Looking for an older boat

[BrennanKMN]

1400 hours isn't bad as long as it is well cared for. 2500 hours or more is when you will start needing to look at a rebuild.

[DW]

@scorban2 : The issue would be more of maintenance not # of hours. Leak down and compression test would give internal engine condition results. Bigger concern is damage from an overheat due to raw water impeller failure or inadequate winterizing resulting in block freeze damage. Agree with Brennan on hours.

 

Other items that simply endure wear due to hours / use would be fuel pump, blower, steering helm bushings & u-joint, rudder bushings. I would much prefer a high hour well cared for vessel than a poorly cared for low hour vessel.

[scorban2]

All,

 

Have found 2 boats (94 PS and a 97 SN) that I'm very interested in and getting close to pulling the trigger. I don't think I'll be disappointed with the wake behind either (haven't skied the MC but always heard good things). At this point, the deciding factor may be the drive distance as the SN is only 6 hrs vs almost 13 for the MC. Also, once I factor in adding PP to the MC and the extra drive, the cost up for the SN is only ~$1500. A few other questions:

 

1) The SN just has PP classic. We're recreational slalom skiers, and in the course I've only managed 3 at 15 off (only tried 5 times). Will the RPM mode be enough for us, or should I figure on upgrading to stargazer (~$750)?

 

2) Is there much difference in under bow, and total boat storage between the two? We will commonly head out to ski and then spend a good part of the day on the river hanging out afterwards, so a bit of storage is nice. I know they're both small, but will I be able to fit a few skis up under the bow with jackets, etc?

 

Thanks,

Stephen

[PatM]

@scorban2 They both have under bow storage, but I think the 97 SN has easier access to the under bow storage. I would think the amount of storage is about the same.

[BraceMaker]

@"Pat M" the SN I think the whole seat base lifts right? The prostar the backrest hinges up and then the seat bottom can be removed where there is a "cooler" that lots of people relocate the battery into - I keep my anchor tucked there myself.

 

Skis fit up front just fine in the Prostar better if you pull the seat bottom up and tuck the fin back there - but you can cram them up further if needed, you lose this in the open bow boats.

 

That said I usually keep my skis out behind the drivers seat as even when hanging out they're out of the way enough - I hardly ever run the rear seat in the boat since people walk over it to get in and out - the SN probably has a center step by 97.

[6balls]

Buy the SN...it's just a better boat (both have great wakes). You will be fine with PP classic...I ski buoys into 39 off behind mine. We use it for open water skiing speed control, too.

[DW]

@scorban2 : PP classic will be just fine, classic gives a very good pull and will control speed very well. As @6balls noted, we also use PP-C for open water and course skiing. One note, PP no longer offers master module hardware for PP classic, they will require an upgrade if the module fails, check their website for details. IMO not a deal breaker or a worry. What you will notice, if skiers are quite different in loading the boat, you need to manually adjust for that, a simple menu scroll and button push to adjust weight or can be done on the fly, the speed controlled by GPS simply compensates for that internally.

 

Don't forget, back in the day not too long ago the Mapple's, Cox's, Roger's, Parrish's, Jaquess', Overton's all got along just fine with PP classic.

[shansen345]

@scorban2 You cannot lose between those two boats!! I have countless hours of wheel-time in my club's 2700-hour salt water 1998 Ski Nautique, and boy is that a great boat. We replaced the engine at ~2300 hours, so you'll likely be okay with 1400, provided maintenance was good! I really like how those boats drive. I've driven a lot of boats, and those are among my favorite because of their decently smooth ride and good tracking.

 

I cannot speak specifically about the 1994 MC, but I have spent almost just as much time in the Nautique as I have in my buddy's 1998 MC SportStar (which is just a tweaked 1995-1997 ProStar) as well as a couple private lake days with my other friend's 1996 MC ProStar 190. Those are great boats too. They ride a little more harsh, but that 1996 ProStar especially skis so nice. That PS and the Nautique ski just as nice as eachother, and I think the PS tracks well too. And that 1994 supposedly even has a softer wake than the 1996...

 

Both are very well-built boats and you'll be in a great spot with either! Pick between the two based off of price, and maintenance. I wouldn't let speed control be a deciding factor.

[TFisher]

I'm a malibu owner and have skied and driven both those boats. Buy the nautique if it's a well cared for boat. Much better tracking. Much less spray. I drove a 91 mastercraft last week and felt like it was on ice.

[RAWSki]

The 94 PS is way different than the 91 (often referred to as the AquaMassage) I think the 94 is arguably one of the best slalom wakes ever. And I believe it will have a EFI engine. You can't really go wrong with either Boat you are considering.

[TallSkinnyGuy]

I haven't heard the '94 PS 190 called "way different" than the '91 before. My understanding is that the hull, deck and overall construction was the same for 91-94 and the only significant change was the EFI engine as standard in '94.

[BraceMaker]

IMO - the 88-90 boats spray like crazy, 15' headwind at 28 and they'll hit you with spray. I've never noticed an excessive spray issue on the '94 on line lengths one is likely to be skiing in wind conditions people are likely to want to ski during. Now one thing that was for sure off in the '94 was its steering cable when I got mine - that made it impossible like battling a greased pig when pulling a skier.

[scorban2]

I've found another one SN I'm going to look at this weekend, which only has 900 hours and had an interior completely redone a few years ago.

 

From all my research I don't think I'll go wrong with either choice.

 

Any thoughts on which is better between the two for 15 off slow speed (26 or 28) wakes? I'm beyond that point, but have a few friends/ski partners that are just getting into it. The TSC1 was good when I skied it at 30, but have no experience with the 91-94 MC at those speeds.

 

 

[skimtb]

I'd go with the nautique. I think the wake will be a bit better where you are skiing.

Also, the boat is wider and will feel bigger.

Third, it should have the 3 piece backseat base which allows you to Keep the middle out and still use the sides without having someone always stepping on your seat. The MC is all or nothing. If you can keep the seat out on the MC, maybe it's no big deal.

Not sure how you will need to use the boat.

[Texas6]

Came across this ole Supra in Houston this week. Hurricane fire sale @Wish

 

[scorban2]

Thanks to all for the feedback on this thread and helping in my boat search. I made a trip to the Minneapolis area last Friday/Saturday and brought home a 97 SN with 920 hours on it. The interior was recently redone and the outside is well above average for a 20 year old boat. I ended up stretching my original budget by a few thousand, but I only ended up ~$1K over most of the nicer 91-94 MC's I was looking at by the time you'd add PP. Headed straight to the lake for the remainder of the weekend, and put 5 more hours on the clock. I enjoyed every set on it, and couldn't get over my cousin's grin every time he crossed the wake (he'd only skied on I/O's before).

 

[shansen345]

One of my favorite color combos! Awesome!!