Inboardfix

The TSC1 hull was introduced at the 1997 CC dealer meeting which was held in the fall of 1996, not the 1996 dealer meeting.

During the introduction of the TSC1 at the 1996 Correct Craft Dealer Meeting Larry Meddock (Vice President of CC at the time) made the following statement to the dealers, "we'll know how good this boat is by how long it takes our competitors to respond". Mastercraft released a new hull for the 1998 model year. Best thing about the '98 PS190 is it was so bad MC had to bring Rob Shirley back to fix it (anyone remember the bolt on sponson fix of Rob's?). Although MC's 2021 new boat obviously wasn't rushed to market like the '98 (looked it over pretty well at Nats and it looks great) I do believe it isn't coincidental the development of it began 2 years ago which is shortly after the '19 SN was released. This "2 years ago" estimate is given by Will Bush in the 2021 introduction video. My guess is most of the posters on this topic have very little experience driving the new SN. Currently, I've put about 80 hours on my 1100 hour former ski school 2019. It is by far the finest SN I've ever owned. 1100 hour ski school used Seadek still looks pretty good as does the interior. Advantages over the SN200: - tracking, this boat practically drives itself. My '14 SN200 was awesome! This boat is better. - ride quality, even on a private site you'll notice a significantly softer wake crossing. If you're on a public lake you really need to drive this boat in rough water before making a purchase decision. Ride quality is impressive. - very difficult to swamp the nose unlike the 200 - great place to sit on the transom to wet your glove and boots prior to skiing. Ever tried to sit on the transom of a 200 to wet your gloves/boots? Not easy to do. - perhaps the best trick wake since the '82-89 SN. Yes, because of ballast but it tricks great. - fuel fills on both sides. Never warmed up to the center fuel fill - much more user friendly Link screen. - much less likely to catch the rope during sit downs - better layout of heater vents - loveseat heater - bilge plug much easier to get to - skiing is amazing behind it but I ski the same behind pretty much anything. Gonna run 32 and then stink it up at 35. If stars align just right might see 38 but thats been awhile. My job allows me the opportunity to drive many ski boats. Last week lake tested a 1989 SN, 1998 SN, 2005 SN196 and a 2015 SN200. I loved every second of all the drives and have personally owned and put well over 1500 hours on each of those hulls (only 80 on the new hull). Each time CC/now Nautique Boat Company changed the hull the boat was improved and the same is true with the new hull. Does the boat require proper set up? Absolutely, but all prior Nautique models did too. Set the rudder tab straight (don't angle it at all), make sure the gate is flush with the bottom of the boat (if it isn't make the dealer correct it), leave ballast empty for slalom (thought that was obvious) and set the ZO. As for all the technology intimidating people I don't get it. There are 3 actuators: 1 for gate (really like the actuator versus the cable driven of the old gate, add that to the list above), 1 for port side tuners and 1 for starboard side tuners. All the other tech stuff all the new boats have, ie screens. Really don't get all the complaining about Seadek either. Good ideas are copied and the 2021 MC has Seadek everywhere too. Stepping on Seadek versus gel is much safer. After reading the "just add water" comments I skied my boat w/o changing the rope length (no tuners were activated). Guess what? I ran 32 and stunk it up at 35, same as always. Tuners are a great idea and really do fill the trough as designed. However, all us old guys are used to troughs so doubt you'll lose a bouy if you forget to change the screen. What the tuners may do is make a difference for the true short line skiers. I'm glad a close friend, whose opinion I respect, convinced me to buy the new hull when he said it was the finest Nautique ever. He was right.

In our area the only tournaments where anyone gets awards are the States (other than Regionals and Nationals). My daughter started competing in 2011 and often was the only competitor in G1. In the following years a girl one year younger started being a regular so usually it was the 2 of them only all the way through G3/4. Sometimes there would be up to 4 in her division at the States. One time Mr. Jones' daughter came over to Ski Chaste to make it 3 G1 competitors at a non States but pretty sure that was the only time she competed against more than 1 other than States all the way through G3/G4. My point is I don't see where much has changed with the new divisions and understand the hope in why the change was made. That hope is the new divisions will stimulate youth competitors to continue competing at the Regional/National level every year and not skip a couple years after moving up to the next division. During this gap in competing at the Reg/Nat level many skiers find other hobbies/alternatives to skiing. An additional hope is this will have a trickle down effect and stimulate kids to compete at local tournaments because they won't feel so overwhelmed competing against a kid 3 years older they know are out of their league (performance wise). Will this change grow the youth divisions/sport? It will take years to know but it's worth a try. My daughter skipped at least one year participating at Regionals/Nationals every division change because she didn't really feel competitive and I didn't want to take time off work/lose money/time to have her be frustrated. We probably wouldn't have skipped those years if the divisions were as they are now. @Sunperch I really don't understand why your surprised. I get confused every time I sit down for diner w/your family too.

Hello Ballers. Here's the story on the 2014 SN200. It was purchased w/approx 800 hours late spring/early summer 2017 in order to provide my kids w/a practice boat similar to what they'd get at Nationals. My daughter made it clear she wanted to keep "her" boat (my 2007 SN w/6.0) instead because the 200 was "plain". About the same time she made this decree I had a buyer for the 800 hour 5.7 original engine. My opinion is the 6.0 is a better power plant for the 200, so I sold the 5.7 (replacing a GT40 w/5.7 CAT ended up being a pretty cool project) and lined up a 6.0 from PCM for the 200. After finding what seemed to be the perfect FRE engine (2014 model, new exhaust/CAT system, new harnesses, new sensors and remanned engine) a purchase price was negotiated. Shortly thereafter a call was received from PCM telling me the engine was actually a ZR450. Having no experience w/the 450 I asked for some time to deliberate. At this point I called the one person I knew who has owned both and would shoot straight, @Jody Seal. This was a pretty long conversation and all I kept hearing was the only negative of the 450 was price. Finally, I asked which engine he would buy if they were priced within $1K. His answer was the 450 and based on this I bought the 450. I'll take Jody's endorsement any day of the week. However, if a customer wants this boat w/a ZR6 409, I can make it happen. As for my use of the word re-furbish in the description of the boat, I think it is correct @J2nh. Is it the most I've ever done to a boat, no. That distinction goes to Scott Ellis' former 2008 Ski Nautique which subsequently became Scott Byerly's slider before ending up at my shop (another really cool project). However, enough was done to where I feel re-furbished was warranted. Here's the rundown: -Boat had dock rash on both sides. Nothing into the glass but the gel had some issues which required repair. Also the rubrail and SS insert were replaced, all graphics removed, hull sides sanded/buffed and graphics replaced. -Engine, inlet hoses, exhaust hoses, muffler replaced (originals sold to the 2001 Sport customer). -3 interior skins replaced: driver's seat back, loveseat skin, driver's seat flip up bun. -Lavorsi throttle quad and handle replaced -Steering wheel replaced -windshield catch replaced -all gas shocks replaced -rudder trim tab replaced because I think the new brass one looks super cool -one piece of Seadek replaced but I have all other pieces included if needed in the future -removed the Garmin pucks and upgraded to the ECI single puck. @Horton my bet is the 450 boat you have skied behind had the Garmin's. Basically I've gone through this boat and fixed or replaced everything which wasn't "like new". It turned out really nice and am very pleased to say my daughter now wants the boat. Unfortunately, her older sister is going to college in the fall so the '07 SN196 will continue to be our boat (unless I sell it too). If any of you would like additional information please let me know. @WaterSkier12 and @Jody_Seal thank you for the nice comments. Ski well everyone! Tim White

Yesterday my kids received their replacement medals. Attached is a picture. It is pretty much the same medal as sent earlier but the stars have been replaced w/National Waterski Championships. @JeffSurdej was very pro-active in making this happen and I appreciate his efforts. Is this medal awe inspiring? Absolutely not and I really didn't expect a replacement medal to be so. However, I do believe the concerns raised during this conversation have been noticed by USAWaterski, which will in turn result in positive future changes. Will next years awards rival the BMX awards @BoneHead posted? Doubtful (truly hope not, that is a bit over the top) but I am hopeful they will have the "WOW that's Nice" factor.

@LeonL Very nice. It shows a quality medal doesn't have to break the bank. I found it interesting/sad on the BOS homepage is a picture of the nightjump medal. Extremely cool medal. What I find sad is the only people that made the trip to San Marcos for the nightjump were the night jumpers and their families. Yet, they get a wonderful medal (and check too).

@ntx Didn't include overall intentionally. I doubt anyone placed in overall who didn't place in at least one of the events so they will have one nice medal. If you want to add 24 (30-6: 1st place overall got a really nice award so that is enough) x $15.50 = $372 we're still not talking big $.

Monday night/Tuesday morning I came up w/a thought on how to rectify the situation for this year's podium finishers. Afterall we're not talking big $ here: 90 B1/G1 through B3/G3 placements at $8 per medal + $7.50 flat rate shipping (less for the flat rate padded envelope) = $1395.00. So, under $1500.00 gets all Juniors a respectable medal (one that actually states the events name). It shouldn't be that hard to get 3 companies to donate $500 each and the problem is solved. So, I did what I usually do when thinking through an idea, I called someone a whole lot smarter than me (my wife and kids think that is true of all my calls) to discuss the plan. After explaining the situation to my smart friend the following conversation took place: Friend: so who's mistake was this? Me: USAwaterski Friend: and you said attendance was up 25%? Me: Yes Friend: and Nationals was trimmed down from 5 days to 4? Me: Yes Friend: do the math and tell me again why you think someone should bail them out. Me: You're right Do I think sponsors could be found to make this right? Absolutely, but USAwaterski should take care of their mistake. Here's the numbers: 25% increase in participants is approx 168. 168 x $165 entry = $27720.00 of which USAwaterski gets a negotiated percentage. Although I don't know the percentage negotiated this year I do know in the past it has been more than 20%. For arguments sake lets say 15%: $27720.00 x .15 = $4158.00. This doesn't take into consideration any of the expenses saved from cutting the tournaments duration by 20% ( 5 days to 4 ). So, the $ was made to cover their mistake. First thing USAwaterski should do is have a nice medal made which 1st and foremost states "2017 AWSA National Waterski Championships". It would be nice for it to have some reference to it being the 75th but putting the name of the tournament is essential. Second thing USAwaterski should do is mail the medal to all the B1/G1 through B3/G3 along with a letter stating: Thank you for your participation....... Enclosed is the medal which wasn't ready in time for the tournament due to production delays.......Look forward to seeing you next year. Third thing USAwaterski should do is send a letter/email/whatever to all the other division podium finishers and offer to send them the medal for $10, shipping or whatever. Personally, I think all podium finisher should be sent the medal free of charge. This isn't a problem which should wait until next year to be corrected. Podium finishers from this year deserve better than what they received.

@liquid d and @dchristman on the 12 hour drive home we came up w/a plan to dress up the medal as you mentioned. Probably going to go the customized ribbon route along w/putting it in frame with pictures from the flash drive (sold on site) as a back ground. It will be nice and something he'll want to show off to his friends. @disland I appreciate your comment, it made me laugh and shake my head. @Wish thank you for your response. It was perfect and much less smart ass than what I would have said. @JeffSurdej This wasn't written as a whiny Dad but rather a concerned long time skier who thinks USAwaterski is missing the big picture. USAwaterski is competing for kids time and effort. My son plays soccer and this Nationals medal isn't even as ornate as the medal he gets in the off-season playing "Y" rec league not to mention the ones he gets in season on his travel team. USAwaterski needs to realize the kids should get a reward that makes them want to stick w/it rather than go do one of the many other options available to them. Yes, I am saying the kids should get treated better than us old farts (directed at you @eleeski and @Inboardfix ) Do you think if he showed his soccer buddies this medal they'd say "oh wow, we've got to start skiing so we can earn that medal"? My guess is after looking at it the polite ones would walk away thinking good grief he went to TX for that and the rude ones would start ridiculing it immediately. The reality is the kids at this Nationals got the shaft. If time allows later this evening I will go into great detail about the awards ceremony for G1 and B1 on a different thread. Here's a teaser: the G1 weren't allowed to take the medals out of the plastic bag because they were told there wasn't time. Boys 1 were told the same thing but I got involved/defiant/really mad/serious jerk mode and time was made for them to put on their medals. Can't say it got any worse but it didn't get much better after that. @GK I will send you what I have. As you know the lighting consisted of flash so the quality is n't great but maybe better than what you have. @malski64 Thank you for a wonderful Nationals experience last year. Was really hoping your site was going to do it again for 2017. Attached are pictures of the awesome medal from last year. @MattP sorry if I'm attaching thing wrong. @Horton Exactly, this is about the juniors. However, I think it is reasonable for all podium finishers to receive an award that states the event's name. This wasn't a grass roots tournament and I am pretty certain this medal is the exact one USAwaterski sends out in their grass root package.

Yes, I know everyone of you are and should be proud of your achievement. It was attained through hours of hard work and the end result was a well deserved placement at Nationals. But are you proud of the medal? Attached are pictures of the front and back of the medal received by my son who placed 2nd in Boys 1 Slalom ( I'd be remiss if I didn't mention my daughter placed 2nd in Girls 2 for the 2nd year in a row). After Jake received his medal (in the dark under an unlit tent where the podium was located. This will be the topic of my next forum subject) he said to me the medal didn't say "Nationals" anywhere on it. Since he is 10 I thought for sure he was mistaken (when he couldn't find his socks that morning I looked where I told him to look and they were there) so I looked it over and sure enough there is no mention of this medal being from the 2017 National Championships. Initially, I was frustrated w/the host site until being informed the awards were the sole responsibility of USAwaterski. In addition to the competitors medal I've attached a picture of the "Officials" medal. For some reason, "Let them eat cake" came to my mind. USAwaterski should be ashamed.

@jody_seal Define "many" sites? There simply weren't many Ski Fly ramps. Never said those pushing Ski Fly weren't helpful. Jaret, Freddy, Scot and Bruce are great guys (don't know Freddy personally but have heard nothing but good). However, I stand by my statement the majority of professional jumpers didn't have adequate practice with the ramp which resulted in inconsistency with all but the very few who had full access to a ramp and supercharged red w/silver cloud N Ski Nautique. Is Cory ready to drop the $ to make his site Ski Fly capable? He'd be one of the few who could justify it but even in view of his interests I'd be surprised he'd drop the change to do it. How may other sites would be willing to do it?

Biggest problem w/Ski Flying was only a select few had access to a facility to practice. Don't remember anyone winning, or placing for that matter, the event that didn't have access to practice. Generally the only time most of the competitors practiced was in the actual tournament. End result was more serious crashes than occurred in regular jump. Ski fly was a part of the Masters for very few years (I'm thinking 3 but not 100% sure) and during that time period there were 2 skiers (that I remember) taken out of the water on a back board . Don't remember seeing any other skiers taken out on a back board in the 20+ other Masters I've attended/worked. I'm all for more excitement in the sport but not at the expense of safety. The money for the infrastructure needed to make this as safe as possible simply isn't there. How many ski sites are willing to spend the money to upgrade their ramp?

@horton Someone with lots of money, a place to work on it, a place to store it afterward, not care that the money put into it will be several times more than the value of the boat afterward and did I say lots of money? Oh yeah, and the person needs to have lots of money (did I say that already)?

Not sure padding is really needed since the pvc isn't likely to scratch anything. However, it sure won't hurt. Very cool idea. Cheap, lightweight and easy (qualities of a perfect date when I was single).

Correct Craft's 1986 Silver Nautique had a metal flake stripe. Additionally, Correct Craft's Bass Nautiques were metal flake as well and were produced in the late 70s through early 80s. Back to the original topic. Way to go @teamseal on getting another beautiful boat. Any truck you're in is worth more than $800 as long as you've got some cash in your pocket and Michelle by your side.

@bishop8950 I understand heel side/toe side terminology in wakeboarding but what is heel side/toe side on a slalom ski? Thank you.

@ShaneH is giving good advise. Don't try this yourself.

During this past season there were pictures of Regina's boot setup posted on BOS. It surprised me how much space there was between the front and rear boot. @Jody_Seal and I discussed this and I wouldn't dream of paraphrasing Mr. Seal on his opinion of why her stance is so different but maybe he'll see this and chime in. Also, another skier with almost as much notoriety as Regina, but on the negative side, used a wide stance: Dr Jim Michaels. Wide vs narrow is just like most everything else in ski set up. There isn't a right or wrong just trade-offs. Finding the right set-up for your individual characteristics is the key.

Drew is really fired up about the G5 and so are the guys at O'brien. My guess is Glen is pretty fired up about the G5 too.

This is a great idea for those skiers who use the single plate per boot. HO used a similar concept on their HO76 adjustable binder. It was a slotted plate mounted to the boot plate which allowed for easy movement of the front toe. It didn't allow for 1/16" adjustments but was pretty much the same idea. Not sure if O'brien was one of the companies this was presented to or not. If it was I would guess they weren't terribly interested because their new binding system does this (allows small incremental changes in boot placement) already.

Just sent a note saying what @kcswerver said. Looks like you've got your pick of who to sell to.

@chris Reps at Nats and Expo said this boat weighs in @ 3300 lbs which would make it the same as the published weight of the 197 (still pretty impressive considering the size increase). Has the weight been revised/more accurately determined to be 3000 lbs?

Used Clinchers for several years w/o dowel and loved them. Unfortunately, they do require more effort to release than a standard glove and I feel this caused an aggravation of a pre-existing shoulder injury. If you have shoulder issues I would not risk using them. I've gone back to a standard glove and miss the Clincher/ML/Radar grip but it simply isn't worth the risk of shoulder surgery/rehab.

thank you Pete. It surprises me a skier w/dual citizenship and a resident of the state of Florida isn't allowed to compete for the State Championship. Bummer, would have been cool to have a 3 way run off.

@Justin_C Assuming MB used the PCM transmission 1:1.23 or 1:1 it sounds like the pressed in forward clutch housing gear has dislodged. This would eliminate the forward gear but you would still have reverse. Overheating/warping of the forward clutches would usually result in forward only, no reverse, no neutral. As @Ronski mentioned there are other reasons for no forward gear but on the PCM trans you don't see a pump failure very often without other issues failing first (usually because of contaminants in fluid or low fluid level). What model/manufacturer of transmission is in the boat?