2013 Mastercraft X-star First Impressions

[Aric'sX15]

Originally Posted by willyt

uh... no.

the boat has 2 foot long forks... a 24 footer with the interior room of a 22 footer. I'll agree with the fact that i find the star much, much more comfortable to sit in, but its definitely not a family boat.

comfort may also be a point of view though... i dont find the interior of my buddy's BMW 328xi very comfortable, yet i love the plushness of my tahoe's seats.

In mind* never meant it's a family boat, but it is more comfortable than a g23 for sure.

[scott023]

Dang. That's a sic boat.

[agarabaghi]

Originally Posted by TN X-45

Wonder why no 5 blade? Not needed?

Sent from my Galaxy S3 on Tapatalk

With stock + Plug n play + launch plate = boat jumped out of the water, be interesting to see how it handles with more sacs.

[agarabaghi]

Originally Posted by Aric'sX15

Massively disagree. G23 is possibly the ugliest boat ive ever seen. Looks like a beached whale!

Agree, sitting in the water the G23 / G25 do not appeal to me. I will tell you that the Xstar drove much nicer / handle much better while pulling a rider than the G25 did with just stock ballast.

Ive never driven / ridden behind the G23 though

[jason95gt]

The problem with the G23, minus how big it is, is that it turns like a bus compared to the Star or most other boats for that matter and is also a gas hog. It uses twice as much fuel as a Star. I understand about price of boats and who cares about price of gas, but that means you have to fill it up twice as much over the season. I don't know about you, but that is the biggest pain.

[kgrove]

I think I'm in the majority in saying MC and CC both screwed up with their latest flagship boats. MC with the X-Star made some questionable style choices particularly in the exaggerated pickle fork extensions plus depending on your point of view either was surpassed or at least lost their advantage in pure wake performance. CC with their G23 made some awesome performance improvements but created a fugly boat that while it produces an awesome wake has some seriously negative handling characteristics and user problems. Both companies also gave their less than perfect boats massive price increases.

Interested to see which company changes first. If neither makes a move, they've both left the market open to Malibu, Tige, etc to step in and take ownership of the dominant wake boat. Don't get me wrong - both boats have an awesome wake, but both come with baggage that should not be present on a $120k boat.

[captain planet]

Originally Posted by kgrove

I think I'm in the majority in saying MC and CC both screwed up with their latest flagship boats. MC with the X-Star made some questionable style choices particularly in the exaggerated pickle fork extensions plus depending on your point of view either was surpassed or at least lost their advantage in pure wake performance. CC with their G23 made some awesome performance improvements but created a fugly boat that while it produces an awesome wake has some seriously negative handling characteristics and user problems. Both companies also gave their less than perfect boats massive price increases.

Interested to see which company changes first. If neither makes a move, they've both left the market open to Malibu, Tige, etc to step in and take ownership of the dominant wake boat. Don't get me wrong - both boats have an awesome wake, but both come with baggage that should not be present on a $120k boat.

That is like saying Lexus and Infinity have left the market open to Kia and Chrysler. How malibu continues to be considered an elite boat baffles me.

Sorry for the threadjack......I just couldn't help myself.

[Tristar Racing]

Originally Posted by jason95gt

The problem with the G23, minus how big it is, is that it turns like a bus compared to the Star or most other boats for that matter and is also a gas hog. It uses twice as much fuel as a Star. I understand about price of boats and who cares about price of gas, but that means you have to fill it up twice as much over the season. I don't know about you, but that is the biggest pain.

No offense, but twice the fuel? Come on. I'm guessing you work at a Mastercraft dealer?

Oh wait, tried this on wakeworld too, it seems G23 owners dispelled this "rumor"...

http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=797030

[Aric'sX15]

Dude, 19.5 gph?!!! I'd burn through that in like 2.5 hours of riding?! (In my 15) Bottom line is the g is flat out ugly. I wouldnt care if it burned 2 gph. I wouldn't be caught dead buying one of those. I do like the looks of the 230 for sure. Always have. Not just bashing brands. Id like to see some numbers on the star.

[FourFourty]

Originally Posted by Tristar Racing

No offense, but twice the fuel? Come on. I'm guessing you work at a Mastercraft dealer?

Oh wait, tried this on wakeworld too, it seems G23 owners dispelled this "rumor"...

http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=797030

G23 Owners?? That thread seemed like a bunch of G23 nuthuggers, and G23 haters, arguing about what the fuel mileage "could" be..... No factual statements


For what it is worth, the G23, that I spent time in, late this last summer, did not drink 19gph surfing with stock ballast + 3000lbs. We spent an entire afternoon surfing and wakeboarding behind it, and still had enough fuel to cruise around that night. It was probably more like 10-12gph.