Horton, what can you tell me about it?

[rodltg2]

I am pretty sure you know this boat. What can you tell me about it? Should I be worried about 1500 hours?

For you mechanic guys out there, how long could one expect this engine to last. I have read approx 2000 hours. When it it hits TBO, what could one expect to spend on the overhual?

[BraceMaker]

I suspect a link was intended ~~~

[east tx skier]

Rod, with proper care and maintenance, the sky's the limit (the sky being around 3,700 hours). But the passed around numbers are 2,000 hours for Indmar and 2,500 for PCM. I'm a big fan for having long conversations with the owner and looking around his garage. You can learn a lot about how a boat was treated by having a couple of beers with the owner. I have ended up with some well cared for boats this way.

[Wish]

Have a buddy that baught a ski boat despite the fact that every time he asked about something he questioned with the boat, the owner would start his sentence with...." well me and my buddies were drinking so....". Agree a good chat will tell you a lot.

[Horton]

@rodltg2 ?

[6balls]

Lots of clues in person. Garage, vehicles, home, condition of rope/handle, clutter in boat, bilge, trailer etc. By nature many of we slalom addicts are OCD about our equipment/boats...but not all.

[rodltg2]

Oops forgot the link ! http://www.ski-it-again.com/php/skiitagain.php?topic=Search&category=Comp_Boat&postid=21186

[6balls]

@rodltg2 you were after ZO and that's no ZO boat, why would you look to buy it? For reference pricing I bought a 2000 SN 196 w/84 hours for $17K even 2 yrs ago.

[rodltg2]

The boat I wanted sold. My buddy was considering this boat but passed on the high hours. Now I'm considering it.

[BraceMaker]

Of course your California Skier is prominently displayed. http://www.ski-it-again.com/php/skiitagain.php?topic=Search&category=Comp_Boat&postid=21962

 

Have to say - I thought that your boat was many years newer than '93

[rodltg2]

Yes, yes it is! I'm hoping for ZO boat , but I would need to finance it. So paying cash for a nice nautique is an attractive option.

[Horton]

@rodltg2 the owner of that boat takes awesome care of his stuff. Trust him all day. Super good guy. Is a great boat.

[greghayes]

@horton - agreed. I am on the same lake as the owner and he is super conscientious about his boats. Definitely worth a look - and as a former Nautique owner of the same vintage, you won't find a better slalom pull out there for the money.

[Waternut]

Love the wake behind those boats!

[brody]

That 2000 hrs was more if the older carb boats, the newer fuel injection engines should go closer to 4000

[Wolfeie]

I also know the owner of that boat, and he does take very good care of his boats. Saw him

out skiing behind it last weekend. Used on a private lake and garaged.

[rodltg2]

All very re assuring. Definitely worth a look then. Just need to sell my boat now.

[JC McCavit]

I like the 97 -2000 196 they weighed 2,340 lbs and with 310 hp GT-40 had a better power to weight ratio than most newer boats. Add a Z-box and you can’t ask for a much better slalom boat. Does anyone know why the 2001 and later put on so much weight? The 2001 196 weighed in at 2,570 lbs. a net gain of 230 lbs. Where did all the extra weight come from?

[6balls]

It may be when they went to the trunk. My '00 has no trunk, a buddy w/a '02 does.

[Wish]

No trunk but was that the year they made the slider-up back seat with storage behind it? That shouldnt be that heavy.

[crashman]

the weights listed in the brochure are for boats equipped with standard equipment. In 2000 and years prior the "standard" engine was the 275 HP throttle body EFI and the GT-40 was an upgrade. In 2001 the GT-40 became standard but I think (and may be wrong) that if equipped with the GT-40 then the 2000 and 2001 boats weight the same. My 2001 SN still has the slider.

[JC McCavit]

@crashman What is the slider? I suppose Jody could tell us the weight difference in weight between the standard 275 h.p. engine of the era and the GT-40. I would be surprised if it were 230 lbs. Maybe 50 or 60. I may be way off though.

[6balls]

@JC agree...I'm thinking displacement for both prob approx 350 cubes despite difference in HP...unless in those years they were dropping in a 5.0 liter as the base?

[crashman]

I was referring to the slider up trunk thing in the back- it seems to span the years when the weight jumped. I could be totally wrong about the engine difference accounting for weight difference. I was kind of drinking while posting last night.

[Wish]

I prefer the method of kind of posting while drinking.