PDA

View Full Version : Slalom Wake Discussion: Which is Best?


aswinter05
10-15-2012, 09:15 AM
I've searched and read a couple other threads that are similar, however, I wasn't very happy with the answers. Nothing definitive enough for me to come to a conclusion as a reader.

I'm getting ready to buy a different MasterCraft for next year. Just joined a ski club and I want a 190 or a 197 for the course. The wake on my 209 is "fine", however, I've skied behind a 197 at the same speeds and can tell a difference.

I've narrowed my search down to a 1994+ 190 or a 2000's 190/197. I definitely want Perfect Pass and Fuel injection. Those are a must. Other than that, nothing else really matters except (of course) the quality of the wake.

Currently we ski the course at 30 MPH but obviously that will change as we improve. I've heard a lot about the late 1990's PS 190. I've also heard good things about the 2003+ 197's.

Looking for the best "ALL AROUND SLALOM" wake. Answers from those who have experienced all the wakes are encouraged. No bias pretty please :)

jkski
10-15-2012, 09:26 AM
I think some of the answer depends on how much you are looking to spend and how you will be using the boat when not in the course?
For pure skiing, in my opinion, you really can't go wrong with either choice but obviously, technology has improved thru the years so the newer hulls will offer benefits. I can not speak for the older 190's but I can tell you that the wake on the newer 197's is not very good at the 28-32 mph mark, depending of course on rope length and whether or not the skier is on edge. If the skier is on edge then the wake will not matter but if they are at 15 off and riding flat, they will get launched.
So, maybe not what you want to hear but, in my opinion if you ski right, any of the boats you mentioned will do the trick and will not be a limiting factor in your success.

ntidsl
10-15-2012, 09:59 AM
What club did you join? My suggestion for club skiing would be a 197 2005+.

aswinter05
10-15-2012, 10:08 AM
What club did you join? My suggestion for club skiing would be a 197 2005+.

It's a ski club in Shelbyville Indiana of about 20 people. Besides owning a 2005 197, why do you recommend the 2005+ over a 2003 or 2004 197? What changes were made in the later years that make the wake better?

Double D
10-15-2012, 10:26 AM
I have always heard the 1994 year hull has one of the best slalom wakes. Not sure its its just the 205 or also the 190. People with experience can shout out and provide better information. Good Luck!

TxsRiverRat
10-15-2012, 10:41 AM
I get to ski behind a lot of different boats and different year models – both Mastercraft and some of those “off brands...” ;)

Since you are deadset on a Mastercraft, I wont tell you that the SNs currently have the best slalom wake in the business, we’ll stick to Mastercraft talk.

The Mastercraft PS190 pre-1998 was awesome. They changed the hull and had a lot of issues, and I think they changed it again in 99. There is a thread here on TT that details it all. I really like the wake on Kyles 93 PS190, but its not EFI. The 1996 PS190 was EFI and skied awesome.

I have a 1993 PS205 and it also has a wonderful wake. There is however the infamous 22’ off bump. Fix your form, and you wont feel it (seriously). You have to have the ski on edge for it or it will punish you.

Any year of PS197 that I have skied behind skis great. Seems the wake is a little wider on it (to me anyways), but there is no 22’ off bump.

I will say that my experience has been that the older Prostars track better than the PS197.

It’s your choice... The 197 is modern, has more creature comforts, will be easier to get parts and service on. The older Prostars are timeless beautiful classics that you can take pride in restoring, have a cool factor at the lake, and ski and track awesome.

JohnE
10-15-2012, 10:48 AM
It's a ski club in Shelbyville Indiana of about 20 people. Besides owning a 2005 197, why do you recommend the 2005+ over a 2003 or 2004 197? What changes were made in the later years that make the wake better?

My assumption is because 05 and newer are drive by wire.

Phntmski
10-15-2012, 01:35 PM
91 - 94 PS190s are the same excellent hull, different cosmetics. I believe they introduced the fuel injection option in 94. From what I understand MasterCraft got kinda lost for a few years after 94 and the slalom wake was not so great for a while. Not exactly sure when they got back on track. There is a lot of info available here on TT, just have to look a little.

Do you need open bow for family friendly? Technology has definitely improved boats. Now the boats are bigger for more storage, family or just elbow room.

For money and purpose my 91 is just right, solid tracking, great 3 event boat and great price when I got it in 04. Also, lots of resources for DIY.

JohnE
10-15-2012, 01:37 PM
91 -94 were a home run and then the hull was changed for 95 - 97 and was still a great wake. 98 - 00 were considered not up to par by many

TxsRiverRat
10-15-2012, 01:40 PM
For money and purpose my 91 is just right, solid tracking, great 3 event boat and great price when I got it in 04. Also, lots of resources for DIY.

My boats better! 8p 8p 8p

LOL

aswinter05
10-15-2012, 01:58 PM
91 -94 were a home run and then the hull was changed for 95 - 97 and was still a great wake. 98 - 00 were considered not up to par by many

Do the '94's come with Perfect Pass or any other type of cruise control?

TxsRiverRat
10-15-2012, 02:04 PM
Do the '94's come with Perfect Pass or any other type of cruise control?

No they did not

Bouyhead
10-15-2012, 02:24 PM
I don't know how practical this is but it helps to ski behind a boat you are seriously considering buying. Most slalom tugs are designed for 34-36 MPH skiers skiing 28 off and shorter. The problem is alot of folks ski 15 off at slower speeds and that is where you'll see a big difference in the wake from the different hulls or different manufacturers. I spent MANY years chipping away at all those different speeds at 15 off! If your a natural born athlete, train year round on a private lake, and have top notch coaching you won't spend much time @ 30 MPH. If your like the general poulation you'll have a lot fun/frustration chipping away @ 30 When folks complain about a large wake at slow speeds or a bump @ 22 someone will chime in and say "keep your ski on edge,etc" Guess what? If you did everthing correctly you wouldn't be skiing 30 MPH! Anyone who can run 28 off or shorter @ 34 or 36 isn't going to notice the difference from boat to boat. Try to get a boat that will help your skiing, not hinder it. It does make a difference. Good Luck!

Man, it's going to be a long winter:mad:

east tx skier
10-15-2012, 02:41 PM
No they did not

But it can be added.

The previous posts have hit most of the high points. As far as slalom wake goes, you really can't go wrong with the years mentioned. Since we're talking EFI, you'll be looking at 93 and later boats. Early 197s still had a foiled rudder. 2002 TT/2003 Standard 190/197 have the hooked hull. 2005 got throttle by wire on the MCX. 2006 got the updated rudder and TBW across the board. There was a weight loss in the bow in around 2008 or so. 2011 had the bullet strut. 2012 Got Ilmor. 2007 and forward can have Zero Off.

These various boats will all ski and drive differently. In the 197, the boats can feel different from year to year, i.e., I know people who love the 2010, but don't love the 2011. No idea why.

You need to drive and ski whatever you consider. It is the only way to be sure.

TxsRiverRat
10-15-2012, 02:50 PM
You need to drive and ski whatever you consider. It is the only way to be sure.

I volunteer to go and test drive / ski :D

ntidsl
10-15-2012, 03:01 PM
I say +05 as they are drive by wire...yes...electronics are just going to make it best for whtaver you coose, PP or otherwise but you will need a good speed control system if you are going to be skiing in a club. I, personally, never felt as comfortable sking behind an older boat that someone installed PP themselves. It just never was as consistent as a new boat with factory installed PP on a drive by wire boat.

ntidsl
10-15-2012, 03:02 PM
I don't know how practical this is but it helps to ski behind a boat you are seriously considering buying. Most slalom tugs are designed for 34-36 MPH skiers skiing 28 off and shorter. The problem is alot of folks ski 15 off at slower speeds and that is where you'll see a big difference in the wake from the different hulls or different manufacturers. I spent MANY years chipping away at all those different speeds at 15 off! If your a natural born athlete, train year round on a private lake, and have top notch coaching you won't spend much time @ 30 MPH. If your like the general poulation you'll have a lot fun/frustration chipping away @ 30 When folks complain about a large wake at slow speeds or a bump @ 22 someone will chime in and say "keep your ski on edge,etc" Guess what? If you did everthing correctly you wouldn't be skiing 30 MPH! Anyone who can run 28 off or shorter @ 34 or 36 isn't going to notice the difference from boat to boat. Try to get a boat that will help your skiing, not hinder it. It does make a difference. Good Luck!

Man, it's going to be a long winter:mad:


Great post! Agree with all above!!!

ntidsl
10-15-2012, 05:29 PM
http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/showthread.php?t=51371

Here you go. Have dealer install PP. All set.

madcityskier
10-15-2012, 05:58 PM
And throw a couple stars on the side while they're at it. Beautiful boat. As has been said, ski it.

ntidsl
10-15-2012, 06:14 PM
I just happen to see it come up as i was reading this post. That is a good looking boat. I tend to like the TTs with the larger graphics but that is a close second. Strange to not have PP though I think.

east tx skier
10-15-2012, 06:56 PM
I volunteer to go and test drive / ski :D

My boat is ready to test, but is not for sale. :)

TxsRiverRat
10-16-2012, 01:38 AM
My boat is ready to test, but is not for sale. :)

Next season, you me and Kyle need to GTG and ski... :cool:

vrsc
10-16-2012, 06:08 AM
That is a good looking boat. I tend to like the TTs with the larger graphics but that is a close second. Strange to not have PP though I think.

Agreed great looking boat but hard to believe no PP

Phntmski
10-16-2012, 07:30 AM
Next season, you me and Kyle need to GTG and ski... :cool:

What about me?
:(

Skipper
10-16-2012, 07:35 AM
Skiing on a private lake just to swerve through the course I would go with a 94 Prostar with EFI. Despite the speculation, I installed PP and later upgraded to Stargazer on my 95 Prostar and I get times that are perfect or within .02 through the course at 34mph. No issues with installing PP on the older boats.

My 95 rides deeper in the water but has less spray than the 94. I replaced the rudder with the winged rudder from the crappy years. That gives my 95 a very smooth wake. But again, pulling through the course on a private lake I would go with the 94 with EFI. Throw in the power slot transmission and you will be totally squared away.

mikeg205
10-16-2012, 07:59 AM
I am with Bouyhead - not much difference at higher speeds....feeling the bump means your out of form and/or getting tired. So lot's of good choices out there for you.

I have a 1995 PS205 which I would not even trade for EastTX's boat .. :D Boat would never turn down a tow from his boat... :D

Double D
10-16-2012, 08:23 AM
Do the '94's come with Perfect Pass or any other type of cruise control?

It does if you had it added! :D:D

19_Skier
10-16-2012, 08:57 AM
The best boat for you depends on what your goals are in the course (and budget of course!). If you have joined the club just to enjoy having a place to ski and are not interested in running tournaments, any of the above suggestions with PP would be a great boat.

If, however, you are serious about getting in tournaments maybe you should be looking at a zero-off boat (2007 and up I believe). Alternatively, you can install ZBox on a Stargazer PP system as well to get a similar pull to ZO.

No matter what MC you choose, at your (read: my) speed you will be dealing with a bump at longer lines. Personally I find the bump forces me to practice good form and I think has allowed me to progress faster because if I am not thinking about my form, that bump will remind me in a hurry!

aswinter05
10-16-2012, 09:08 AM
The best boat for you depends on what your goals are in the course (and budget of course!). If you have joined the club just to enjoy having a place to ski and are not interested in running tournaments, any of the above suggestions with PP would be a great boat.

If, however, you are serious about getting in tournaments maybe you should be looking at a zero-off boat (2007 and up I believe). Alternatively, you can install ZBox on a Stargazer PP system as well to get a similar pull to ZO.

No matter what MC you choose, at your (read: my) speed you will be dealing with a bump at longer lines. Personally I find the bump forces me to practice good form and I think has allowed me to progress faster because if I am not thinking about my form, that bump will remind me in a hurry!

I haven't narrowed my goals down to specifics. All I know is I want the best ALL AROUND slalom wake. I don't care about open bow vs. closed bow. I want a wake that beginners can enjoy and a wake that pros can appreciate. Tournaments are doubtful, but hey... you never know! I have a couple 1994's that I need to check out.

Does anyone know how much it would cost to add PP? Parts and labor? That could factor into my decision making process.

As for price.... I'm willing to spend up to $35k (ish). More ideally though... inside 30K

mikeg205
10-16-2012, 09:09 AM
Perfect Pass is about $1400... and fairly easy DIY job.

JohnE
10-16-2012, 09:17 AM
I haven't narrowed my goals down to specifics. All I know is I want the best ALL AROUND slalom wake. I don't care about open bow vs. closed bow. I want a wake that beginners can enjoy and a wake that pros can appreciate. Tournaments are doubtful, but hey... you never know! I have a couple 1994's that I need to check out.

Does anyone know how much it would cost to add PP? Parts and labor? That could factor into my decision making process.

As for price.... I'm willing to spend up to $35k (ish). More ideally though... inside 30K

Best ALL AROUND will likely be a 91 - 94. Better longline but subject to shortline spray. Everything is a trade off. Pro's would prefer a new boat, no doubt.

There isn't a boat that has the best ever longline wake and the best ever shortline. Except maybe the 200.

ntidsl
10-16-2012, 09:33 AM
With that budget you could get whatever you want...now if it were me and I have that money in cash in this economy I would buy a 94 have someone install perfect pass perfectly and invest the left over. If I were borrowing the money I would go 94. I say this as I get the impression you are young and that money would be better off in the market. If you are over 35 with a nest egg, get 2005+, under 35 '94. I'm a tight ash that paid cash for my boat when the market was high and it was a good decision.

Phntmski
10-16-2012, 10:12 AM
Perfect Pass is about $1400... and fairly easy DIY job.

Agreed, if you can install a car stereo you can install PP. With stargazer I don't think the paddlewheel is necessary other than for water thermometer.

TxsRiverRat
10-16-2012, 10:35 AM
I haven't narrowed my goals down to specifics. All I know is I want the best ALL AROUND slalom wake.

I would not hunt with the wrong gun the same way I would not ski with the wrong boat. There are slalom boats, wakeboard boats, fishing boats, sail boats, tug boats, pontoons, deck boats and there are houseboats. You need to select a boat that satisfies your primary discipline 1st and worry about the time wasters you enjoy after the serious stuff is over.

I don't care about open bow vs. closed bow.

Yes, you do... Or you should... The 190 and 205 drive and handle quite a bit differently.

I want a wake that beginners can enjoy and a wake that pros can appreciate.

For slalom, you have your choices made for you: 190, 197 or 205. Start shopping :D


As for price.... I'm willing to spend up to $35k (ish). More ideally though... inside 30K

I’ll sell you my PS205 for 30k ;)


Does anyone know how much it would cost to add PP? Parts and labor? That could factor into my decision making process.

As far as PP goes, it’s essential you invest the money in it. I drove for one of my club members the other day and his boat did not have PP... And it’s been years since I drove one manual – he waster 32 MPH and I could not get it to where he was. At the end of the pass he said “Now, that wasn’t 32 now was it...?” “Um no, sorry, it’s been a while since I drove manual...” SMH

feeling the bump means your out of form and/or getting tired.

Winner winner chicken dinner!

I have a 1995 PS205 which I would not even trade for EastTX's boat .. :D Boat would never turn down a tow from his boat... :D

Those skiers who own boat with counter spinning props are such elitist ski snobs, aren’t they! :D

What about me? :(

Scott, if you’re ever up for a trip out to Tyler, and ETS invites us out, of course you can come out. Now don’t cry – see you tonight man! :D

Ski-me
10-16-2012, 11:03 AM
Agreed, if you can install a car stereo you can install PP. With stargazer I don't think the paddlewheel is necessary other than for water thermometer.

I found a used PP 6.5ng module for $100 and then bought everything else new for $526. I did not install a paddlewheel though. For slalom, PP only needs the RPM's to maintain speed. Definitely worth installing for SURE!! I bought all that gear a few years ago so the price may be slightly higher now.....

TxsRiverRat
10-16-2012, 11:14 AM
I found a used PP 6.5ng module for $100 and then bought everything else new for $526. I did not install a paddlewheel though. For slalom, PP only needs the RPM's to maintain speed. Definitely worth installing for SURE!! I bought all that gear a few years ago so the price may be slightly higher now.....

If you are not on a Stargazer or Zero Off, you do need a paddle wheel to calibrate the perfectpass to a slalom course.

Otherwise, you might as well have no perfectpass at all and have the observer have a hand held stopwatch.

aswinter05
10-16-2012, 11:30 AM
Yes, you do... Or you should... The 190 and 205 drive and handle quite a bit differently.

I don't care about closed bow vs. open bow because the only two boats I was considering were the 190 or 197. From what I've read/heard, the newer models 190 and 197 have the same wake being that both boats have identical hulls and weigh the same (2,620 lbs. according to the 2005 owner's manual).

Also, I'm not too concerned about how the boats drive. I'm way more concerned about the wake. I'm sure both boats drive exceptionally well.

As for the 205... I haven't heard much about their wakes being the best. If they are... then it sounds like I should have my eyes open for them too.

Anyone have opinions on the 205 and their slalom wake compared to that of a 190/197? Using 1994 as an example, I've always assumed that the extra 1 ft. length of the 205 and extra hundred pounds of weight or so on the 205 made the wake a bit less ideal? If there is no wake difference in the two then I'm excited because used 205's seem to be slightly more abundant in my area. And just FYI, I'm not talking the 205-V.

Ski-me
10-16-2012, 11:41 AM
If you are not on a Stargazer or Zero Off, you do need a paddle wheel to calibrate the perfectpass to a slalom course.

Otherwise, you might as well have no perfectpass at all and have the observer have a hand held stopwatch.

I don't have a course to ski on, unfortunately. If I did, I would certainly look into it further, but it definitley works for open water (and short lakes!!):D

I do calibrate it with a gps but maybe not as precise as a course.

TxsRiverRat
10-16-2012, 11:48 AM
I don't care about closed bow vs. open bow because the only two boats I was considering were the 190 or 197. From what I've read/heard, the newer models 190 and 197 have the same wake being that both boats have identical hulls and weigh the same (2,620 lbs. according to the 2005 owner's manual).

Also, I'm not too concerned about how the boats drive. I'm way more concerned about the wake. I'm sure both boats drive exceptionally well.

As for the 205... I haven't heard much about their wakes being the best. If they are... then it sounds like I should have my eyes open for them too.

Anyone have opinions on the 205 and their slalom wake compared to that of a 190/197? Using 1994 as an example, I've always assumed that the extra 1 ft. length of the 205 and extra hundred pounds of weight or so on the 205 made the wake a bit less ideal? If there is no wake difference in the two then I'm excited because used 205's seem to be slightly more abundant in my area. And just FYI, I'm not talking the 205-V.


OK, that you have a point on - comparing similar year model 190 vs 197, yes, they will have the same or little difference. if you compare an older mid 90s 190 to todays 190 or 197, there is a big difference.

You should still care about open vs closed from a resale value perspective... Say you have to get out from under that boat, you're going to hold onto a closed bow for alot longer than open bow.

I own a 93 PS205 and the wake is pretty awesome - I think they changed the hull on the 205 in 1996. My GFs PS205 is a 1998 and her wake is not as good as mine.

Strictly my opinion heres a few things about my 205:

1. It tracks better than the new boats
2. It is easier to work on, but harder to get replacement parts for
3. It has a 22 off bump... But it goes away if you fix your form
4. It has less creature comforts than the new boats

Like people have said below, if you want to keep some money in the bank, the older boat will give you a GREAT skiing wake and awesome performance.

Kyle
10-16-2012, 12:47 PM
Here is my .02c

'91-'94 190 and '92-'95 205 are fine skiing boats. The wake on a 190 is slightly flatter than the 205 but not enough to over exaggerate and say its by far superior. It basically boils down to your family size. The spray that people are talking about behind the "old boats" will hit you at -35 off and shorter depending on a head tail wind. I ski into -38 and I am a pre madona when it comes to conditions. I would only buy one with the powerslot transmission along with the HO 285hp gt40 engine (91-93) or the efi '94's have and very few '93's. I added stargazer to my "unwanted carburetor (non efi)" boat and it will pull actual times all day long and if it is not an actual it is .01-.02 off of actual time, so still within world record time capabilities.


Forget the '02 190 or 197 unless it is a TT. The non TT boats did not have the hook built into the back of the hull and they chine locked in the turns. Any '03 and newer 190 or 197 will ski nice. And you will like either of them. Wake softness extremely close to the '93 190.


Here is my advice. I bought my '93 "unwanted carb boat" because of the wake. I don't like any other Mastercraft ski wake unless its a '91-'94 190, '92-'95 205, or '03 or newer 197 or 190. I would not own any '96-'01 Mastercraft (wakes were not as good).

You saying you want perfect pass and a good wake then buy an old boat and add it (simple install $1500 or so). I run into mid -38 and have for years and I can not justify buying a newer 197 because it will make me better. Now I can justify the cool factor but if you are wanting a ski boat, then I can honestly say that you and most people out there will not out ski an "old" 190.

Hope this helps.

TxsRiverRat
10-16-2012, 12:54 PM
and I am a pre madona

Kyle, can we see you vogue...?


http://vipstylecars.com/forums/images/smilies/smiley-rofl.gifhttp://vipstylecars.com/forums/images/smilies/smiley-rofl.gifhttp://vipstylecars.com/forums/images/smilies/smiley-rofl.gif

aswinter05
10-16-2012, 01:02 PM
Here is my .02c

'91-'94 190 and '92-'95 205 are fine skiing boats. The wake on a 190 is slightly flatter than the 205 but not enough to over exaggerate and say its by far superior. It basically boils down to your family size. The spray that people are talking about behind the "old boats" will hit you at -35 off and shorter depending on a head tail wind. I ski into -38 and I am a pre madona when it comes to conditions. I would only buy one with the powerslot transmission along with the HO 285hp gt40 engine (91-93) or the efi '94's have and very few '93's. I added stargazer to my "unwanted carburetor (non efi)" boat and it will pull actual times all day long and if it is not an actual it is .01-.02 off of actual time, so still within world record time capabilities.


Forget the '02 190 or 197 unless it is a TT. The non TT boats did not have the hook built into the back of the hull and they chine locked in the turns. Any '03 and newer 190 or 197 will ski nice. And you will like either of them. Wake softness extremely close to the '93 190.


Here is my advice. I bought my '93 "unwanted carb boat" because of the wake. I don't like any other Mastercraft ski wake unless its a '91-'94 190, '92-'95 205, or '03 or newer 197 or 190. I would not own any '96-'01 Mastercraft (wakes were not as good).

You saying you want perfect pass and a good wake then buy an old boat and add it (simple install $1500 or so). I run into mid -38 and have for years and I can not justify buying a newer 197 because it will make me better. Now I can justify the cool factor but if you are wanting a ski boat, then I can honestly say that you and most people out there will not out ski an "old" 190.

Hope this helps.

Excellent information. Thanks a bunch. I had no idea about the omission of the "hook" on the '02's. Glad to know that bit of info.

MC209
10-16-2012, 01:51 PM
that 06 on here for sale is pretty sharp!

VTJC
10-16-2012, 05:18 PM
The later ‘02TT/03+ will track better than the 91-94 190’s. I had a 99 Sportstar(95-97 190 Hull) they have a great wake, but aren’t excellent tracking boats. The taller freeboard is nice to keep kids and dogs in, but they don’t have the sport feel of the earlier boats. Good luck in your search.

ntidsl
10-16-2012, 10:19 PM
okay aswinter05...we're all scheduled for a trip to your lake for a ski run...when you buying?...lol...

aswinter05
10-16-2012, 10:48 PM
okay aswinter05...we're all scheduled for a trip to your lake for a ski run...when you buying?...lol...

Shooting for early spring! Let's do it! I live 15 minutes from Nate Smith's hometown lake (Champion). Maybe he'll let us ski a set.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

shepherd
10-16-2012, 10:58 PM
I will say that my experience has been that the older Prostars track better than the PS197.
.

Wow, that's opposite from my experience. I ski/drive a '93 205 and a '03 197 regularly (each one at least weekly, including the 205 today). The 197 drives like its on rails through the course compared to the 205, which does get yanked around a bit by a strong skier.

The 205 does have a sweet slalom wake though, and gave me a PB today. :)

I don't have a lot of experience with other boats, but I skied behind a '95 PS 190 once, and it seemed to have the friendliest wake I ever crossed. Sometimes I think about "downgrading" from my 197 to one of the 190s from that era.

Bouyhead
10-17-2012, 06:25 AM
Considering your budget I wouldn't even entertain a boat with a carburetor. Most EFI boats are so trouble free it's silly. I've got tons of trouble free hours on my 96' PS 190 with the TBI motor. After 2000+ hours I'm on my second motor(salt water use got the first one) and I'm still running all the original EFI components, with the original fuel pump! Another reason not to go with a carb boat: ethanol.

TxsRiverRat
10-17-2012, 10:14 AM
Wow, that's opposite from my experience. I ski/drive a '93 205 and a '03 197 regularly (each one at least weekly, including the 205 today). The 197 drives like its on rails through the course compared to the 205, which does get yanked around a bit by a strong skier.

The 205 does have a sweet slalom wake though, and gave me a PB today. :)

OK, so I have to say, if you feel the skier yanking you around in the slalom course... When he drops at the end, tell him to stop hooking up at the buoy and let the ski finish its turn! I'm LMAO, but I'm serious. :D

Maybe its the 197's steering system, it just always feel like theres alot of play in it. Kind of like driving a car with versus without power steering.

shepherd
10-17-2012, 12:50 PM
OK, so I have to say, if you feel the skier yanking you around in the slalom course... When he drops at the end, tell him to stop hooking up at the buoy and let the ski finish its turn! I'm LMAO, but I'm serious. :D



Heh, I'm probably more guilty of that than the other guy, and I'm about 25 lbs heavier than him. I'll have to ask him how hard it is to control that 205 when I'm skiing. :rolleyes:

To the OP: I think Buoyhead has it -- the best boat for you would probably be a '95 or '96 190, and you can get one for almost half your intended budget.

aswinter05
10-17-2012, 01:12 PM
I think I got a little confused on the hull change years. Maybe someone can confirm? Waterskimag's article about the "top 5 used boats" says the model years with similar hulls are 1992-1995. However, most of you on here say that they changed the hull in 1995 and the better hull design was actually 1991-1994. Maybe waterskimag is confused?

cbryan70
10-17-2012, 01:21 PM
87-90 have great ski wakes to IMO. I beleive it went 87-90 91-94 95-97ish

j.mccreight@hotmail.com
10-17-2012, 01:22 PM
I think I got a little confused on the hull change years. Maybe someone can confirm? Waterskimag's article about the "top 5 used boats" says the model years with similar hulls are 1992-1995. However, most of you on here say that they changed the hull in 1995 and the better hull design was actually 1991-1994. Maybe waterskimag is confused?

history lesson
http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/showthread.php?t=29236

TxsRiverRat
10-17-2012, 03:06 PM
I think I got a little confused on the hull change years. Maybe someone can confirm? Waterskimag's article about the "top 5 used boats" says the model years with similar hulls are 1992-1995. However, most of you on here say that they changed the hull in 1995 and the better hull design was actually 1991-1994. Maybe waterskimag is confused?

The 205 hull changed in 1996 (not as nice as my 93 but totally skiable). The 190 hull changed in 1998 and it was not good.

If you look at the link James posted, it has pics of the transom inserts and the cross fin. I witnessed seeing these mods on a boat belonging ski ranch skier at the brazos.

MC

aswinter05
10-17-2012, 03:11 PM
history lesson
http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/showthread.php?t=29236

Excellent. Thanks. That was a nice read.

Double D
10-17-2012, 04:10 PM
Not meaning to jack this thread and it is sort of related. Does anyone know how the 94 190 tracks compared to the 94 205? I only ask because I own a 94 205 and I have done everything on it (just not good) and it tracks pretty darn good, IMO. My only comparison is I drove a 98 190 this past summer with a barefooter on the side. When that footer swung out or did much left or right, that boat was all over the place, and I mean abrupt changes in direction. We do the same thing beside my 205 and and sure I get a pull and a slight change in direction, but nothing like the 98 190. So, just wondered if the 94 190 is similar. Thanks!!

TxsRiverRat
10-17-2012, 06:08 PM
Not meaning to jack this thread and it is sort of related. Does anyone know how the 94 190 tracks compared to the 94 205? I only ask because I own a 94 205 and I have done everything on it (just not good) and it tracks pretty darn good, IMO. My only comparison is I drove a 98 190 this past summer with a barefooter on the side. When that footer swung out or did much left or right, that boat was all over the place, and I mean abrupt changes in direction. We do the same thing beside my 205 and and sure I get a pull and a slight change in direction, but nothing like the 98 190. So, just wondered if the 94 190 is similar. Thanks!!

I've often said my 205 tracks better than a 190. Maybe its due to the weight of the boat...?

east tx skier
10-17-2012, 08:07 PM
My only regular comparison is the tracking between my old 93 205, my father in law's 98 205, and my 98 Ski Nautique. I should probably stop typing before I make comparisons. ;)

sk8salomon
10-18-2012, 06:52 AM
Wow, that's opposite from my experience. I ski/drive a '93 205 and a '03 197 regularly (each one at least weekly, including the 205 today). The 197 drives like its on rails through the course compared to the 205, which does get yanked around a bit by a strong skier.

.

agree! i wonder if he means how responsive the steering is, not tracking. the older 190's are super responsive due to their size but tracking just plain sucks.

Jorski
10-21-2012, 09:45 AM
The tracking on the 1991-1994 190 is highly dependent upon set-up.

You need to have the rudder ground properly. If you do, it's one of the easiest boats to drive in the course.

That said, the bigger and heavier the boat is the better it will track- at the expense of other characteristics. Also, the deeper the boat rides in the water the better it will track.

Everything is a trade-off in hull design. The new CC 200 tracks exceptionally well, but because it has so much hull in the water, you pay for that nicety with higher rpms required for a given speed and high fuel usage.

east tx skier
10-21-2012, 11:30 AM
The tracking on the 1991-1994 190 is highly dependent upon set-up.

You need to have the rudder ground properly. If you do, it's one of the easiest boats to drive in the course.

That said, the bigger and heavier the boat is the better it will track- at the expense of other characteristics. Also, the deeper the boat rides in the water the better it will track.

Everything is a trade-off in hull design. The new CC 200 tracks exceptionally well, but because it has so much hull in the water, you pay for that nicety with higher rpms required for a given speed and high fuel usage.

Most SNs track incredibly well. My 98 is no exception. It is also light ay 2,300 lbs and runs in the typical rpm range. It's no comparison to the SN 200, or so I'm told. They achieved great things with the wake and tracking on that boat at the expense of high operating revs. The 197 has more wetted surface than its predessesors and, as a result, requires more HP to operate efficiently.

If we would have all been satisfied with narrower beams and shallower freeboards, we would be more likely to still be able to buy new boats that resemble sports cars instead of sports suvs. Think 911 versus Panamera.

madcityskier
10-21-2012, 01:23 PM
Agree. My boat is just fine at 240hp, trying to be everything to everyone requires space and therefore HP. Gonna use a lot more gas to push some if these beasts, but the variety of things a 205v can do amazingly well while providing a ton of space is probably worth the trade offs in fuel consumption and performance, both of which are still pretty damn good compared to the vast majority of boats.

east tx skier
10-21-2012, 08:10 PM
Agree. My boat is just fine at 240hp, trying to be everything to everyone requires space and therefore HP. Gonna use a lot more gas to push some if these beasts, but the variety of things a 205v can do amazingly well while providing a ton of space is probably worth the trade offs in fuel consumption and performance, both of which are still pretty damn good compared to the vast majority of boats.

205v is a mid 90s hull and shouldn't be too bad at all on gas. That was just the tip of the spear on creature comforts getting pushed to the forefront.

madcityskier
10-21-2012, 08:35 PM
It's no xstar or g23, but the difference send noteworthy enough to make a difference. We usually get about 4gph hour out of my boat vs 6.5 on a buddies boat that would be similar to 205v from a competitive manufacturer. And while his v drive offers amazing performance even a straight 205 can compete with the performance of my boat. (Yours either EastTex, I would dare to say.)

TxsRiverRat
10-22-2012, 10:23 AM
Most SNs track incredibly well. My 98 is no exception.

Elitist! :D

east tx skier
10-22-2012, 11:04 AM
It's no xstar or g23, but the difference send noteworthy enough to make a difference. We usually get about 4gph hour out of my boat vs 6.5 on a buddies boat that would be similar to 205v from a competitive manufacturer. And while his v drive offers amazing performance even a straight 205 can compete with the performance of my boat. (Yours either EastTex, I would dare to say.)

I think that's a reasonable assumption. It all comes down to wetted surface, weight, and efficiency of the engine. I presume your boat is lighter and less wetted than mine. I don't know how the efficiency of of my multiport injected engine plays into things. I have not measured consumption, but I wouldn't guess it's noticeably better than my old 93. If it is, it is minimal.

east tx skier
10-22-2012, 11:21 AM
Elitist! :D

Realist. :)

TxsRiverRat
10-22-2012, 11:44 AM
Realist. :)

Shut up! http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/funny/2/banana.gifhttp://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/funny/2/banana.gif


LOL

Phntmski
10-22-2012, 12:23 PM
So, what about filing a rudder? My 91 PS190 drives like a sportscar out of the course and tracks fairly well in the course but I've driven better. If I were to give her anything but an A+ it would be how she tracks, probably a B. Actually I get so used to it I don't think about it until I drive someone elses boat where it seems I just point and shoot.

Filing a rudder sounds drastic, and possibly expensive, but interesting.

JohnE
10-22-2012, 12:27 PM
Filing the rudder is free if you own a file. If not it shouldn't cost more than ten bucks.

TxsRiverRat
10-22-2012, 12:27 PM
So, what about filing a rudder? My 91 PS190 drives like a sportscar out of the course and tracks fairly well in the course but I've driven better. If I were to give her anything but an A+ it would be how she tracks, probably a B. Actually I get so used to it I don't think about it until I drive someone elses boat where it seems I just point and shoot.

Filing a rudder sounds drastic, and possibly expensive, but interesting.

Not expensive. http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/QuickViewService?storeId=10051&langId=-1&catalogId=10053&R=100572556&catEntryId=100572556

you just have to file the rudder trial and error till the boat doesnt veer tot he right.

my boat had a severe turn when you get go of the wheel, i fixed it.

JohnE
10-22-2012, 12:30 PM
Not expensive. http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/QuickViewService?storeId=10051&langId=-1&catalogId=10053&R=100572556&catEntryId=100572556

you just have to file the rudder trial and error till the boat doesnt veer tot he right.

my boat had a severe turn when you get go of the wheel, i fixed it.

The boat is supposed to turn severly when you let go of the wheel when you file the rudder. That is the intent - to require countersteer to help the tracking.

Phntmski
10-22-2012, 12:37 PM
What I really meant was expensive if I were to mess it up.

JohnE
10-22-2012, 12:50 PM
What I really meant was expensive if I were to mess it up.

I'll agree with that. :D

I never did it, but taking it a little at a time and trying is should be fairly safe.

TxsRiverRat
10-22-2012, 01:25 PM
The boat is supposed to turn severly when you let go of the wheel when you file the rudder. That is the intent - to require countersteer to help the tracking.

Oh... I thought it was meant to help with the turn and the end of a run so the skier hangs on to the handle :steering:

aswinter05
10-22-2012, 01:27 PM
*cough* THREAD JACKERS! *cough*

Jorski
10-22-2012, 01:43 PM
What I really meant was expensive if I were to mess it up.


Not really...if you go too far filing the rudder, taking some off of the other side will reduce the effect.

Phntmski
10-22-2012, 02:57 PM
Didn't intent to. Sorry dude, guess I just went with some seemingly natural progression of the thread. Good luck with the boat.

Pound for pound, for the $ I think you'd be hard pressed to do better than a well kept, 91 - 94 PS190. But I'm a little biased. :D

aswinter05
10-22-2012, 03:04 PM
Didn't intent to. Sorry dude, guess I just went with some seemingly natural progression of the thread. Good luck with the boat.

Pound for pound, for the $ I think you'd be hard pressed to do better than a well kept, 91 - 94 PS190. But I'm a little biased. :D

haha just kidding man I don't care. I've gotten all I needed out of this thread because of some great posts. Thanks to all. Let the thread progress. I'm just being an ***.

east tx skier
10-22-2012, 03:16 PM
So, what about filing a rudder? My 91 PS190 drives like a sportscar out of the course and tracks fairly well in the course but I've driven better. If I were to give her anything but an A+ it would be how she tracks, probably a B. Actually I get so used to it I don't think about it until I drive someone elses boat where it seems I just point and shoot.

Filing a rudder sounds drastic, and possibly expensive, but interesting.

You might want to check to see if you have a factory grind. Not uncommon on early 90s boats. It will be faint and run the length of the starboard trailing edge. The red arrow in this picture is just where it is most noticeable.

Kyle
10-23-2012, 01:17 AM
Phantom

Mine has been tuned. I wanted more so I used a bastard file on the rudder and took more off. If you wanna go check mine out that is fine. She sleeps 3 doors down from yours right now. I'm sure she will be there until I'm finished with RiverRat's 205 in Early 2013.

TxsRiverRat
10-23-2012, 10:43 AM
Phantom

Mine has been tuned. I wanted more so I used a bastard file on the rudder and took more off. If you wanna go check mine out that is fine. She sleeps 3 doors down from yours right now. I'm sure she will be there until I'm finished with RiverRat's 205 in Early 2013.

What do you have against the file? :uglyhamme