Go Back   TeamTalk > General MasterCraft Topics > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 03-23-2014, 02:06 AM
Ryan's Avatar
Ryan Ryan is offline
MC Maniac
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Boat: 2007 SANTE 220
Location: DFW
Posts: 3,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMLVMI View Post
Not a wrap, it was auto paint + clear. The guy who did it commented on Facebook.
Looks like a great option for some of color trends that were more popular back then than they are now
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 03-25-2014, 12:23 AM
Tristar Racing Tristar Racing is offline
TT Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Boat: 2011 X1
Location: Chicago
Posts: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by 02ProstarSammyD View Post
agree but wasn't the rumor that the new hull was a new prostar failure hull? Wouldn't be as much r&d anyways
I read/heard that too. Easiest way to back up that rumor? The 91" beam that is more similar to a ski boat design than a modern wakeboarding design...

As an x1 owner, I really like what I see out of the nxt thus far.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 03-25-2014, 08:57 AM
Ryan's Avatar
Ryan Ryan is offline
MC Maniac
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Boat: 2007 SANTE 220
Location: DFW
Posts: 3,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristar Racing View Post
I read/heard that too. Easiest way to back up that rumor? The 91" beam that is more similar to a ski boat design than a modern wakeboarding design...

As an x1 owner, I really like what I see out of the nxt thus far.
Once upon a time many people favored narrow hulls because those boats took less weight to get good wakes. Perhaps there is reason to the narrow madness that people seem shocked by. I do hope MC put a lot into wake development on this boat.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 03-25-2014, 10:41 AM
craig3972's Avatar
craig3972 craig3972 is offline
MC Fanatic
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Boat: 2006 mastercraft x-star
Location: canada
Posts: 633
Maybe be thats why my 2006 xstar transom below the water line looks like a big box was tacked onto the hull - it looks like a 1998 slalom boat down down there.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 03-25-2014, 12:38 PM
MC25's Avatar
MC25 MC25 is online now
MC Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Boat: 2016 X30, 85 S&S
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 12,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
Once upon a time many people favored narrow hulls because those boats took less weight to get good wakes. Perhaps there is reason to the narrow madness that people seem shocked by. I do hope MC put a lot into wake development on this boat.
Agree. I don't have very many friends anyways, so narrow doesn't bother me. Lol
__________________
-Aric

LONE STAR MASTERBASH 2018

Details released 12/17!!!!

2016 X30-Wetsounds galore
1985 S&S
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 05-04-2014, 05:57 AM
g-mantrix's Avatar
g-mantrix g-mantrix is offline
TT Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Boat: matrix sorrento 2006 315 mrcruiser
Location: south east
Posts: 262
Update from MC Australia on FB



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 05-04-2014, 11:09 AM
WakeRider107 WakeRider107 is offline
TT Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Boat: boat
Location: location
Posts: 119
Has no one addressed the claim that their base 5.7L 320 hp engine is 30 hp more than competitors? Who runs a 290hp engine?
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 05-04-2014, 11:35 AM
FourFourty's Avatar
FourFourty FourFourty is offline
MC Devotee
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Boat: 2016 Nautique G23
Location: Northeast
Posts: 1,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by WakeRider107 View Post
Has no one addressed the claim that their base 5.7L 320 hp engine is 30 hp more than competitors? Who runs a 290hp engine?
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad...w-011-0059.pdf



210kw is only about 280hp.


http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad...018-0010-1.pdf


Indmar and PCM rate engines in test trim. Ilmore rates following SAE guidelines. (All belt drivin accessories installed and cat manifolds) C.A.R.B reviews engines following SAE guidelines. The others are technically overrated if basing on SAE guidelines.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 05-04-2014, 07:20 PM
WakeRider107 WakeRider107 is offline
TT Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Boat: boat
Location: location
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by FourFourty View Post
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad...w-011-0059.pdf







210kw is only about 280hp.





http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad...018-0010-1.pdf





Indmar and PCM rate engines in test trim. Ilmore rates following SAE guidelines. (All belt drivin accessories installed and cat manifolds) C.A.R.B reviews engines following SAE guidelines. The others are technically overrated if basing on SAE guidelines.

That's pretty much what I figured. But even car manufactures advertise brake horsepower, wonder why ilmor doesn't
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 05-04-2014, 07:37 PM
FourFourty's Avatar
FourFourty FourFourty is offline
MC Devotee
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Boat: 2016 Nautique G23
Location: Northeast
Posts: 1,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by WakeRider107 View Post
That's pretty much what I figured. But even car manufactures advertise brake horsepower, wonder why ilmor doesn't
Car companies rate on brake horsepower following SAE guidelines as well. Same way as Ilmore. Indmar, PCM, etc. measure brake horsepower without running any belt driven accessories (alternator, water pump, raw water pump etc), and also use tubular manifolds without cats. This was the common practice of all marine engine manufacturers since the beginning. Car manufacturers used to do it as well, until SAE set up guidelines for rating in the auto industry. They don't have to rate at the wheels, but they have to rate with all the belt driven equipment and correct exhaust in place at the time of testing bhp.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:05 PM.