Hull Difference Pre TSC

Going back a while. I know the TSC from 97-01, and then TSC2 and so on.
But what I don't know is the pre TSC from 89-96. I think I have that right, because if I remember right, the 2001 hull was pre 89. Based on what I am seeing out there it looks like the 89-96 pre TSC hull is closest to my price range than the TSC is gonna be.

So if some of you can enlighten me on if I have the years right (89-96) and if so, how different than a TSC boat was it? downsides upsides etc. Any info you guys have or places I can find it.

thanks!

Doug,

What you are missing in your note above is that hulls from the era you are talking about are generally called the "No Wake Zone", or NWZ. These hulls come in two types: 90-92 that have wood stringers and 93-96 that have composite stringers. No wood - no rot. Note that some of the interior parts in the NWZ era have wood (like combing pads).

The NWZ hull was the first shift away from the 2001 hull and represented a significant jump in the ski-ability of the boat for slalom skiing. The trick / wakeboard wake of a NWZ hull is not as big as that of the 2001 hull. The NWZ hulls include "spray relief pockets" that keep the spray out the side of the boat down.

Other items to look for include engine changes such as fuel injection and the GT-40 engines which all came out during this time. This is also the era where the 1.23 transmission came onboard. It was an option at first and later became standard. The transmission slowed down the rotation of the prop creating less prop wash and a noticeable drop in the "hump" at 15-22 off.

Somebody else will have to enlighten us concerning the differences between a NWZ and the TSC hulls.

Things to look for: Pre 1993 check the stringers. In all boats of this age look for something that has been well-cared for, or be willing to spend time fixing what is broken. Some of these boats also included engines with an electronic ignition system called "Pro-Tech", which are known to go bad and require an upgrade (that costs a few hundred and is not hard to do - I'm told).

Fantastic info!!! Exactly what I wanted to know. Thanks! The wood/composite is really great info, because I couldn't find when they changed it. Some things like interier and engines I can do. I did one boats stringers and never want to

FI, I want the boat for slalom, and just general playing. I really don't want to worry about wood, which is why The info is so helpful and I know I'm still back a few years, but I want to stay as close to "modern" as I can

WOW!!! more great info THANKS!!!

Foot_Fungus wrote: as mentioned above 93+ get composite and for the small price difference between an early 90s wood and a mid 90s composite i'd almost say concentrate on the composites exclusively. 94 also brought about the wonderfully hated and loved protec system. Works great when it works, almost impossible to fix once its breaks. Most spend $500 and rid themselves of the protec in favor of a standary dizzy setup. You also had the tbi option on the protecs. Again great when it ran, no parts when it breaks. Add another $600 to replace with a standard carb. in 94 you also had the option of a walk thru windshield, which to my knowledge was the only year it was offered on a closed bow nautique. To me NWZs are the perfect mix between being affordable, reliable, and easy to work on.

This is probably the path I am going to work toward. As I said, did stringers once, and it was a royal PITA. NEVER again. Had not heard of the protec system before. except for my first late 70's Nautique, all my time was in TSC/TSC2 and GT-40's.

Is the hull under the Sport's of this generation the same as under the Ski's?

2 questions more please.

1. Is the below engine the infamous Protec that you are talking about? and if so what are the triggering? Is this an individual coil motor or what?
2. Is the hull that is under the Sport of the 90-96 era a modification of the NWZ hull? Because I saw one listed that said it was the same as the hull on the Super Air, which if I remember right, even in TSC days had a hull that was different from TSC/TWC.

Thanks!

Plenty of walk through windshields on closed bow ski nautiques

Hollywood wrote: Plenty of walk through windshields on closed bow ski nautiques

I know. I only asked about the Sport hull, because there are some of them out there in the price and travel distance range. But I don't want to end up with a hull thats poor for slalom. If I had to, I can "make" a ski put out a bigger wake. I can't fix a wakeboard wake.

   [/QUOTE] so its amazing to see it still on a running boat I assume? I guess you are saying my best bet would be trash the parts and replace with Holley and standard Dist right because its not if they fail but when?[/QUOTE]

If it runs and still runs good then run it till she quits! just remember that their are NO NEW REPLACEMENT PARTS AVAILABLE! So when it does puke out be ready to cough up about a grand to change it out to carb and Distributor.   

Hollywood wrote: It's probably the best 21' hull I've been behind. There are many threads on the 93-97 and 98-02 sport hull on here, it's been a popular buy lately.

Thats why I was asking. My 2nd Nautique was a 99 Air (or sport with tower). great all around boat. I would love to buy back into the TSC years hulls, but out of my price range. But I have seen some what appear to be great condition 93-96 Sports at decent prices. If they aren't/weren't decent slalom wake boats, I didn't want to waste mine or the sellers time on them.

So you had a 99 sport but still not sure the 93-97 is "decent"?

It's been discussed before. The 93-97 would be very similar to your old 99 as far as the slalom wake.

Fl Inboards wrote: The Hull changes were very minimal to the later Sport 98-2001. Chine cutout was changed as the boat had a tendency to drop in and run not so flat in a turn as did the early super sport . Also a flatter shaft angle was was introduced that year that helped the slalom wake. ....

Where's Keith? He could give you a good comparison between a 97 Sport and the "No Wake Zone" slalom wakes.

So from me reading this it seems like a 95 or 96 is your best bet?

Composite stringers, GT40, 1.23 tranny? Now i'm not saying the 90-94's aren't good boat, i'm just saying if you're going to buy one with this hull, the 95-96's are the best?

Doug I have a 98 Sport great all round boats and the slalom wake is decent.

Check this thread out it describes the differences in the Sport Hull. The thread has a lot of input from Jody.

Sport Hull Changes

zone 5 wrote: Fl Inboards wrote: The second generation Sport is a stretched and widened version of the 90-96 SN Hull. A lot of the ideas and concepts from the SN went into the Sport Nautique. So the dealer with the 97 Sport for sale saying that its the same hull as a Super Air is correct?

Didn't see anyone answer this for you yet so... The hull is similar but a major difference in the "super" is the engine is in the back (v-drive). More weight in the rear=bigger wake. My '97 SS had a pretty rough wake to cross for slaloming, although my BFN is probably even worse, and it's hard as a rock.