 12:17 PM
Okay, I take it all back. Thanks to google docs, 214v approved with MCX, 1.56:1; OJ, 4, 13.7 x 17.5, and Zero Off.

Link to Source (http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:ZgWIpv50aEwJ:www.schnitzskis.com/images/Towboat_Comm_Report_12_2008.doc+2009+awsa+approved +tournament+towboats&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESh3DzkJQFpWzM7wXX7h3FxnOO0MoQitcp7Evu82 dZ75G_JF_nvqV73hEwhraaVu9b3QqrbVub6BlZoonQSbnnSpXh fJ9JKuizoI-WW7mID82IyQAWsNCqEioySAiimmdgX1MjP4&sig=AHIEtbQPVEVLPS53YXWhT4H3wIkSIuSazw)

My sincere apologies for the incorrect information previously. I must have been remembering the CC 211v being approved in 2005 or thereabouts for Class C.
So are the record certifications good for 2 or 3 years at this point? I recall their changing that at some point.

Thats what I was trying to remember in one of my posts. I couldn't cite any sources for the 214V certification and didn't do the research that you did, I just remembered that at it's introduction it was the only 'record certified vdrive' on the market. The marketing made it appear to be the only 'certified' v-drive, but I also remembered cc having one certified but not the R class. Thanks for clearing it up.

TX.X-30 fan
06-24-2011, 12:42 PM
Are you standing up and introducing yourself? ;)




I'm not a lone wolf here. :D

east tx skier
06-24-2011, 01:00 PM
Thats what I was trying to remember in one of my posts. I couldn't cite any sources for the 214V certification and didn't do the research that you did, I just remembered that at it's introduction it was the only 'record certified vdrive' on the market. The marketing made it appear to be the only 'certified' v-drive, but I also remembered cc having one certified but not the R class. Thanks for clearing it up.

No problem. Sorry for all the confusion.

TX.X-30 fan
06-24-2011, 01:05 PM
No problem. Sorry for all the confusion.


Maybe a simple disclaimer like the Arizona guy would help?



"Not intended to be a factual statement". :confused:

east tx skier
06-24-2011, 01:13 PM
Maybe a simple disclaimer like the Arizona guy would help?



"Not intended to be a factual statement". :confused:

I don't see any reason to make my signature longer than it is.

Those times when I'm right about something are probably just lucid intervals.

TxsRiverRat
06-24-2011, 01:23 PM
BTW - since we're talking about claims being made...

Is it true that wakeboarding is alot easier that slalom trick jump or barefoot?

:D:D:D:D

scott023
06-24-2011, 01:58 PM
BTW - since we're talking about claims being made...

Is it true that wakeboarding is alot easier that slalom trick jump or barefoot?

:D:D

It has got to be. Why don't you go strap one on and see how easy it is. :rolleyes::D

TxsRiverRat
06-24-2011, 02:11 PM
It has got to be. Why don't you go strap one on and see how easy it is.

Buwahahahaha! :uglyhamme:uglyhamme:uglyhamme:uglyhamme

TX.X-30 fan
06-24-2011, 02:46 PM
I don't see any reason to make my signature longer than it is.

Those times when I'm right about something are probably just lucid intervals.



I can understand you wanting to keep your sig. as is and tend to agree with the intervals.

east tx skier
06-24-2011, 03:24 PM
http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/yhst-61826598858317_2164_10820635

east tx skier
06-28-2011, 01:05 PM
Okay, so AWSA replied stating, as we now know, the 214v was record approved in 2009. I asked them if that lasted 3 or 4 years. Here is their response.

"Their approval expired after 2009 because they chose not to renew it. Currently, if a model remains unchanged and the manufacturer chooses to renew the approval each year, that model only needs to be physically tested every 3 years."

So the statement for the Sport 200 is technically true. It is, currently, the only record approved v-drive, since the 214v was not renewed.