Jmoski

Look at the maintenance log for engine oil, transmission oil, fuel filter, proper winterization, etc. As other have said the hours are not an issue if taken care of. Gel coat looks to be in great shape as far as one can tell based on the pictures. If it’s a garage queen that’s a plus. My buddies 1986 MC has over a 1000 hours and it’s running strong. Love the corvette engine!

@Than_Bogan - actually the difference is last April Jason’s MC was in on the south pond so the high water level thwarting me at the keyhole wasn’t a factor!

Yep - bad start in Mass as well. Ice is out, I skied once two weeks ago, but too high water from several rainstorms and crappy weather in general has hosed us. This weekend is a rainout as well.

I find that long board shorts or bathing suits that come down to the knee and are loose fitting at the leg cuff can create a scoop underneath the back of my legs on take off that adds drag. I happen to have a few pairs that create this effect, hence I don’t ski in them anymore.

When I switched from a full rear to a 1/2 rear (first the reflex R, and now the Radar HRT) I found I had to make adjustments to my deep water start as the first couple tries I kept pulling my rear foot out of the binding on the way up. Once up I found my position on the ski was different (for the better) as well. I suspect you are just using your muscles differently (not necessarily right or wrong) than before and your body needs to adjust. Do you feel like your fighting the boat on your start? The comment on baggy shorts is a good one, they can become a major drag on your body.

Interstate MT7-65 AGM - I put one in my 2006 196 2 years ago, love it. They are very expensive, but I wanted the best battery I could find. No problems running the radio after I ski my sets so my wife can bask in the middle of the lake. The model numbers changed since I bought it - you want the MTZ line. Read the details - designed for high draw applications that need both starting and deep cycling (police cars). https://www.interstatebatteries.com/products/mtz-65?productLine=auto&subcategoryKey=&ignorecategoryid=true

If you have a standard grease zerk fitting on the bearing, you can continue to push new grease in until all you see coming out is essentially new grease.

only advantage I can think of for the dealer vs. local marina, is if they seriously screw your boat up you probably have more recourse if it was the dealer. With the dealer if they screw up or it’s a recall problem with the boat, they own the problem either way. That said, I am with @oldjeep on doing it yourself, but if that’s not your bag take it to the tech that will treat your boat as if it was his own. Many shops (cars or boats) have time quotas on how long specific jobs should take, so if you get “norm the newbie” assigned to winterize your boat - mistakes can happen in the rush to meet the time quota. For example, when I bought a Toyota Tundra in 2016 I had them install a remote starter before I took delivery. The tech that did was a newbie and completely screwed it up and I had to take it back and have it redone after dealing with months of weird locking and alarms going off when I tried to use the remote start.

If you go with a vehicle that is close to being max’ed out, that’s ok for your local 1 mile trips, but consider having the dealer come pick it up for service and drop it off, or borrow a friend’s truck for that trek. In terms of specific vehicles, I would avoid the Honda Pilot/ridge line. I towed my SN196 behind my wife’s pilot once - and it was not a pleasant experience. The rear struts we’re toast after that one 180 mile round trip.

Sweet - Maine has a similiar but more restrictive law - you can ski the course without a spotter if you have a wide angle mirror.

Bet them a hundred bucks they can’t run the course by the end of the season.

@bkreis - where do you have it listed? Thanks for the lead, but I won’t be in a position to upgrade this year as all remaining funding will be exhausted after the house purchase and lift purchase.

@oldjeep - yes, the 200 is much bigger, but i’m Not comparing the 196 dry weight to the 2019 200, I’m comparing the diff between a 2018 & 2019 200. 2006 196 - 2570# 2018 200 - 2850# 2019 200 - 3400# 2019 ski - 2945# https://www.planetnautique.com/CorrectCraftManuals/SpecSheet.xlsx

@rayn - True, but it WILL work at our new lake house in Maine! We have the P&S signed and close in May. Of interest if I upgrade to a MC prostar, I am back at 3400# - which lift and capacity do you have Ray?

Hey guys, Anyone know why the 2019 200 is 550 pounds heavier than its 2010-2018 counterparts? Just noticed that fact since I am about to buy a lift for my 196, but am sizing the lift to handle a 200 in case I upgrade. The weight jumping to 3400 means I probably need a 5k lift instead of 4K. Granted I would most likely buy a low hour first generation 200 that would be ok with the 4K lift. Thanks

@BoneHead - the illusion is the fuel economy angle on it, no doubt both add a significant boost in power. One argument that could be made is a smaller turbo charged engine is more fuel efficient that a V8 while driving casually around town or in traffic, but if your driving it like it was meant to be your clearly not trying to save on gas :)

Turbos gives the illusion of more power with better fuel economy because it siphons power for the air compressor out of the exhaust being passed through a turbine, whereas a supercharger is powered of the drive train like any other accessory.

Make sure you hold onto the packaging it came in as shipping companies require seeing it in order to process any claim that they damaged it.

@eleski - good points, especially regarding UV rays & heat doing damage to the ski. I personally have never seen a ski break, but there maybe more cycles flexing the ski than we realize, problem is I doubt it’s ever been measured. A good example I have seen though was the 3D printed heel cups on some hard shell binding plates, they simply didn’t hold up over time. I had one catastrophically fail after a single season of use, no UV or salt exposure. It would be interesting to rig a ski with a set of transducers to measure the stress, strain and amount of deflection a ski experiences on a single pass.

Fatigue failure i think is the more likely culprit if you rule out defective materials or construction- which the static load test above would catch. The ski experiences significant flexing as you hit the wakes, so this type of cyclic loading over years will weaken the structure. Both metals and composite materials are subject to this. Watch a video in slow motion and you will be surprised by how much the ski flexes as you hit the wakes.

Rock climbers refer to this measurement as “ape-index”. The bigger the number the better...

In regards to the original question, it would be interesting to know what % of their spend is on R&D. I would guess that it varies wildly in years where they introduce a hull, versus making improvements above the waterline. Investing in making products better is what keeps market leaders on top, if you don’t you will lose market share - granted sometimes you still lose it even if you do! I love all of the improvements that are available in today’s DD boats. Whether it’s improvements to make maintenance easier, improved engine performance & fuel economy, electronics, interior finishes as simple as making it easy to walk to swim platform without wearing the rear seat, or having places to store skiis... That said, most of the wake improvements on the SN are things that will never help me as an amateur, so I wonder if manufacturers are doing a disservice to the majority of their customer base by optimizing for the top 5% of skiers. That would be another interesting break down to see: purchase distribution across skier ability level.

@Orlando76 - I agree it’s tight on the weight for the 196 trailer, and I would never advocate putting a 196 on a 200 trailer due to bunk layout differences. I only ever want a trailer designed for my specific make and model. my trailer weighs in at 700# actually. That said the published max weight limit on an axle or trailer is the “working” limit, not the max/ultimate strength of the unit. On top of that, components like this are designed with a factor of safety, what value did they use for my trailer, don’t know for sure but I bet it’s atleast 1.5. That's awesome that we can still get Ramlin trailers, I had one under my 2001 SN and loved it, it was built like a tank. Finally, that must be a typo on you weight inventory, you meant you have 300lbs of “Beer” (not gear) in the boat? ;-)

@Orlando76 - FYI I paid $3500 In 2011 for a new trailer for my 2006 196. Single axle, swing tongue, disk brakes, diamond plate steps. Granted this was custom performance trailers in NY, so that doesn’t help you. The 200 is a bigger and heavier boat than the 196, most 200’s are on a double axle or a single with a 5000# axle, the axle on my trailer is rated at 3500#, so that will make the 200 trailer more $$.