Hogballer Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Which boat would you buy? Slalom only. 15 to 32 off which of these boats would have a better wake. I know one is efi and the other carb. We are skiing a 1990 ps now with stargazer. I know a lot of you guys had skied both of these boats a lot and was wondering which you like the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller swc5150 Posted July 23, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 23, 2015 We owned both and personally prefer EFI by a long shot. The '92 will have more spray at -32, where the there's hardly any with the '95 hull. The '95 won't handle anywhere close to the '92. It has a ton of body roll in the corners, but does track decent through the course. I think they created more dead rise with that hull, to eliminate spray, which had the negative affect on handling. FWIW, after owning '95, '97 and '98 Prostars, I wouldn't want to go back to any of them. I'd personally prefer a '94 Prostar (EFI), if it had to be a Mastercraft. Would you consider a '97 Ski Nautique? I would bet if you drove and skied all three, that's what you'd choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogballer Posted July 23, 2015 Author Share Posted July 23, 2015 That's exactly what info I was looking for! Thank you! We have been looking for a 93/94 but no luck. Both these boats we have found are local, low hours, and cheap. I have skied the antique in that year and yes it's very nice but hate the rh prop, doesn't handle as well docking and in tight places Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogballer Posted July 23, 2015 Author Share Posted July 23, 2015 Which of the mc hulls has the best wake? Is there as bad of a rooster tail as our 90 model? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Fine409 Posted July 23, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 23, 2015 I think you'll find that of that era, strictly looking at the slalom wake, the 91-94 will put out the best slalom wake, with the 95+ being right behind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller jhughes Posted July 23, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 23, 2015 Don't discount the 90-96 Ski Nautique "No wake zone" era hull, either. It's a great hull that drives and tracks and handles spray as a modern boat does. Ergonomics are fantastic as well whereas MC seems to always have been a bit off in this department. 93-96 has no wood stringers but the 90-92 seem to still be holding up very well rot-wise. I own a 93 and a 2000 Ski Nautique and our club boat is a brand new TXi every year so I'm in a good position to say that the 90-96 SN hull is extremely good. It's really the first hull to drive like a "modern" boat and address spray issues, they were way ahead of the game in 1990 with that design. That hull was an actual "game changer". Don't count it out for sure, and there are killer deals out there for that era SN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller_ MISkier Posted July 23, 2015 Baller_ Share Posted July 23, 2015 If you're not buying a Nautique, Malibu or other, the choice between the 92 and 95 MasterCraft would be the 95 for me. The worst slalom equipment I own is between my ears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller gregy Posted July 23, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 23, 2015 I have a 99 Response LX. Its fuel injected, good wake, spray isn't an issue. When I bought this boat I specifically looked for Fuel injection. The carb on my old boat was always temperamental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller pgmoore Posted July 23, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 23, 2015 I can't comment on the '92 vs '95 wake. No experience with that. But, I can say with confidence... EFI over carb. All day, every day. With EFI, you just turn the key and the engine starts every time. Just like your car. No worrying about throttle, choke, or any of that nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller ALPJr Posted July 23, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 23, 2015 We used both a 92 and 97 MC almost exclusively for 10 seasons. Both are excellent ski boats! The 91 to 94 hull is probably the best wake I have ever seen for slower speed, longer line beginners and up through top speed 35 off Ballers. The 95 to 97 hull is only slightly different and also excellent. The 91 to 94 will have skier spray at 38off and shorter. The 95 to 97 eliminates that issue. The choice for me would be based on my budget and the boat's condition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Ajskier Posted July 23, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 23, 2015 @hogballer, the way a nautique backs up is actually easier once you get used to it. When coming into a dock if you point the bow in and then start the stern swinging in and then bump reverse it will make some of the softest dockings you have ever had, but it is a matter of personal preference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Orlando76 Posted July 23, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 23, 2015 If a carb'd small block doesn't fire up within the first nano second of a bump on the key, you're not tuned right. It should be every bit as quick as an efi with less to fail ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller swc5150 Posted July 23, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 23, 2015 I have to respectfully disagree that the 91-94 hull isn't that much different than the 95-97. Driving characteristics are 180 degrees from each other. I do agree that they both ski excellent though. Orlando76, you hit the nail on the head, which is why I could never own a carb'd motor again. I don't have the patience or time to maintain a carb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller 6balls Posted July 23, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 23, 2015 You get used to the Nautique at slow speeds around docs it's just different at first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller swc5150 Posted July 23, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 23, 2015 I was curious how docking a Nautique would be, after decades of MC ownership. Once you get it down, I think it's easier. The rotation actually helps you not bang the back of the boat into the dock, and I like how it pulls away from the skier when they drop. Preference though I suppose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller escmanaze Posted July 24, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 24, 2015 Yeah, originally I hated that my boat pulled away from the skier in reverse. Then after a little more use, I decided it's better to be too far than to be too close. I'll swim the extra 15 feet any day every day if it means I'm less likely to have my wife run over me on a brain fart. As far as the actual question the OP is asking, I think I go 92. You obviously care about the wake a lot, where the 92 has an advantage. You don't seem to be complaining about the carb on you 90, so the 92 shouldn't be any different. My elevation changes drastically based on which lake I go to, so EFI wasn't an option. It was mandatory. So I basically followed the thought process of swc5150 and just went for the 97 nautique where I got EFI and great ski wakes. I had to drive 1,000 miles to find it though, and I wouldn't say I got an amazing price or anything, so it's all about which tradeoffs you're willing to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Steveo Posted July 24, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 24, 2015 Agree with @jhughes on the 90-96 CC I put 2000 hrs on my 90. Ergonomics much better than the MC. The rotation you get used to. My choice would be 97-99 CC. Sounds like your pretty set on Mastercraft. @hogballer check Ebay I saw a nice 94 and a 96 MC on there recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller kpickett Posted July 24, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 24, 2015 I have a 94 190. My buddy had a 95. My son skis the course at 21. My wife skis 15 off at 28 and 30. I ski into 35 at 34. We feel like the 94 wake is much nicer than the 95. I wouldn't turn down a ride behind a 95 at all, but it's a harder, higher curb to cross. There is some spray on the 94. It's really only a problem when there's a big headwind. I love the ergonomics of the 94. Feels like you're driving a sports car. I love all of the new boats, but I don't think their wakes are any better than the 94 190. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogballer Posted July 24, 2015 Author Share Posted July 24, 2015 Thanks everybody! I think I'll look more at the natique now. I was just concerned about the handling but sounds like it's no prob after you get used to it and they are awesome boats. I have never touched the carb in 1400 hrs on the old mc, but I do have to run premium gas to make it work. I would however like to be efi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogballer Posted July 24, 2015 Author Share Posted July 24, 2015 Thanks again! Great info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller ALPJr Posted July 24, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 24, 2015 @kpickett please post some pic's of your boat - a reverse gel beauty if I remember right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller kpickett Posted July 24, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 24, 2015 Always happy to put up a picture of my boat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller jhughes Posted July 24, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 24, 2015 @kpickett that is absolutely sick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller kpickett Posted July 24, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 24, 2015 Thanks, @jhughes, I can't believe it, but I'm actually thinking of selling it if I find the right 197. I need a little more space for growing boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller 6balls Posted July 25, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 25, 2015 @kpickett beautiful are you EFI? How many hours? I have a friend tentatively looking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller Waternut Posted July 25, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 25, 2015 Don't discount Malibu's either. I really like the 99 ski nautique we use in the course but the 2000 Malibu Response I recently bought has a very similar wake with a whole lot less spray and it drives so much better IMO. I was seriously looking into a 93 MC 205 but the Malibu wasn't much more money. I've driven and skied a 94 Prostar and really like both handling and skiing but I only got 1 set behind it. I don't know what your price range is but closed bow Prostars seem to sell for fairly cheap while Nautique owners seem really proud of their boats and want considerably more money for the same year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller kpickett Posted July 26, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 26, 2015 @6balls - Yes, it has the LT-1, no slot. It has 1050 hours. I'm not going to sell until I find a 197. I was ready to drive home with one, but it didn't work out. You can put your friend in touch with me if you want. kwpickett@gmail.com Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller 6balls Posted July 26, 2015 Baller Share Posted July 26, 2015 @waternut is correct the malibu echelon and the malibu response both drive/ski nice as well. Have friends with both, each has 320 hp efi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.webp.fe2f8a07724aa0b030c317bb8c02956a.webp)
.webp.8497384650ada8a3e4f1fd5dd6c3fb2a.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