"2001" vs earlier hull

Hi all, new here with a question about hull differences. Today I came across a 1980 SN locally, a bit of a project, but at a very good price. So I ran home and started researching and was wanting to know what the differences were in the wake created by the later "2001" vs this '80.

From what I've read, the 2001 can be a great wakeboard boat, but what about the '80? I figure the flat bottom of the '80 would lay a nice flat slalom wake, but what about the 2001 at those speeds?

Thanks for any input, and hopefully I'll be reporting back soon to show you my project!

Waterski wake could be considered better on the 80. The 2001s (82-89) are good ski boats, but have a reputation for a hard lip when slaloming. A friend of mine who competed in 3 Event skiing for 30 years still calls the 2001 the best all around boat ever made.

As a wakeboard boat, the 80 will be a narrower wake because the boat is narrower (and shorter btw). The 80 is not a heavy boat and so it does not require a great deal of ballast to sink it. The 2001 is generally considered the best wakeboard boat of the closed bow, pre-wakeboard era.

My $.02. BKH

Wow, this forum moves pretty quick! Thanks for all the insight, I think you told me pretty much what I needed to hear. I want a good all around boat, and this sounds like it does several things well. I mainly wanted to see if there was a big reason why I should pass on this one and find a 2001, but it sounds like I'll be very happy with the '80. Thanks a lot for your help!

horkn wrote: While the 2001 is a very nice boarding boat, some of the more obscure boats that are not quite as well known make an even better wake.

FYI, I believe the Martiniques of the 70's used the same hull as the Ski Nautique of the same era. The only difference would be the deck and interior.

Im not a wakeboarder, but BHP made a valid point- the pre-2001 wake will be narrower and steeper than the newer boats. If Im not mistaken, the 2001 is already considered to have a pretty steep wake. Not sure if steeper is always better- but its something to consider before purchasing.

I have a 1989 "2001" and my buddy has a 1980 Ski.

The 2001 is a much bigger boat than the pre 2001 comparitively speaking.

Here's my 2c worth of advice from a wake boarding perspective.

Both hull types are relatively flat in design, so wake shape is similar.

1980:
With minimal ballast (500lb max), the 1980 will throw a respectable wake, however it will be very solid and vertical with minimal transition. However as BKH mentioned, the wake will be nawwor as the boat has a narrow beam.

If you like big vertical "knee blowing" type wake, this is the boat you want.

the pre 2001 hull will throuw a nice boarding wake without ballast.

2001 hull:
I run generaly between 400 & 500lb in my 1989 with a combo of lead / steel weights.

I beleive the spray releifs along the rear half of the hull round out the wake slightly compared to the 1980. It is not as vertical, and has a nicer ramp comparred to the 80, but I would still consider it steep with this amount of ballast, comparred to say a Malibu sportster / response.

Wake wider than the 1980, but still narrow when comparred to the larger nautiques, but I ride a 70-75 ft line. Wake is fine at 80-85ft if you want wider.

With both hulls, the more weight you add, the larger the wake becomes, to the point where I consider it to be unridable.

We decided to put in an extra 2 x 500lb sacs in the 89 to see what it was like. Wake was that big that we dumped it out again after the first run.

I know some of the guys run 1800+lb of ballast. I cannot see the need for anything like this.

I honestly could not see either one of these CC's being particularly good for slalom due to the sheer size of table top.

I'll vouch for my '78, The first summer we had it, before the resto. We had it loaded down with ballast & it was absolutely ridiculous. But, since then I really haven't wanted to put all that crap in my nice boat & with just a driver & a couple people the wake is most definitely adequate for basic-intermediate wakeboarding (Backrolls, 180, 360, etc.) Wake is very steep(which I love) and very narrow, which can also be nice, b/c when you're teaching someone to ride, it makes 'em feel good when they can jump wake to wake after just a few runs w/o cutting too hard.

Nate

8122pbrainard wrote: [QUOTE=horkn] [QUOTE=TRBenj] Tom, I think you are referring to the later Martinique hulls and not the 70's hulls. Tim is correct that the Nautique and the Martinique shared the same hull but just had different decks. If you go into the Ref. section and pull up the 1978 specs, you will find the the two boats have identical lengths, beams and drafts. If the Martinique was a deeper V as you have stated, the draft would be more than the Nautique. You're from Cedarburg, but you state the boat is up north. Where?

I dunno. Maybe it does have the same hull as a 78 SN?

I can say that it makes a steep wake, and was never ideal for waterskiing.

I keep my boat in Tomahawk, not far from Tree Lakes;)

I just wish I could get it all figured out. I forgot a timing light and that hampered my engine buildup, well at least the tune up part of that. I got the heads, intake, and all that on, but timing without a timing light is near futile.

Thanks for the input, I really appreciate it. Here's a bit of an update as to where I'm at with this. The owner of the shop where the boat is parked called me out of the blue last week. He said his secretary told him I called so he pulled my number off the caller ID. He was a super nice guy and just wanted to offer his opinion of the boat since he's done some work on it, and I was grateful to get it. It's not his boat, it actually belongs to an older gentleman in AL, he just let the guy park it out front to try to sell it. He describes it as being even more of a project than I anticipated and named several serious things that need attention. The only way I'll end up with the boat is if he takes an absolute low-ball offer, which he might considering the boat has been sitting out there for over a year with little interest shown.

After talking a while he started telling me about some of the ski boats he had there at his shop (Florida Inboards in Panama City FL). He said he took trades and I told him the only thing I had that he might be interested in is my dad's '75 Sleekcraft with an Olds 455. The guy jumped through the phone with excitement, and when I told him it was converted from a jet to v-drive he got even more excited. The boat needs a lot of work but he said he was more than interested in checking it out and that he had a '92 Ski Nautique in decent shape that he could trade with me. So I'm trying to get my dad's boat this month to carry to him for a look.

So now my question is, what about the characteristics of a '92 SN as compared with the other two I have asked about?