DP70

When leaned away from the boat your inner elbows are already pinned to your vest and the handle is low on your body between your hips & knees. As your body starts to get more vertical through centerline and the handle moves to hip height - allow your arms to bend at the elbow to accommodate, it's not a pulling motion, it's keeping your elbows / upper arms in place and not letting them get separated from your torso.

I have the same boat - 1994 Tige 2000 SLM Comp - see attached pics of strut. [STSL 16] stamped on the starboard side of it - the other side is blank - no other markings on the strut.

Hey there NewStarts - I volunteer boat driving at summer camps getting small kids, big kids and adults up on skis - most of them start on 2 skis. The advise to get into a ball is great for wakeboard and slalom deep water, but in our experience doesn't work as well for double skis. We us a 90/90 method with great success. You want your knees bent 90* and a 90* bend in your hips - like sitting in a kitchen chair tipped way back. Definitely do not wrap your arms around your knees - in the 90/90 position your straight arms should be right about at your knees - your knees can be just outside of the handle if need be. As Bracemaker's sketch shows, press your toes towards the boat so your skis are roughly at a 45* angle in the water, not vertical in the water. The critical thing we teach is once you're in the position in the water with your arms straight, imagine a tether from the handle to your belly button - when the boat pulls you up you want it to feel as though it's pulling you up from your belly button - brace yourself when you yell 'hit it' and focus on keeping the handle the same distance from your belly button until you're standing, don't let it get pulled away from you. Once you're standing, keep the handle at belly button height in front of you and stand in an athletic position. From the video you posted it looks like you're letting your hands get pulled up in front of your shoulders and it's pulling you over top of the skis. Keep your hands low and let it pull you from your belly button.

Don't get hung up on those calling it 'wrong' - it's not. Call it reverse grip or switch grip & just grip it and rip it.

Here's a couple of pics Trailer is a 2002 Bunks need to be re-done From tail end of long bunk to winch roller is 18'3 - it would appear to be an appropriate length Long bunks are 12'7 Short bunks are 8'8 Trailer has been parked since the boat was purchased, it hasn't touched salt water.

Thank-you guys - I really appreciate the feed-back on the hull in particular. I'm feeling good about taking this on. From further dialogue with the current owner, whom I know & trust, the engine was running well 2 years ago - it's been sitting for 2 years. When they went to get it ready for use this summer is when they had the seized plug issue. I'm pretty confident the block & heads are OK. The issue for them is they're on an island off the coast - any major work that needs to be done requires a barge & then likely a ferry. My inclination is to get a machine shop to strip it down, remove surface rust, test it, paint it and then reassemble with whatever new parts are needed. A question about a trailer for the boat. There is one that comes with it - I don't believe it's original or native to the 1996 SN. Do any of you know of, or can point me in the direction of where to find, the correct spacing & length for the bunks for a 1996 SN?

I'm in Western Canada - limited selection of boats & closed border. I'm encouraged by the comments so far regarding the rebuild.

I mentioned this in my other thread about purchasing a boat - but this likely needs it's own place. I have an opportunity to get the hull of a 1996 SN for next to nothing. Interior needs some work. Engine needs a rebuild or re-power. It's the GT-40 engine. At the end of last season a spark plug broke coming out and a couple of pieces fell into the cylinder, so the head needs to come off for sure. Starter, alternator and other bolt on parts need to be replaced as well. The boat has been primarily used in salt water the past 10+ years - always pulled out at the end of every use, but quite a lot of use. I'm expecting the full exhaust system will need to be replaced and likely a good idea to replace the controls. Probably best to strip it right down to the block if keeping the power plant. Because I can get it for next to nothing, it may be cost effective to get the boat and do a re-build over the winter. I've owned boats, but never a direct drive. I'm reasonably handy, and know a bit, but I'm not a gear head & I don't know what I don't know. #1. Is the 1996 model year a good hull? Good wake? I get that it won't be 97-01esque, but is it still reasonable? I was behind a 99 SN 2 weeks ago and they are nice. How does the 96 compare? How would it compare to a 93 TIGE 2000 SLM (for sale in my area)? #2. Is this a reasonable project - or should I avoid it? #3. If I do go through with it - do I try to salvage the GT-40 or go with a new power plant? How easy is it to get parts for a GT-40 engine these days? It would be great if @Jody_Seal or any of the other engine gooroos on this site could give me the straight goods on this. Open to and appreciate any and all suggestions or advice. Mostly family usage long term - kids learning to ski, knee boarding, tubing - adults skiing. Will be used on a large lake with minimal boat traffic - not a lot of opportunity to get into a course. Darren

Definitely going to test any boat I purchase. Eclipse sold for more than I was willing to pay Missed on a 93 Prostar 205 in great shape as I couldn’t see it before leaving for holiday Sanger is still an option, still waiting on the engine issue to be resolved before another water test Will look at the Tige in a couple of days - it appears immaculate from photos Came across a project boat today - 1996 Nautique. It has the GT-40 but will likely need to be re-powered - it spent a lot of hours in salt water and it shows on the engine. I can likely get it for next to nothing as I’m familiar to the seller. I know the golden window for Nautique of that era is 97-01 - but how is the 1996 wake? Still OK, or avoid? I recall there was a chunk of years in that era that was ‘avoid’ - was that pre-07 or post-01? Any other potential issues with the 1996 hull? Good project boat or keep looking? Definitely not a chance to test this one as it’s not running.

I've been on holiday for a couple weeks so the boat search took a hiatus. Water tested the Sanger but it has an engine issue - it'll likely need a water test with an engine tech, but that isn't happening any time soon - all shops are slammed. Centurion Eclipse has good bones but interior is hammered - immediate full replacement required - and owner is still holding out for a premium price at this point. Another boat in the area is a 1994 Tige 2000 SLM (closed bow) - it looks to be in excellent shape w/350 Magnum power plant. I'm going to have a look at it tomorrow. Anything I should be wary about on this boat? I haven't found a lot of info online about them apart from them being based on the Centurion Falcon hull. How are the wakes? Anyone have any experience with them?

Thank-you all - very helpful. A bit more info. Current owner has had the boat since 2014. Some water got trapped in the block over winter 2015 & cracked the block. He replaced the block in 2016 - a number of the original peripheral parts were re-installed - including the original carb. Boat has been stored indoors since then & winterizing process each year has been thorough. Boat has not been serviced professionally since the new motor installed in 2016. Apparently it's only seen the water 1-2 times per year since the motor replacement so he didn't feel it was necessary. Original carb No service or tuning for 5 years That's a solid recipe for having running issues Sound like it could all be resolved with a service appt & worst case a new carb. Any recommendations on a new carb? There was a vote above for the Holley Spreadbore over the Quadrajet.

Thank you to those whom helped me narrow down my selection on a potential new to me boat. It was very helpful as I’ve not owned a direct drive boat prior. I test drove the boat (93 Sanger DX2) this evening. It has a newer engine in it - a Mercruiser 5.7L w/70 hrs. The boat handled well & has been well maintained, but there was an issue with the engine. I have no expectations that the issue will be solved from what limited info I have, I’m simply hopeful to narrow down where to look. If it’s a simple issue with the engine that can be fixed easily, I’d rather not discard this boat as an option out of ignorance. The boat didn’t have the pick-up / hole shot I expected - based on riding / driving other direct drives. It ran really smooth through 3000 rpm - but above that there were issues. The highest rpm I could get it to was 4000, but only briefly, then it fell off to 3800 or so. Everything I’ve read indicates WOT rpm should be 4400-4800 - typically 4500-400. As soon as it was in the upper rpm range the engine got a lot louder - disproportionately. It sounded like it had a kind of rattle & minor squeal a bit & began to run pretty rough with a bit of a stutter / surge. When I backed off the rpms it kept these symptoms until 3200 or so and then back to smooth at 3000. I’ve been driving diesels for 25 years, my memory is pretty foggy regarding gasoline power plants. My instinct is to start at the carb? Possibly the fuel / air mixture is out of whack. Not clear on why the threshold at 3000 rpm. I’d appreciate any suggestions that would help point me in the right direction. The guy that owns the boat now has maintained it really well, but he’s not a skier and not someone who you’d expect to be a boat owner. I believe he inherited it from family. If I can figure out what the issue is, it may help favourably with the purchase price. Thank-you in advance.

Thank-you @6balls. Tried to do a test drive today - so busy at the lake they closed the ramp. Lot & overflow completely full. Trying for an evening in the next few days. Definitely will put it in the water first. Leaning DX2 right now - that’s what we tried to test today. Most behind the boat will be <32 @ longer lines for the first few years. If we end up with a few keeners in a few years we can always upgrade the boat then.

Hey Guys - I’ve seen both boats - boat are decent DX2 is closed bow, interior is in good condition & comes with 2 covers - it’s been maintained better Eclipse has the step over bow, no cover, interior needs work & Bimini needs replacing Hull & engine hours similar on both boats Open bow has it’s pros & cons but will likely be $2K-$3K more to get into With respect to wake - I understand the Eclipse has the better wake - but how much better? There’s lots out there about how the DX2 has a ‘hard’ wake / curb, etc. Is that only at 34 & 36, or at all speeds? How about the 24-32 range for beginners & intermediates - is it a curb at those speeds too? What makes a wake hard vs soft? Is it the shape? A hard wake has more of a peak (inverted V) and a soft wake is more rounded (inverted U)? Primary use is a large lake that can whip up from time to time but is not super busy & we don’t need to transport people - we can play right off the beach / dock.

Thank-you @Wish - you're a gold mine for these older boat reviews. Great info. I'm still hoping to hear from a couple of people that have owned or driven one - but it sounds like a solid option. I'm going to look at it today.

Here is a pic of the Sanger - saw it yesterday. Looks real solid. Cosmetically it needs some work, but functionally the boat is solid. At the right number I believe it would be a solid option. Then yesterday another option popped up - a 1999 Centurion Eclipse - step over bow rider. I've done a search on here & there is generally positive feedback about this version of Centurion - flat wakes & family friendly. Does it have glass stringers & EFI for 1999? Is this model less likely to bury the nose than other models? Would you consider the Centurion over the Sanger function & performance wise? @Rednucleus @hammerski @RAWSki @ReallyGottaSki

Thank-you again guys - I admit I was a little seduced by the bowrider, but I understand for where & how the boat would be used the Sanger is likely the better option. I'm good with that. I'm going to have a look at it tomorrow. @Rednucleus - I'll post a pic once I have a look at it @6balls - what is a good prop for a 5.7 motor in the DXII?

Thank-you all for your thoughts & recommendations. Much appreciated. I'm up in western Canada - very limited options for used boats up here right now.

In my area there are a couple of boats available that I'd appreciate some insight / feedback on: 1994 Sanger DX II w/new carbureted 5.7L Mercruiser engine (70hrs) - boat has 700 hrs 1993 Ski Centurion B/R XP w/original Indmar 351 (assuming carbureted) - boat has 800 hrs My understanding is wood stringers in each. Are there any red flags to look for on either of these boats? Main usage will be on a large lake - not a lot of other boat traffic. It can whip up from time to time. Lots of free skiing and will have kids of various ages learning & riding behind it. None of the primary users are short line skiers & we likely won't have the time in the next decade to put aside to get there - so that's not a concern. Centurion has single axle trailer. Sanger has double axle trailer. Both look to be original with the boats. What are the wakes like? From what I've read - we're leaning towards the Centurion. Also, because of the bow space. I've read that some bow riders are susceptible to water coming over the front - is this model year Centurion one of those? Which boat will have the softest / smallest wake at longer lines? If you have a minute & have experience with either or both of these models of boats I'd appreciate a "If I were you I'd buy the ___________." And include a couple of reasons why please. Thank-you.

Based on typical construction practices it is likely you have a continuous beam across the entire width of the garage including the cantilevered overhang above your walkway. Typical 'rule of thumb' is for the exposed cantilevered end of the beam to be no greater than 1/4 the unexposed length of the beam. This would preclude your header being 'split' between the doors requiring an essential structural post in the middle. If the header beam is 1pc across the garage & including the overhang it is most likely engineered upon construction to handle the associated loads of that span. What it will likely boil down to is the point loads on the foundation. The greatest load is at the walkway corner where the cantilever is. It's possible the center post was included in the load calculations to help slightly alleviate the additional load on that corner of the foundation - spreading the load over 3 points vs 2. If that is the case, will removing the center post overload the foundation at the walkway corner enough to cause uneven settling, cracking of finishes or even failure? I'm not an engineer so I can't provide definitive answers to those load questions. But I am familiar with the costs of repairing something like this if it fails. $540 is really cheap insurance against worst case scenario. There is typically a cost associated with peace of mind & $540 isn't unreasonable.

Panda is fully deserved, especially for an English major. If there wasn't a period after 'no' you would have a point, but there is and you don't.

I really like the 1.092 handle from In-Tow. I’m a similar measurement at 7.75 & middle finger is 3.25

Wrist to finger tip measurements don’t always tell the whole story - it primarily depends on the palm to finger ratio when selecting the best grip. A good starting point is to use a handle where the finger tips just brush the base of the palm when gripping the handle - it gives a good solid grip without having to really squeeze it. If the fingers don’t reach the palm then the grip will be too much in the fingers & if they’re pressed into the palm you’ll need to use extra grip pressure to control the handle (grip tires quicker).

A good rule of thumb, or finger as the case may be, for handle thickness is when the finger tips of your middle 2 fingers just brush your palm when gripping the handle. Any thicker & the grip will be only in the fingers and thinner than that requires additional muscle tension to control / grip the handle (grip will tire quicker). As has already been said - however you decide it simply needs to feel good for you.