Inboardfix

Z-box mimics ZO much better on dbw than non-dbw. If you stick w/the GT-40 (non-dbw) the Z-box will be servo controlled. Will it come closer to the ZO feel than Stargazer or Classic? Yes, but it will not be as close as USA1's Moomba w/dbw. You may not be happy w/it. Best options IMO would be to repower or look for a newer used boat w/ZO. My thoughts are if you can restore the '99 w/new interior, cables, engine w/ZO for $16-18K it is probably worth it. If it will cost $20K it is less attractive and anything over $20K I'd lean toward spending a little more for a newer boat. I've always used the $2K per year rule of thumb, i.e. if you can step up to a '07-08 for less than $2K per year you'll come out ahead. So, if the '99 when all is said and done costs $20K and you can get an '07 or '08 for approx $28K you'll come out way ahead on future resale buying the '07-'08. Obviously, this rule doesn't take into account budget. If you've only got $20K for a ZO boat you're option is the '99 (and it is a good option). BTW, I've put over 2K hours total on 4 different '97-01 Ski Nautiques and over 500 on an '07 hull. From a slalom perspective I have no preference on hulls. Both are incredible. Handling I'd give the edge to the '07 strictly because the off-side turn (starboard) is superior. Tricking goes to the '97-01 and jump I have no opinion as I don't jump (except when my wife speaks).

I've got four new 66" Sixam 2.0 skis still in the box. These are 2008 model (blue top) for $275.00 blank w/fin. Great ski for the money and in my opinion (yes, I'm biased) it's a better ski for many skiers at any price. This year I tried several of the latest and greatest skis and ended up more consistent on one of these '08 Sixams. Also, I have a couple '08 64" Sixams available too. This is a great ski for kids learning the course or lighter weight skiers. My 9 year old 83 lb daughter killed it this year on one (hers is an '07 silver top). She went from a tournament pb of 3 at 28.6 mph to 3 @ 22 off.

CC contemplated it when the SN200 was being developed. At the time I was on the dealer council and strongly recommended against it. In view of the sales of the 200 CB I believe Bill Yeargin would say he is glad they decided to continue making a closed bow. BTW: no I don't think my recommendation had anything to do with CC continueing the cb but it did make me feel better to express my opinion.

Is the TXi available closed bow?

Pretty sure the AM was not RTM.

ShaneH is on the money with his comments. The only thing I would differ with is the trailer issue. Single vs tandem has a lot to do with your region. In the south and mid-west it is rare to find a tournament ski boat on a tandem but out west it is rare to find them on a single. It probably has to do with distance travelled to water. Out west some boaters may have a 2 hour+ drive to the lake but in the south and mid-west it usually doesn't take long.

Since nobody else has asked for more photos of Elle I guess it is up to me: Please post more photos of Elle skiing (or not skiing).

same mold, different flex pattern (supposed to be anyway). Both skis generally flexed at the 17" in the low 70s and at 25" around 110 but at 33" the 1.0 would be in the 140s compared to the 1.1 in the 130s and at 41" the 1.0 would be around 160 while the 1.1 would be in the low 150s. As with any compression molded ski the variance is wide and sometimes a 1.0 would flex vitually the same as a 1.1 and vice-versa. It would be real interesting to flex the 2 skis you rode. Not sure how the ventral affected things but I'm surprised you had such an adverse reaction to the 1.0. Would your friend let you remove his fin and put yours in to see how you do? After a couple out the fronts you may not want to do anymore experimenting on the 1.0 but if you're up for the test I'm curious of the results.

If you are the original owner (or if you're the 2nd owner and transferred the CC parts warranty) and the ZO was installed at CC than it is still under warranty. If that is the case don't try to adhere it, have it replaced under warranty (good for 5 years from date of purchase). If the above does not apply than I would suggest a flexible adhesive such as 3M 5200. This stuff is very difficult to clean once it sets so be sure to clean any residue off the bezzel before it dries.

Do any of these shorts (except the Nike w/liner) have liners? Guess I'm old school but seems like having "the boys" flopping around would be irritating. aswintero5 Do the Nike w/liner shorts ever wedgy on you getting up? Thanks.

Looking at the 2 engines' pictures is all I would have to do to eliminate the Bu. It sure looks like this boat has been used in a salt environment: engine mounts rusted badly, alternator rusted and even the transmission cooler is rusted. Additionally, it looks like the riser gaskets have been replaced. Finally, it looks like a Cutler intake/efi which was common on these engines. These intakes did not have a bronze lined water jacket. Eventually (if it hasn't already occured) these water jackets seep due to deterioration caused by rust (unless the engine is closed cooled). Everything has a price but the Bu is not discounted compared to the CC. This particular Bu would have to be in the $8K-9K range for me to be willing to buy an 800+ houred boat with evidence of salt exposure.

Jody's steel trap mind is pretty correct on retail price. A dealer could come down to around 50K and make a decent margin. This boat was introduced in 1994 not '92 and was made in '95 as well. Even though CC went to a rounded windshield in '95 the '95 Paragon used the '94 windshield because of the difficulty of trimming the wood around a rounded edge. Our dealership was lucky enough to secure one for our '94 boatshow. Even if you didn't like the exterior look of the boat ( I personally loved it ) the details of the interior were impressive. Coolest thing to me was the tongue and groove floor. In 2008 I had an opportunity to buy one for $20k. Unfortunately, the boating business wasn't great at the time and simply couldn't justify 20k for something to use a couple times a year.