PDA

View Full Version : MasterCraft vs. Correct Craft (NO Bashing PLEASE!)


Sodar
01-15-2006, 01:50 AM
I like everything about the boat buyers guide except I am getting razzed by my Nautique buddies for a few reasons.

First, MC PS197 0-36 time 6.5seconds, Nautique 196 0-36 5.1seconds.

Second, MC PS197 has a larger wake that the Nautique 196 and 206.

**** The MC PS197 is my absolute dream boats, anyone who owns one I am envious of you, but why did the Nautique 196 do better? I still want to believe MasterCrafts are "driven to a higher standard!!"

Lastly, and definately most importantly, I am getting a lot of "If MasterCraft or so great, why don't they warranty their products like Nautique." Even my dad, a 3-time MC owner made a comment about taking a look at CC. Am I missing something with the quality of the warranty or what? I would love for some MasterCraft execs to make a few comments. It just seems MasterCrafts have always been at the top of the charts.

Please, do not turn this into a nautique bashing, "mine is better than your's" thread. I just would seriously like to know what the deal is with this? I do not know if there are more factors to these tests that I am missing, but whats up?

pj-slalom
01-15-2006, 02:09 AM
First of all, I have to tell you that I am with the competition. I own 2 Ski Nautiques. For me, it just came down to the fact that I like the company, I'm in love with their boats, and that's all I've ever wanted since I was a kid.
However, as far as all the arguments going around about one boat being better than another. I'm with the school of thought that says we all paid a lot of good money for our boats. All of the top inboard companies make great, tournament approved, record capable boats. Since I spent a lot of my hard earned money on a Correct Craft, I'm going to want to tell everybody how great my boat is.
I think each manufacturer has its pluses and minuses. Does it mean that one is "better" than another? That is just personal opinion.

rodltg2
01-15-2006, 02:11 AM
well put pj.

gene dobies
01-15-2006, 09:35 AM
well put pj.
The 196 is 2 inches shorter and I think not as wide and it is a closed bow making it lighter too than the MC197.

T Scott
01-15-2006, 09:37 AM
To me, it is like comparing BMW and Mercedes. Both great cars, but it comes down to what look you like and what features are important to you. Personally, I have always liked the lines on a Mastercraft better than a Nautique. I don't think anyone will say that Nautique makes an awful boat, they just make a "different" boat. I like my Mastercraft and always will. :headbang:

G-man
01-15-2006, 10:17 AM
The reason for the times being so different is because gear reduction tranmission is standard on a Nautique and an option on MC. The MC tested did not have gear reduction. Most people don't need gear reduction, but it's great when you need it.
Also the amount of hull in the water creates drag. Last year in our tournament the MC baseline for 34mph was higher than the N. Maybe it was just this one promo boat.
For me I buy for dealer service and location. Without this it doesn't matter what you own.

Farmer Ted
01-15-2006, 10:24 AM
Why do they retest if there hasn't been any changes to the hull?

Isn't the '06 hull identical to the '02?

Workin' 4 Toys
01-15-2006, 10:46 AM
And why do they have only one exhaust outlet. That's stupid....:confused:

stevo137
01-15-2006, 12:39 PM
And why do they have only one exhaust outlet. That's stupid....:confused:
I believe that CC feels that the dual exhaust is not necessary and have taken measures to make their boats quieter over the years.
I know that the older dual exhaust CC's were quite loud.
I test drove a new demo CC about 5 years ago and it was very quiet.
I still like to hear some rumble and prefer the dual exhaust.

Sodar
01-15-2006, 12:45 PM
But what about the warrenties, that is what got me the most. Items like upholstery, carpet, components, instrumentation, etc are all substantially longer. I would think that both companies use primarily the same materials. The only thing I did find was that the labor rate on a nautique had to be paid by the owner, which sounds a little dangerous. But like i said in my original post, I love the lines of a MC too, I would just think that the two top compainies would do everything in their power to be as similar in "perks" as possible.

rodltg2
01-15-2006, 12:56 PM
Why do they retest if there hasn't been any changes to the hull?

Isn't the '06 hull identical to the '02?


03' .......

Jim@BAWS
01-15-2006, 01:17 PM
They are NOT The same company. Is FORD and Chevy the same?
Apples to Apples the CC is even more expensive than than MC.
You are paying for the EXTRA Warranty that CC offers. Don't think that you are'nt. It is going to be very tough not to have the apperance of bashing when facts are stated.

A CCis 100% chopper gun 60% resin to 40% glass. A heavier boat needing more HP and torqur to push that heavy hull
A MC is 60% hand laid bi-axle fiberglass with 40% resin

That is a BIG difference ! With all that said. Look at the plushness of a new MC. See how the seat bases are thicker, see how the interior is sticthed. Basically the fit and finish has more attention to detail. Look how a MasterCraft fits together. Look at the front of a CC where the upper deck meets the hull.

CC is a great boat. I owned a 93-96 Model years myself. The fit and finish was ALOT better back then. CC is lagging behind, waiting and waitng till there NEW factory gets built. Basically there boats are built outside in an openair environment

Jim@BAWS





But what about the warrenties, that is what got me the most. Items like upholstery, carpet, components, instrumentation, etc are all substantially longer. I would think that both companies use primarily the same materials. The only thing I did find was that the labor rate on a nautique had to be paid by the owner, which sounds a little dangerous. But like i said in my original post, I love the lines of a MC too, I would just think that the two top compainies would do everything in their power to be as similar in "perks" as possible.

Workin' 4 Toys
01-15-2006, 01:24 PM
Wooo, don't hold back Jim.....;)

Byrdman
01-15-2006, 02:08 PM
I think MC and CC are the best skiboat builders in the world. Both make a great product. I looked at the SV211 before I bought my X-2. It was a nice boat, but I noticed the differences and weighed the cost vs what you get and I didnt look back after I made up my mind to buy the X-2. The things the made the difference to me were things such as 11 vs 9 people, the interior was better on the MC(it seems to me the MC had twice the amount of thickness in the seats), more HP, better transmission, water ballast, etc. Plus, after owning a MC PS190 for seven years, I prefer MAstercraft, just like I prefer Chevrolet vs Ford.

baedriver
01-15-2006, 02:12 PM
I had a SN 196 and before that a supra loved them both. When I took a tour of the MC factory about a month ago after I was done I knew I made the correct decision. The quality that goes into making this boat makes me feel that as long as it is propely maintained it will last a long time.

Now as far as warranty issues go I really never had an issue with the supra. The SN i did not have long enough. I have friends that have SN and absoutley love them and then I have friends that have BU and MC. And they all have something that their owners like.

When it comes down to it I think it comes down to preference. These boats are not cheap and I think that are great. Can't wait to get mine be about two weeks.

Sodar
01-15-2006, 02:32 PM
They are NOT The same company. Is FORD and Chevy the same?
Apples to Apples the CC is even more expensive than than MC.
You are paying for the EXTRA Warranty that CC offers. Don't think that you are'nt. It is going to be very tough not to have the apperance of bashing when facts are stated.

A CCis 100% chopper gun 60% resin to 40% glass. A heavier boat needing more HP and torqur to push that heavy hull
A MC is 60% hand laid bi-axle fiberglass with 40% resin

That is a BIG difference ! With all that said. Look at the plushness of a new MC. See how the seat bases are thicker, see how the interior is sticthed. Basically the fit and finish has more attention to detail. Look how a MasterCraft fits together. Look at the front of a CC where the upper deck meets the hull.

CC is a great boat. I owned a 93-96 Model years myself. The fit and finish was ALOT better back then. CC is lagging behind, waiting and waitng till there NEW factory gets built. Basically there boats are built outside in an openair environment

Jim@BAWS

Thanks Jim! This is what I was looking for... specific differences. It is quite obvious that the Buyers Guide does not cover these topics. Your vast knowledge is appreciated!

stevo137
01-15-2006, 02:33 PM
There is one thing that I think that all of the manufacturers are lacking and that is putting the extra expense into making a better trailer that is more corrosion resistant.
E-Coat and a powdercoated topcoat would make a huge improvement as far as corrosion resistance and gloss retention is concerned.
I know that this thread is discussing the boat but the trailer is a big part of the purchase and it also should have a higher quality standard...

Farmer Ted
01-15-2006, 03:21 PM
A CCis 100% chopper gun 60% resin to 40% glass. A heavier boat needing more HP and torqur to push that heavy hull
A MC is 60% hand laid bi-axle fiberglass with 40% resin

Jim@BAWS


according to the little factory tour on the CC webpage, they only use the chopper gun on the first layer, then it's hand laid implying that this way is better than 100% hand laid.

They also highlight the fact they use 100% AME 5000, now is this important or simply marketing?

I tried to find the MC factory tour but I guess it's inbetween webpages.

Kind of get the feeling like this could turn into a Repbulican V Democrafts......

j2nh
01-15-2006, 03:50 PM
1987 Prostar 190
1995 Prostar LT1
1999 Ski Nautique 196 GT 40
2002 Ski Nautique 196 Excalibur
2005 Ski Nautique 196 ZR6

Personal preference. I ski and drive most and the differences are and have been, small. Both companies build great boats. Big decider for me was the dealer. I happen to have a very good CC dealer close by. The MC dealer is further away and much less committed to customer satisfaction. I do like the slalom wake at 34 MPH slightly better behind the CC (15 to 28 off) but have never turned down a pull from an MC.

Unless you are on a very tight set up lake the 0-30 times don't mean that much. Both boats will get you out of the water just fine. Just an opinion but I think the powerslot is a must have option on the MC.

I do like the fact that MC finishes the glass in the bilge area to a mirror finish. Very easy to keep clean. Gauges are a little easier for me to see when driving the CC.

sand2snow22
01-15-2006, 04:32 PM
I think MC and CC are the best skiboat builders in the world. Both make a great product. I looked at the SV211 before I bought my X-2. It was a nice boat, but I noticed the differences and weighed the cost vs what you get and I didnt look back after I made up my mind to buy the X-2. The things the made the difference to me were things such as 11 vs 9 people, the interior was better on the MC(it seems to me the MC had twice the amount of thickness in the seats), more HP, better transmission, water ballast, etc. Plus, after owning a MC PS190 for seven years, I prefer MAstercraft, just like I prefer Chevrolet vs Ford.

We looked at the SV-211 also, but didn't like the high floor. Gives you the feeling it's easier to fall out of the boat....Plus, the seating arrangement is a little weird. Some people like the walk through transom. I personally do not. Not as many ladies from the swimsuit thread can fit back there :D I hope this isn't bashing......

Brent
01-15-2006, 05:29 PM
Mastercraft has a plusher interior & nautique is a more focused ski Boat ! that being said they are both fantastic ski boat's & you can't go wrong with either Company! I think mastercraft is being influenced far more by the wake-boarding community than CC has. I would like to see Mastercraft come out with a bare bones Ski boat ,with no frills .

erkoehler
01-15-2006, 05:32 PM
Does anybody know which company offers more different models? I think it would be nice to see different levels of boats put out by MC. Similar to how CC has the standard, limited, and team editions. The "no frills" boat would be available as the standard and then build up from there.

André
01-15-2006, 05:58 PM
"frills" is where the money is...
frills=bling=money!

Brent
01-15-2006, 08:16 PM
You are correct André,that is were the real money is ! If they can have a starter boat that has world class wakes & keep that customer all the way to when they can afford & desire the bling . Cover the whole spectrum from start to finnish!

tommcat
01-15-2006, 08:55 PM
i llove them both. i just bought my MC because i have wanted one since i was young and finally got to the point i could afford one.

only down side to a CC for me is once you're used to backing up an MC and going back/right the CC throws you off a bit with the reverse rotation. ;)

Workin' 4 Toys
01-15-2006, 09:28 PM
There is one thing that I think that all of the manufacturers are lacking and that is putting the extra expense into making a better trailer that is more corrosion resistant.
E-Coat and a powdercoated topcoat would make a huge improvement as far as corrosion resistance and gloss retention is concerned.
I know that this thread is discussing the boat but the trailer is a big part of the purchase and it also should have a higher quality standard...
Geese Stevo, got any personal interest at heart here. I too would like to see them powdercoated too.
Or ALUMINUM!!!!!

Workin' 4 Toys
01-15-2006, 09:30 PM
Does anybody know which company offers more different models? I think it would be nice to see different levels of boats put out by MC. Similar to how CC has the standard, limited, and team editions. The "no frills" boat would be available as the standard and then build up from there.
I think that is why they started the X1 line. If I recall reading correctly.

Ric
01-16-2006, 11:41 AM
Yep, Mastercraft has BY FAR, the best looking, best featured trailers on the market, yet they still leave a lot to be desired..

N v. MC ?...... N doesn't even make a trailer. You pay for that extra. Just one more reason why they're more expensive, and they really don't look right.

Good boats but I see N to be the Apple of the waterski world.. a decent product idea, but aiming more at margin than market share :twocents:

For me, the look of the N was the first detractor, the trailer next, the price last... Skiid both and LOVED the Mastercraft.

For your money Sodar, go ski them all.



There is one thing that I think that all of the manufacturers are lacking and that is putting the extra expense into making a better trailer that is more corrosion resistant.
E-Coat and a powdercoated topcoat would make a huge improvement as far as corrosion resistance and gloss retention is concerned.
I know that this thread is discussing the boat but the trailer is a big part of the purchase and it also should have a higher quality standard...

Byrdman
01-16-2006, 11:48 AM
We looked at the SV-211 also, but didn't like the high floor. Gives you the feeling it's easier to fall out of the boat....Plus, the seating arrangement is a little weird. Some people like the walk through transom. I personally do not. Not as many ladies from the swimsuit thread can fit back there :D I hope this isn't bashing......

My fellings exactly.....Also the trailer is built by MC and the bimini is made by MC as well. The little things add up.....

stevo137
01-16-2006, 12:03 PM
Yep, Mastercraft has BY FAR, the best looking, best featured trailers on the market, yet they still leave a lot to be desired..

MC may be one of the few that actually manufactures their own trailers.
They do a nice job of customizing the trailer for each boat model.
Just curious if they have made any changes to the new saltwater line trailers to make them more corrosion resistant.

ski_king
01-16-2006, 12:22 PM
I am still by far a MC fan, but I do like the retro graphics on the direct drive CC's this year.

Leroy
01-16-2006, 12:41 PM
Interesting debate! There are several boats out that I could be very happy with.


First, MC PS197 0-36 time 6.5seconds, Nautique 196 0-36 5.1seconds. Time yourself 0-36 next time and see what time you like to be pulled up. I think while it is interesting data, it doesn't mean that much.

Second, MC PS197 has a larger wake that the Nautique 196 and 206. Interesting I didn't see the 190 in the guide? I would like to know what a skier thinks behind each boat. However the data shows Malibu, Nautique, and others did come out with boats with great wakes in the 20-21' size with more space.

Lastly, and definately most importantly, I am getting a lot of "If MasterCraft or so great, why don't they warranty their products like Nautique." Even my dad, a 3-time MC owner made a comment about taking a look at CC. Am I missing something with the quality of the warranty or what? I would love for some MasterCraft execs to make a few comments. It just seems MasterCrafts have always been at the top of the charts. Normally you create a difference because you have had problems, or use as a marketing advantage. Extended warrantees are financially pretty simple and tend to be the highest margin of almost any business. I'm sure MC could add a few hundred bucks onto the cost for everyone and a very few issues would be covered and they would make more money. A lot of the issues covered in the extended warrantee are owner/maintenance issues meaning everyone pays for the guy that doesn't take care of the equipment. I don't like that. THE POINT IS IF A PRODUCT IS GREAT YOU DO NOT WANT THE WARRANTEE OR CARE ABOUT IT. WHEN I BUY I ALWAYS ASK IF I CAN HAVE ZERO WARRANTEE AND GET SOME MONEY BACK! Sorry, opinion rather than factual differences.

MYMC
01-16-2006, 02:31 PM
Speed: I posted elsewhere the 0-36 times do not reflect a slot boat. The two boats are much closer when compared apples to apples.

Wake size: This a subjective topic that cannot be quantified. "It felt hard" doesn't qualify as a scientific fact. Modern ski boats (like the top 3) are beyond being blamed for poor personal performance. Lessons and practice will do more for any of our skiing than a new boat will. If you are not skiing at 34 or 36 MPH then you are using the boat outside of it's design envelope. I am not picking on people that ski below tournament speeds; however, the boat is built and designed around tournament criteria.

Warranty: Kia has a ten year 100,000 mile warranty...Does that mean their cars are better built than BMW, Mercedes, Lexus (all 4 years or 50,000 miles)?

jayocheskey
01-16-2006, 02:35 PM
Air Nautique Interior

jayocheskey
01-16-2006, 02:37 PM
X-2 Interior

jayocheskey
01-16-2006, 02:39 PM
I prefer the Interior of MC over CC any day. MC seems to stay one or two steps ahead of the competition especially in this aspect. As far as performance goes - they both make exceptional ski/wakeboard boats.

Hoosier Bob
01-16-2006, 08:26 PM
When I purchased my slightly used MC I went into the hunt only wanting a Correct Craft (previous owner). The boats are similar in build and performance (IMO). The difference for me was the style of the two. I reviewed all years current and past. I felt the MC was better looking historically and in the present. The Mastercrafts (all years) never appear dated. All of the designs last forever and are just as appealing today as they were when they were new. I will look at a new MC or CC but with the intent to buy used. I feel that Correct Craft is making a much less appealing boat today than Mastercraft. That being said CC is my second choice even though I spent a lot of years bickering with MC owners. At this level they better look good! :D

3event
01-16-2006, 08:35 PM
I agree with Hoosier Bob, I still think MC makes a better looking boat and interior. And Nautique charges more... for what? As we see here, for warranty on one hand.

I was sold on the quality of Mastercraft, and the 197 is a great looking boat. And I got one of the pre-hook 2002's so it runs 48mph giving me lotsa top end for barefooting.

What would be good to see in the next few years would be some additional styling efforts on the ProStars. MC leads the way with the X boats...don't forget the skiers.

AirJunky
01-16-2006, 08:44 PM
When I was boat shopping, a new boat was out of the question. So looking at the $15k - $20k price range at the time meant I was looking at mid - early 90s boats.
Being a Sky Ski rider I like a strange mix of features in my boat, big / hard wake, lots of room, and ability to drive hot pick ups & Around the Boat.
Keeping that in mind, the mid - early 90s Nautiques can be weighted to have a good wake & drive a straight line great. But they turn like a truck. The Prostar 190 & 205 turn nice & sharp like their on rails.....we can do Around the boats over & over till the whole lake is chop suey. But we'll try & keep it down for you guys... ;)
I'm sure the manufacturers are real concerned about my niche. Meanwhile, I'll be looking at various cross-over sport boats that can be modified to do what we want. These days it's looking like either a X-9 or an XTI.

Hoosier Bob
01-16-2006, 08:48 PM
For versatility the X-9 can't be beat! It drives and handles great and pulls anything well but like all else when ballasted all up it slows big time.
When I was boat shopping, a new boat was out of the question. So looking at the $15k - $20k price range at the time meant I was looking at mid - early 90s boats.
Being a Sky Ski rider I like a strange mix of features in my boat, big / hard wake, lots of room, and ability to drive hot pick ups & Around the Boat.
Keeping that in mind, the mid - early 90s Nautiques can be weighted to have a good wake & drive a straight line great. But they turn like a truck. The Prostar 190 & 205 turn nice & sharp like their on rails.....we can do Around the boats over & over till the whole lake is chop suey. But we'll try & keep it down for you guys... ;)
I'm sure the manufacturers are real concerned about my niche. Meanwhile, I'll be looking at various cross-over sport boats that can be modified to do what we want. These days it's looking like either a X-9 or an XTI.

rodltg2
01-16-2006, 08:50 PM
i think mc should make a boat in between the x7 and x9. they make a crap load of models for boarding , why not one more famlily friendly prostar.

erkoehler
01-16-2006, 08:51 PM
For versatility the X-9 can't be beat! It drives and handles great and pulls anything well but like all else when ballasted all up it slows big time.


Was out in the 2005 X9 and it is a GREAT boat. With the MCX engine, it pulled everything from little kids on combos to double deepwater barefooters. The boat wasn't even broken in yet, and didn't even moan under the pressure! Hit the button, fill the ballast and you have a moderate wake back there right from the factory. :D

Hoosier Bob
01-16-2006, 08:58 PM
They can't, the 20'01" was already taken! :D Any more or less and they have a 20'9 or a 19'7". Maybe a 20'01.5". The 209 is as good as it will get for awhile in the tweener boats (IMO)>
i think mc should make a boat in between the x7 and x9. they make a crap load of models for boarding , why not one more famlily friendly prostar.

Lakeview
01-17-2006, 08:59 PM
Guy's and Girls-I have owned 9 Correct Craft's since 1971,still own 2 67's,was a Ski Supreme Dealer back in the early 80's.Have never owned a Mastercraft,but I'm looking for my first one-an 87-89 prostar for my own preferences.Given the current market I have to lean towards the Mastercraft for overall quality,looks,and performance.The early stars and stripes had some issues-but Mastercraft came on strong in the mid eighties.You get what you pay for! :D

skitilldark
01-17-2006, 09:19 PM
I'm in a similar camp. I have skied off of correct crafts starting in 1978 with an american skier, and then through the 80's with nautiques, and barefoot nautiques, but my slalom skiing really took off when I first skied behind an 88 Mastercraft 190. That boat to me still has the best slalom wake ever produced. It is totally not there. I have since owned a 99 190 and now an X9, and they are terrific boats, but nothing compares to that 88-89 190 wake.

Ric
01-17-2006, 09:21 PM
I'm in a similar camp. I have skied off of correct crafts starting in 1978 with an american skier, and then through the 80's with nautiques, and barefoot nautiques, but my slalom skiing really took off when I first skied behind an 88 Mastercraft 190. That boat to me still has the best slalom wake ever produced. It is totally not there. I have since owned a 99 190 and now an X9, and they are terrific boats, but nothing compares to that 88-89 190 wake.
I think that was the first 190 I ever skiid as well dark and it was buttah

Sodar
04-06-2007, 01:49 PM
Bump for BoatDad!

M-Funf
04-06-2007, 03:28 PM
I am still by far a MC fan, but I do like the retro graphics on the direct drive CC's this year.

I agree with ya on this one. I'm really looking forward to the "40th Anniversary" edition of an MC...maybe a 197. But this CC looks pretty sweet...

Sorry...guess I can't put that here...

rodltg2
04-06-2007, 03:47 PM
i think mc should make a boat in between the x7 and x9. they make a crap load of models for boarding , why not one more famlily friendly prostar.


they must have listened to me, hence the ps214!

Harvey
04-06-2007, 05:23 PM
I have one thing to say on behaf of the wakeboarders of the board and around the world.

There have always been two wakes that were the staple of the wakeboard world. The X1 (former X2,PS205 hull) and the SAN 210 (you could also throw in the 2001 it's predecessor). This year N changed the 210 hull while Mastercraft continues to offer the same great PS205 hull in a different package. Mastercraft is a leader in many ways but in this single feat they have told their wakeboard customers "we hear you loud and clear and we will continue to produce the boats that our customer's want to buy." While N has told the same customers, "we are going to change the second most sought after hull in wakeboarding history and we are going to do it just because we can."

Mastercraft will continue to get my business as long as they continue to pay attention to their customer's wants.

rstitson
04-06-2007, 05:40 PM
Just a comment about warantee lengths. You generally find in cars (toyota) ex. that the warantees are shorter because they don't have to. It is really only when there is an issue or marketing need that warantee's lengthen. For me warantees are'nt worth the paper they are on, if there is any question. Most times there is some out. I would go with whatever you feel is most reliable and has a history of less problems. And it always comes down to what floats your boat.