Baller Chuck_Dickey Posted March 15, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 15, 2011 I had a closer look at the MC 2011 WTT and was surprised to see this new shape strut. Has anyone else seen it and what is it suppose to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Sullivan Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 From The Brochure: Pureflow Strut Mastercraft sweats the details. Over time the littlest thing can have a temendous impact. Out Patented new PureFlow strut, for example. Rather than enhancing speed and power by increasing horsepower, our naval architect analyzed prop efficiencies. The PureFlow strut improves torque by delivering cleaner water to the prop. Looks like it came from a navy design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 The design has nothing to do with the navy, Mike Myers the Naval Architect (guy that designs the hull, and boat systems) originally came up with the design for the MC 300 when it was launched and now it is being put on all of the models. The strut works by cleaning up the water in front of the prop, which means that the prop has cleaner water and thus less cavitation (slip) thus increasing the efficiency. The strut also softens the wake some, and has been getting good feed back from dealers and skiers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Chuck_Dickey Posted March 15, 2011 Author Baller Share Posted March 15, 2011 When did they start this? Do all the 2011 WTT boats have this new strut design? Is it being rolled out to all models throughout the year or do all 2011 MC's have it? Would it make a 2010 or a 2009 TT boat better?Will it fit older TT's ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller eleeski Posted March 15, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 15, 2011 Mastercraft did this so you wouldn't have to drill holes in your boat. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 All the 2011 MC's have the new strut design, and yes you can retrofit it to any existing boat that you may have. Midwest MC has them for sale in their store. Eric, I told you that Mastercraft engineers always have something up their sleeves:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller thager Posted March 16, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 16, 2011 Mastercraft just wants you to know it's a male so you don't name it Sue or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Man Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Maybe this could be used as a tail hook for very short lakes at the end of an 8 buoy course. Might consult OB about this being he has the experience flying and setting up an 8 buoy course. http://cid-3cc359cda510882d.photos.live.com/self.aspx/Pictures/IMG00176.jpg http://cid-3cc359cda510882d.photos.live.com/self.aspx/Pictures/IMG00176.jpg http://ldifrq.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pOSObENmt2z-cKsXGC9oKE3Qkcv5ykEMDYcqo8dT6ujVB37rYjsR3RCQNMXFfYvgeyB9kzAq_RyXz2oiRf0ER5YMJYjY51QCA/IMG00176.jpg?psid=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller thager Posted March 16, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 16, 2011 Or you could hang a couple gate bouys from the back and have the complete package! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller disland Posted March 16, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 16, 2011 Hmmm they do this fancy stuff for the strut but they have this huge rudder with no trim tab and zero hydrodynamics. Is that on purpose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 zero hydrodynamics what do you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller_ RichardDoane Posted March 16, 2011 Baller_ Share Posted March 16, 2011 It only takes a touch of the sander to properly load a MC's rudder, no "trim tab" is necessary. I can't wait to get the grinder out for the new boat due the end of April. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Sullivan Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Richard,You haven't heard from your dealer.......our boats won't be shipping until end of May now. Something to do with a missing part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller disland Posted March 16, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 16, 2011 Didnt mean to offend the MC crowd. I just always wondered why the MC rudder was not at streamlined as others. it seems that the block back would cause cavitation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 No offense taken, I just was not sure what you meant. The shape of the current rudder has no adverse affect on the water flow that would cause any cavitation. OB, The new strut design has gotten good feedback from both pro skiers and non pro skiers as well as dealers. The new strut was mentioned in another thread a few weeks ago and the skiers that had skied boats with the new strut all liked it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller_ DW Posted March 17, 2011 Baller_ Share Posted March 17, 2011 So, what did they like about it, what difference was actually seen and felt? Interesting idea and implementation but you still have the disruptions on the top side of the bullnose. It would be neat to see some comparative streamlines from standard and this design. Certainly nice to see innovations back on the table for tourney ski boats after a pretty long drought watching the wakeboard boats suck up all the R&d resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller swc5150 Posted March 17, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2011 Right on DW! That's why I switched from MC to CC back in '06. I felt they were the only company who still took an interest in the slalom skier. I would love to see what MC could accomplish with a new hull, putting their minds to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller eleeski Posted March 17, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2011 SWC5150 I disagree with you strongly. The attempts by CC to redesign boats were disasters. My old 97 Nautique boat intrinsically a spectacular boat. The newer boats were OK for slalom only and awful for other skiing aspects. CC never fixed the defects. Mastercraft started as the disastercraft and continually improved the boat into the great three event boat it is now. The strut is another step in MC's evolution. I hope MC does not change its molds. CC maybe should? Note that the best hull ever is the 79 American Skier - imagine that boat with modern tweaks. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 The skiers have felt that it softens up the wake at all line lengths as well as changing the shape of the wake some. A few drivers also stated that they have picked up some speed, nothing substatal though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller swc5150 Posted March 17, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2011 To each his own, I guess, but my favorite boats to date are still the TSC hulls. I used to bleed TN gel coat, and will always have a place in my heart for the Prostar, I just haven't cared for the last few incarnations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNh2oskier Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I have thought for some time that MC has been complacent with their prostar series, nothing new has come out of Vonore since 2002ish? I wouldn't consider a bolt on to an existing hull as much in the way of R and D.  I'm really curious to see the new prostar, does anyone have any idea if it will be ready for production with the new model year 2012's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller swc5150 Posted March 17, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2011 TN, that was part of my thought as well. MC has been pumping out new wake boats as fast as they could (like everyone), yet the PS remained stagnant. Then when the 197 became the waterski flagship over the 190, I was out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller swc5150 Posted March 17, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2011 ...Not that the 197 isn't a nice boat, it's just not for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Chuck_Dickey Posted March 17, 2011 Author Baller Share Posted March 17, 2011 Just because CC is constantly been changing their hull design doesn't necessarily make them any better and I don't have anything against CC. The old '98 196 was the best wake going, why all the changes?MC has the best 3 event boats going. So why change the proven rather than tweak the underwater gear? The 2002 hull was refined in 2003 which added lift at the rear, flatter wake was the result. In 2006 they changed props and the rudder, both net results were improved driving and wake. Now this PureFlo strut and a new motor brand.Not to bash CC, especially since I'm currently shopping for a 2011 Promo boat, but this is some of what I've heard during my search. These are not my comments, just what skiers have told me.I hear the CC200 feel softer for slalom due to the chines added to the bottom. This adds bubbles to the wake, it's still as high but feel softer if you're on edge. If you're not on edge it will launch you as fast as any MC or BU. They still are not as good in Trick or Jump. I've heard these bubble lessen the efficiency of the prop and the boats are screaming at 34 and 36 mph, running 4000 rpm to 4500 rpm. Also heard the gas consumption increased dramatically, by 15 to 20 %. I hear their answer is their 6L motor ($$) and a bigger prop. I wonder why CC decided to increase the size and weight which makes them the same as MC and Malibu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller swc5150 Posted March 17, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2011 "I wonder why CC decided to increase the size and weight which makes them the same as MC and Malibu."I wondered the same thing, but it was to open the boat up to a broader market - which worked. I'm still chugging the 196 kool aid, but am excited to see what the next Prostar brings us (hoping for late August 2011?). I grew up in a MC household, so I'm not bashing them by any means. Heck, I've probably been harder on CC since the 200 came out.   Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller jdarwin Posted March 17, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 17, 2011 I had the opportunity to drive a 2011 197 at a tournament at Bennett's back in October. I was not certain what had changed but the boat drove and skied much better than any other 197 I had been in. It tracked as well as my SN200 and the wake at 28-35 were comparable. I've been pleased with my 200 but since it is now sold and I'll be in the market for a new boat after the fall, I will consider MC this time around after my experiecne in October. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller ForrestGump Posted March 18, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 18, 2011 chuck, No offense but the "I heard" doesn't hold water. Most of those things you heard on the 200 are not exactly correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller ForrestGump Posted March 18, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 18, 2011 One thing, not all 2011's got the new strut. Early boats did not. I've skied behind a TT and a regular 197 that were built early that did not have it. I think MC will retrofit it under warranty, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 Yes Shane youre correct the boats that were built in july-early aug. didnt get the new design since the production of the strut had not begun, but all 2011 models do get the strut now that production has been ramped up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller skibug Posted March 18, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 18, 2011 Anyone know the price to retro fit a 2009 197 TT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FA Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 http://www.waterskis.com/MasterCraft-Nosecone-Strut-p/mastercraft_nosecone_strut.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Steven Posted March 18, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 18, 2011 It would be interesting to put that on an older boat to see how it changed the wake characteristics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller swc5150 Posted March 18, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 18, 2011 I'm curious to check out this strut. I'll admit, at first it reminded me of the 4th tracking fin, foiled rudder and rear wings glued to the hull. If it provides greater efficiency at the prop, it could be a beneficial idea for the 200, if some the aerated water stories are true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 What do you mean by aerated water stories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Ed_Obermeier Posted March 18, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 18, 2011 Supposedly where the front of the hull meets the water the 200 hull is designed to suck air under the boat to soften (aerate) the wake. This bubbled up water at the prop creates less prop bite making it less efficient, requiring more HP or RPM (using more fuel) to compensate. Anyone able to confirm or deny that? Adding this strut to the 200 might negate the value of this aeration (if in fact it exists) perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 The hull design of the 200 has a lot more wetted surface area then the 196, and that area is also designed in such a way that causes it to be less effiecient, that is why the high RPM and increased power needs. The hull is not sucking air under the boat, infact the boat has vented chines to allow high velocity spray to escape which would also allow any trapped air under the hull to escape. You could still try and add the strut, im not sure what the CC shaft angle is though, as no matter the hull design the strut will clean up the water flow entering the prop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller eleeski Posted March 18, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 18, 2011 Note that race boats use a surface piercing propeller. Optimal amounts of air at the propeller should increase efficiency. Generating that air with draggy features on the bottom of the hull might offset any gain.The 200 is a big boat. Maybe we need a light version of the old 76 Nautique!Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 That is a completely different design ideology compared to the design of an inboards prop, it would just destroy an inboards prop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller swc5150 Posted March 18, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 18, 2011 I would never betray the source of the info I heard on the 200, but it's pretty darn reliable, so I wouldn't say it's not occuring. Whether it was intentional or not, to create a softer wake, was never discussed, so I can't comment on that.  With that said, I'm not privy to "insider info" on these boats, I just happened to be around when it was discussed. In fact, I've heard it discussed in various forums now, so it's not a totally uncommon subject. Owners on this site have changed props to improve fuel efficiency/RPM rates, apparently without sacrificing the wake, so it's not an insurmountable defect (if it's a "defect" at all). I'm not bashing the 200 hull, again I'm just curious if this strut design could help in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 The front of that hull is certainly not designed to draw air under the boat, if it is then it is an unintended consequence of the hull geometry, but the way the hull is designed at the bow is to deflect the spray down and away. The problem with the 200 hull is that the hull geometry caused a large increase in wetted surface area which means greater resistance which causes the boat to burn more fuel, go slower, and turn higher rpm's when compared to a 196. Those are the reasons that people are experimenting with different props unless there is something that I have not heard about at all. The strut would work to clean up the prop flow but I couldnt tell you if it would fit the 200 or not. It would need to have the same shaft angle as the MC or have a shim machined to make it sit at the correct angle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Chuck_Dickey Posted March 18, 2011 Author Baller Share Posted March 18, 2011 FWIW - This is a pic of an '10 CC200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 Thought about it for a bit, and the hull design isnt drawing air under the boat but the way the boats hull transitions may be causing the water to vaporize causing the cavitation problems that you are referring to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Chuck_Dickey Posted March 18, 2011 Author Baller Share Posted March 18, 2011 MCski Freak, Bubbles are what's causing the prop to require such high revs and 15% to 20 % more gas consumption. Wake feel softer due to the bubbles, but you have to be on edge or it is just as high/hard. Still really good boat all around, but they need to do something besides opt up for the 6L motor. At this point I'm shopping for an MC 2011 WTT with the Ilmor motor and the PureFlo widget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller ForrestGump Posted March 19, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 19, 2011 The 15-20% more gas consumption is not accurate, even with the stock prop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller jdarwin Posted March 19, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 19, 2011 First off, the angle of the shaft on a CC200 is 16 deg (IIRC). The Mastercraft is 19-21 - not sure of the exact deg. Therefore the MC strut will not work on the CC200. I'm not certain it is needed.Now, as for fuel consumption, I changed the prop on my 200. The RPM's are better but still not great. I keep very tight records on our fuel consumption. I have a bunch of data from my 2007 196 and by mid summer, I'll have some conclusive numbers on the 200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Chuck, The water that is vaporizing would cause the bubbles. This is the sort of thing that occurs when you first apply the throttle. The vapor pressure is exceeded and this causes air bubbles to form. I still stand by the fact that the increased resistance is what causes the increased fuel consumption, I study this sort of thing all day long, and the way that hull is shaped is very inefficient from a resistance standpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
east tx skier Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 A guy in our ski club just retrofitted one of these to his 2005 TT 197. He also has the rudder upgrade for 2006. Interested to see how it skis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Might be a cool idea to try and video the water flow as it enters the prop...maybe using a gopro mounted on a pole? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller skibug Posted March 28, 2011 Baller Share Posted March 28, 2011 I would really like to hear opinions if anyone retrofits a later model MC 197 TT with this new strut. I have a 2009 197 TT that I am considering retrofitting if it make a dramatic improvement to the wake. Also, wondering about the effort to install. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCskiFreak Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 The install is nothing difficult, the biggest pain in replacing the strut is getting the 5200 adhesive to soften up, as well as making sure that your shaft is properly aligned after the install. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.webp.c1d9c97f9cd6aed3eb2f057593d2bd42.webp)
.webp.3cd841288e23e58f209509e0bce4937d.webp)
.webp.a30f66e5f4553a0ea06e4fe12520951c.webp)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now