Food for Thought: Ski Nautique 2001 Wake Surfing

[ncskier]

I work at a marina and see a lot of interesting boats. One thing that I see that kind of annoys me is people who take a Ski Nautique 2001 and try to turn it into a wake surfing boat meaning, they will put a tower on it and add fat sacks and six to eight people to weigh it down and then actually try to surf behind it. I do not understand it. They are taking one of the smallest boats out there, designed to create the flattest wake and are trying to turn the thing into a battle ship. Nothing about the 2001 is designed for this. Just a couple of months ago I saw the cleanest and nicest sn 2001 being used for this. The owner said he had bought it off of a guy who had just restored it. The thing was immaculate. I do not get the appeal besides that fact that they are cheap. It seems to be that they could easily find an old supra, sport nautique, or malibu sun setter for the same price and with a lot more space. I've added a photo to showcase what I am talking about.

 

[bbirlew]

The 2001 is on the top of the list for 'budget wakeboats'. It's only downfall is lack of space, but the narrow width makes it easy to sink without too much ballast and it throws a nice crisp wake. More wake than 99.999 % of wakeboarders would know what to do with.

They can be purchased cheep too.

 

Yes they look nice as a ski boat, but trust me... You don't want to ski behind one!!!

[Hallpass]

Agree, highly rated as a wakeboard boat on a budget. But, as a surf boat, I think they are down right dangerous. I've only seen it done once, and, to produce a surf wake the boat was buried on one side to the rub rail.

[oldjeep]

Under $10K ready to go, as opposed to 30K+ to get into just about anything else that would work.

http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/ank/boa/5151315850.html

[akale15]

Agreed @bbirlew, I was just looking at an 84' ski nautique 2001....the price was decent but I think I would hold out for something with a little better wake to be skiing behind.

[Nando]

ncskier, you found the appeal- they're cheap. Watched some guys swamp one a couple of weeks ago while wake surfing. They just cut the throttle and had so much ballast that the wake came over the transom and filled it up. They were back in action a little while later, all pumped out, but they were lucky.

[swc5150]

@oldjeep Funny how they're advertising that 2001 as a 21' boat. They must be including the trailer tongue and swim platform!

[andjules]

Although you can get yourself into trouble faster, as suggested above, a narrower boat's displacement is more affected with less ballast. I believe this post is not-too-indirectly related to the explosion in watersports boat prices we've seen in the last 20+ years, which was driven by wakeboard boats. Wakeboard boats faced their own catch 22: the desire for a bigger wakes meant more gear, more passengers, bigger hulls, higher freeboard, and eventually wider beams... but bigger, wider-beam boats are less affected per-pound-of-ballast, which leads to the need for ever-bigger ballasts, and the need for bigger engines. A 500lb fatsac in a Nautique 2001 did more to the wake of that boat than 1000lbs of ballast does to today's $125k Nautique G23. Somedays I wish we'd go back to the sub-2500lbs, sub-300hp, sub-95" beam boats of the 80s... and their price tags.

 

p.s. I used to slalom (and trick) behind the 2001. It had a mean bump at -22 off, but otherwise the wakes weren't that bad; in fact, the boat was heralded as a breakthrough. It was the generation of Nautiques before (76(?)-81) that had slalom wakes made of cement.

[jimbrake]

I think "purple Skurfer" was a kind of acid back in the '70s. Windowpane, purple microdots, purple skurfer.

 

Carry on.

[lakeaustinskier]

My dad still owns a 1982 2001 with a cool black and grey hull combo. Bullet proof boats. Besides the cheap cost the other attraction is the simple nature of the 2001 - basic Ford 351 Windsor motor that anyone can work on, basic gauges, and a boat hull - that's about it. Sure it has the classic Airguide speedos and not ZO but if you're out on the lake with your buddies and an humongous ice chest of beer who cares?

[gregy]

My buddy puts about 1200lbs of fat sacs in his MC 197 it throws a monster wake. I've pretty much converted him to skiing though!

[Horton]

You guys do know this is a water ski site?

[ncskier]

My point is that there are other boats for around the same price as a 2001. It just seems so dangerous and stupid to do something like that to a boat of its size and purpose.

[escmanaze]

The Sunsetters and Supra Saltare (pretty rare and tough to find) are open bow, and are therefore usually quite a bit more money than the 2001. As mentioned above also, since they are bigger, they require more weight to increase the wake size. If it's just a couple bros on a really tight budget wanting to board and surf and wanting to spend the least amount of money possible to still get a really nice wake, it's pretty well documented on all of their forums that the 2001 is the way to go.

 

Also, keep in mind, that waterskiers don't even want those things anymore. I think most would agree that the MC of that era had a better wake, and it also had no wood stringers, so if the wakeboarders didn't hog up all the 2001s, then nobody would.