PDA

View Full Version : 2006 prostar 197 performance


rodltg2
01-14-2006, 10:31 PM
out of curiosity , why is the new 197 slower compared to all other tournament ski boats in the wm boat buyers guide ( except tige ).
it seems that it is 1+ second slower to 36 and about 3+mph slower top end. obviously this is a slalom tractor and top speed makes no difference and 1 second more to 36 is no big deal, but i am just curious to know why a boat outfitted with the mcx 350 is slower than all the other boats tested in its category .
another thing that is strange is that the x7 tested with the mcx had faster times. isnt that boat heavier with the tower and ballast. maybe thast not enough weight to make a difference but how is it faster?

is it that the mc is so well built and is alot heavier than the others?

rodltg2
01-14-2006, 10:40 PM
mc 197
top speed 42.5 0-36 6.5

centurion t5
top speed 45, 0-36 5.4

cc 196 limited
tope speed 46.3 0-36 5.1

gekko gtr 22
top speed 50.1 0-36 5.5

bu response lxi
top speed 47.2 0-36 5.0

mb 190 plus
top speed 45.3 0-36 5.3

svfara
top speed 48.1 0-36 5.2

Andyg
01-14-2006, 11:42 PM
I believe MYMC answered it in another thread. The test boat had the 1:1 tranny not the powerslot. Big difference in hole shot. In fact I think it is about 2 seconds difference for a 0-36 hole shot.

PendO
01-14-2006, 11:59 PM
I believe MYMC answered it in another thread. The test boat had the 1:1 tranny not the powerslot. Big difference in hole shot. In fact I think it is about 2 seconds difference for a 0-36 hole shot.

Andy, guess we should just trade in our 197's since they are so slow.

Rod, here is a link to an older review of a 197 with the LQ9, even it was in the 6 seconds, but it does not say what tranny http://www.waterskimag.com/product.jsp?ID=61546

Jim@BAWS
01-15-2006, 12:06 AM
1) The LQ-9 Comes standard with a geared transmission 1.5-1.0 ratio

2) I get the statement ALOT. The BU is faster ! Ya so... We are not building speed boats. We build SKIBOATS. BU sits on top of the water and act like a skipping stone . A MasterCraft trully shapes the wake.

Rod...do you happen to do a comparison to the wake size. CC and SVARA #1. MC #2 BU #3.

Jim@BAWS

PendO
01-15-2006, 12:09 AM
Which one has the current world record? :woohoo:

Seriously though, the nice thing about the Bu is with the bigger wake and and faster speeds, its a perfect boat for pulling tubers thru the course!

Andyg
01-15-2006, 12:20 AM
Andy, guess we should just trade in our 197's since they are so slow.

Everytime I get in a BU I am glad I have my slow 197. I would much rather have the fit and finish I have in my 197 over that of the BU.

PendO
01-15-2006, 12:27 AM
Everytime I get in a BU I am glad I have my slow 197. I would much rather have the fit and finish I have in my 197 over that of the BU.

A work of art ... poetry in motion!

PendO
01-15-2006, 12:44 AM
One more ... gawd I love the lines on a Mastercraft!

rodltg2
01-15-2006, 12:52 AM
there you guys go again, when did i say anything specific about the bu being better in anyway. why do guys get so worked up when compared. i only asked a simple question as to why it was a slower boat. thanks andy for at least answering my question.

Workin' 4 Toys
01-15-2006, 10:28 AM
Next time I am in a line up with the other brands on on the strip for a race, I'll measure the G-force and time how long it will take me to get to 36. Probably between 5 and 7 seconds. ;)

Workin' 4 Toys
01-15-2006, 10:29 AM
Which one has the current world record? :woohoo:

Seriously though, the nice thing about the Bu is with the bigger wake and and faster speeds, its a perfect boat for pulling tubers thru the course!
I sure do wish my trailer had dual axles!!!!

rodltg2
01-15-2006, 11:54 AM
One more ... gawd I love the lines on a Mastercraft!


maybe you two should get a room :uglyhamme

PendO
01-15-2006, 12:25 PM
there you guys go again, when did i say anything specific about the bu being better in anyway. why do guys get so worked up when compared. i only asked a simple question as to why it was a slower boat. thanks andy for at least answering my question.

Rod, its the equivalent of you saying:

"I noticed your girlfriend is putting on some weight" ... you imply ... we infer, and it all goes down hill from there ... I'm trying to crunch numbers, looks like Bayliner makes some boats even faster than mine:) Maybe I can get a good deal on a trade in?

rodltg2
01-15-2006, 12:45 PM
obviousley you didnt read my first post carefully

BrianM
01-15-2006, 01:26 PM
out of curiosity , why is the new 197 slower compared to all other tournament ski boats in the wm boat buyers guide ( except tige ).


Wetted surface and displacemnet. TheMC has to push more water because of the increased amount of wetted surface.

IMHO not good or bad just different.

PendO
01-15-2006, 07:58 PM
Just had a long conversation with my wife ... seems she never won any medals or ribbons for 1st place in a 100M dash ... so disappointed!

André
01-15-2006, 08:07 PM
Just had a long conversation with my wife ... seems she never won any medals or ribbons for 1st place in a 100M dash ... so disappointed!
:confused: :confused: :confused:
I'll go read back...Must have miss something.

east tx skier
01-15-2006, 10:59 PM
Wetted surface and displacemnet. TheMC has to push more water because of the increased amount of wetted surface.

IMHO not good or bad just different.

What Brian said. Also, the "hook" creates additional drag (knocking a little off the top end) and probably 0--36 times.

In 2003, the Sammy Duvall 197 (same hull) in the boat tests ran a 5.0 second 0--36 mph time when outfitted with the MCX and the powerslot. At the time, powerslot meant 1.5:1. Theoretically, with the new slot being 1.26:1, you'd get a slightly slower time. But with the ETX manifolds, maybe it evens out.

east tx skier
01-15-2006, 11:00 PM
1) The LQ-9 Comes standard with a geared transmission 1.5-1.0 ratio

Jim@BAWS

Jim, still? I thought as of 05, the slot was 1.26:1.

jayocheskey
01-15-2006, 11:10 PM
197 @ the Fort Worth Boat Show.

Ric
01-15-2006, 11:40 PM
197 @ the Fort Worth Boat Show.
Dam that's a good lookin boat Jay!

Rodl, I cannot explain the speed numbers in that magazine, but am exceptionally happy with the top speed of my prostar. I compromised nothing my friend. No regrets AND personal bests too! :woohoo: Wow, it's great!

east tx skier
01-16-2006, 12:01 AM
Great looking boat, but it's just not red enough. ;)

baedriver
01-16-2006, 12:04 AM
Great color! But one question is that on 06 because the guages look black? or am I color blind but if they are black good color change!

erkoehler
01-16-2006, 12:16 AM
That is an awesome looking boat, could use a small black stripe down the side to break it up alittle. Then, put it on a black trailer with red pin striping, NOW were talking perfection..... :woohoo:

rodltg2
01-16-2006, 12:43 AM
i hope no one thinks i was critisizing the 197 in any way . the numbers just didnt make sense when reading the reviews.. thanks you guys who actualy gave me an answer to my question. it makes sense now. by the way pendo my buddy owns a bayliner which he paid 9999 for ,and its top speed is faster than all our boats. dont think any of us regardless of what brand we have are rushin out to get a bayliner for its top end speed.

PendO
01-16-2006, 01:21 AM
Jim, still? I thought as of 05, the slot was 1.26:1.

Eastie ... for whatever reason they used two different gear reduction ratios

1.5:1 for the LQ9
1.26:1 for the MCX

The 06 manaul lists it that way too, but with the typos you never know:)

That is a Sweet Boat!

PendO
01-16-2006, 01:22 AM
i hope no one thinks i was critisizing the 197 in any way . the numbers just didnt make sense when reading the reviews.. thanks you guys who actualy gave me an answer to my question. it makes sense now. by the way pendo my buddy owns a bayliner which he paid 9999 for ,and its top speed is faster than all our boats. dont think any of us regardless of what brand we have are rushin out to get a bayliner for its top end speed.

no, but my wife is going to work on her time in the 40 yard dash.

Ric
01-16-2006, 08:50 AM
That is an awesome looking boat, could use a small black stripe down the side to break it up alittle. Then, put it on a black trailer with red pin striping, NOW were talking perfection..... :woohoo:
you'd think that the red on a black trailer would look good but I recently had my red boat on a black loaner trailer for a couple of weeks and .................. uh-uh, not lookin good at all :noface:

MYMC
01-16-2006, 09:37 AM
I leave for a few days and look at ya!

The LQ9 is NOT standard with a PowerSlot...it is an option in the DDs. Trust me we had one here.

MC has not submitted a slot boat (in recent memory) to the "Buyers Guide" test because the 1:1 seems to fit most everyones needs, and according to the marketing department they want "real world" results printed.

BTW, the Malibu is still quicker 0-36 than our slot boat...it is also lighter.

LQ9 slot = 1.52
MCX & RTP-1 = 1.26

east tx skier
01-16-2006, 08:18 PM
So, Mike, are they going to continue to use a 1.52:1 tranny on the LQ9s in the future or is that just for this year?

Hoosier Bob
01-16-2006, 09:03 PM
I never thought too much about it other than the statements that were made about the 91-94 MC's. I guess if it is under AWSA requirements I am happy, otherwise I believe the Gekko was and has been the quickest in recent years. That and the Tahitti! The rooster is a bi%@@ behind the old jet though. You can't call them slow. Same prop, trans and wake characteristics? Props and ratio's all effect performance. Knowing that people buy numbers another company may capitalize on that focal point. Quicker equals better, not! If it took a second longer to get the best wake in the world I would wait just for the experience of skiing the best. :D

MYMC
01-17-2006, 09:16 AM
So, Mike, are they going to continue to use a 1.52:1 tranny on the LQ9s in the future or is that just for this year?

It is my understanding that the "slot option" for an LQ9 will remain the 1.52.

I believe the Gekko was and has been the quickest in recent years.

That is true; however, they have never submitted a boat to be USA WaterSki certified.

When all the boats are set-up equal there is less than 1/2 a second difference between all of them. I have no good answer as to why we don't submit our "quickest" set-up...it would seem to be a good idea on the surface.

rodltg2
01-17-2006, 12:53 PM
gekko probably hasnt submitted for approval because i believe that the boat has to pull a certain amount of tournmants to be considered.

rodltg2
01-17-2006, 12:59 PM
and it cost money to be tested

MYMC
01-17-2006, 01:44 PM
and it cost money to be tested
That was the answer I got from Mark when we spoke about it a couple of years ago.

east tx skier
03-08-2006, 10:25 AM
Please don't think I'm pot-stirring here, but to divert this post into a head on with a post I started yesterday, why did MC submit different setups to AWSA for certification than it sent to Water Ski Mag for the boat buyer's guide tests.

The way I understand it, none of the boats reviewed in the BBG, i.e., MCX w/ 1:1 were AWSA approved this year, i.e., LQ9 w/ 1.5:1 or MCX w/ 1.26:1? Did it have anything to do with the fact that they were listing MSRP in the buyers' guide this year and that would drive the list price in the guide up?

Sodar
03-08-2006, 10:36 AM
...MC has not submitted a slot boat (in recent memory) to the "Buyers Guide" test because the 1:1 seems to fit most everyones needs, and according to the marketing department they want "real world" results printed...
LQ9 slot = 1.52
MCX & RTP-1 = 1.26

I think this answers your question a little, Eastie.

east tx skier
03-08-2006, 10:52 AM
A little. Just reading up on the accelleration requirement to pull record capable tournaments. Minimum distance to pull them is 0--36 in 220'. Then there's this 250' requirement, which goes to, I suppose, non-record capable tournaments.

DanC
03-08-2006, 08:37 PM
"That is true; however, they have never submitted a boat to be USA WaterSki certified."

Not true. The Gekko GTR-22 is AWSA approved for 02-06


"gekko probably hasnt submitted for approval because i believe that the boat has to pull a certain amount of tournmants to be considered."

Sorry again not true. A company only has to pay money and be in good standing with the AWSA to submit a boat model and try and get AWSA approval. An AWSA approved boat model must pull a certain percentage of tournaments to be considered to pull a regional or national event.

WTRSK1R
03-08-2006, 10:06 PM
Great color! But one question is that on 06 because the guages look black? or am I color blind but if they are black good color change!
For '06 the gauges are now a medium blue. I think they just look black because of the direction the picture was taken from in relation to the instruments.

Farmer Ted
03-08-2006, 10:12 PM
mc 197
top speed 42.5 0-36 6.5

centurion t5
top speed 45, 0-36 5.4

cc 196 limited
tope speed 46.3 0-36 5.1

gekko gtr 22
top speed 50.1 0-36 5.5

bu response lxi
top speed 47.2 0-36 5.0

mb 190 plus
top speed 45.3 0-36 5.3

svfara
top speed 48.1 0-36 5.2

Flip this boat boy,

I'd be more concerned with resale versus top end speed,

Reminds me of the story about the Bull and his son sitting on a hill overlooking a herd of Cow

son says, "dad, let's run down there and cufk one of those cows"

dad says, "no son, let's walk down there and cufk them all"

east tx skier
03-08-2006, 11:05 PM
Flip this boat boy,

I'd be more concerned with resale versus top end speed,

Reminds me of the story about the Bull and his son sitting on a hill overlooking a herd of Cow

son says, "dad, let's run down there and cufk one of those cows"

dad says, "no son, let's walk down there and cufk them all"

-Robert Duvalle in Colors

Farmer Ted
03-08-2006, 11:07 PM
-Robert Duvalle in Colors


Damn it feels good to be a gansta...

east tx skier
03-08-2006, 11:16 PM
If I can replace the rope I've misplaced, I may actually get the shaft packing done and get on the water this weekend.

/crosses fingers

MYMC
03-09-2006, 09:05 AM
Not true. The Gekko GTR-22 is AWSA approved for 02-06
I stand corrected...I see they also have boats approved for footing. When I spoke with Mark at Surf Expo fall of 2001 he told me that "he" had no intention of paying the money to USA WaterSki for certification. He stated that he felt the costs incurred would not be offest by additional sales due to the certification. Obviously the current owners/partners have a different perspective.

east tx skier
03-09-2006, 12:00 PM
Mike, slight threadjack here, but do you think MC is leaning toward discontinuing the 1:1 in its Prostars inasmuch as it did not seek to have a boat with that gear ratio approved this year?

I recall you and I discussing that the 310 hp engine and the 1.26 might be a preferable option if one had to chose between MCX and 1:1 versus base engine and 1.26:1 where money was an option.

I guess, realistically, the only boats actually pulling tournaments are going to be MCX or LQ9 with various gear reductions. So maybe that's why those were the only ones approved. I don't think the 190/197 with 1:1 would have any trouble getting approved. The WSM numbers with the MCX and 1:1 appear to be able to handle the accelleration requirement with ample room to spare. I'd imagine the 310 hp engine isn't too far behind that. The 209 with 1:1, on the other hand, seemed to be a few feet over. But submitted with gear reduction, I'm sure it'd pass with flying colors easily, too.

I know it's got to be expensive to submit so many boats for approval. But MC has put a lot of money into developing a fishing boat this year, so I guess I don't know what to think. As far as I can tell, they're still advertising the 209 as tournament approved even though it wasn't submitted for approval this year.

Thoughts?

baedriver
03-09-2006, 02:41 PM
I have an 06 197 with the mcx 1to1 and love it. For me it is great. I have no issue with hole shot. I have not opened it up yet but there is plenty for what i do. Excellent boat!!!

MYMC
03-09-2006, 04:26 PM
Mike, slight threadjack here, but do you think MC is leaning toward discontinuing the 1:1 in its Prostars inasmuch as it did not seek to have a boat with that gear ratio approved this year?
To be honest I don't see (and have not heard anything) about the 1:1 going anywhere in the near future.

The real issue is money...every model and powertrain combination incurrs another "certification fee" each time it changes. It is my understanding that any change below the water line needs to be re-certified (this includes engine/transmission due to props) as such MC chooses not to pay for the boats to be certified that will not be used in tournaments (i.e. 190/197 with 1:1).

Lastly, as I understand it the certification lasts for 5 years (I think) so there is no need to re-submit the 209/X9.

east tx skier
03-09-2006, 04:30 PM
I believe Jim said it was two years. I recall it being okay for the current year and the next model year. So the 2005 209 would still be approved this year.

Thanks for the response.

MYMC
03-09-2006, 05:21 PM
I believe Jim said it was two years. I recall it being okay for the current year and the next model year. So the 2005 209 would still be approved this year.
That may be correct...I don't remember for sure to be honest (getting old...never good when your bouy count drops below your age)

east tx skier
03-09-2006, 05:23 PM
104, is that right Monty? ;)

MYMC
03-09-2006, 05:25 PM
Yesssss...and have the Rolling Stones killed immediatley!

east tx skier
03-09-2006, 05:30 PM
LOL! 8p

"But, sir...."

MYMC
03-09-2006, 05:57 PM
"do as I say damn you"
(sorry had to finish it)

rodltg2
03-09-2006, 06:37 PM
Flip this boat boy,

I'd be more concerned with resale versus top end speed,

Reminds me of the story about the Bull and his son sitting on a hill overlooking a herd of Cow

son says, "dad, let's run down there and cufk one of those cows"

dad says, "no son, let's walk down there and cufk them all"


you sure get you panties all up in as bunch easy, i asked becuase i was curoius not critizing. although re sale value is not a priority for me, i clearly know mc hold there value well above others...

PendO
03-09-2006, 06:51 PM
you sure get you panties all up in as bunch easy, i asked becuase i was curoius not critizing. although re sale value is not a priority for me, i clearly know mc hold there value well above others...

Am I the only one who envies the speed of RodL's boat - but hey, at least my 06 is AWSA approved, maybe we get more top end in 08?

rodltg2
03-09-2006, 07:14 PM
actually my bu has a slower top end than my 197 did , lq9 was fast

ilikeitglacy
03-09-2006, 07:18 PM
actually my bu has a slower top end than my 197 did , lq9 was fast
i get about 42mph with my x7 and predator, what's your top speed Rod?

rodltg2
03-09-2006, 07:46 PM
my 197 w/ lq9 did 52mph...

ilikeitglacy
03-09-2006, 08:59 PM
Fastest ski boat i ever seen, but then again... :D

PendO
03-09-2006, 10:25 PM
actually my bu has a slower top end than my 197 did , lq9 was fast

but not worth the shop visits!

Seriously, can't blame you for getting a new boat and getting rid of the gremlin ... but I think you need a 196 so you have a smaller wake:)

Also, whether its a Bu RLXi, 197, or 196 the co.'s should not sell one that is not AWSA approved (period) ... just offering too many options IMO.

east tx skier
03-09-2006, 10:34 PM
I think Malibu's old flightcraft sportster would do about 55 or so. Pretty quick for a straight drive.