Print Page | Close Window

’93 Moomba Boomerang???

Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: General Discussion
Forum Discription: Anything Correct Craft
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2506
Printed Date: January-15-2025 at 6:22am


Topic: ’93 Moomba Boomerang???
Posted By: AWhite70
Subject: ’93 Moomba Boomerang???
Date Posted: September-26-2005 at 12:05pm
A relative of mine is looking at a '93 Moomba Boomerang and has asked me for some advice. I have no experience with these boats so I was wondering if anyone on here knew much about them. I've heard the new Moomba's are good boats for the price but I don't know about the old ones.

The engine is a PCM 351 so I know it should be solid, the rest I don't know about.

Has anyone drive, ridden, ski'd behind one of these? What is the handling, tracking, and wake like?

My first advice of course was buy a Nautique instead, but I probably need a little more.

Thanks




Replies:
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: September-26-2005 at 12:22pm
A friend of mine bought one this past season and I guess they are the exact same haul as the supra's and are made by them as well. He said they are trimed out differently without as many bells and whistles thus the lower cost. I'm not sure if this applies to all yrs but the late models are. The only thing I never liked about the moomba's is that the freeboard on the sides is very low and the motor box looks huge sticking out of it. All in all your buying the motor and looking at the wake characteristics. Me personally I would rather own a CC but not everyone's budget is the same.


Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: September-26-2005 at 1:55pm
Supra/Moomba (Skier's choice now owns and operates both companies) did not begin using the same hull for both boats until 1997.

The early Moomba Boomerang's are a unique and strange boat. As suggested, the freeboard is very low. More like an outboard or jetboat than an inboard. The engine box sits 50% above the gunnel. Second, the rudder mechanism sits outside the transom of the boat and goes down through the swim platform. The boat handles "differently" somewhere between an outboard and an inboard. It does back up better than a typical inboard. Third, this was a price point boat. It cost less than 10K new. The upholstery is very cheap. The back seat is just a block of foam covered with vinyl. The windshield is just a frameless piece of fiberglass. Guages are minimal.

Pulling a skier in good conditions, the boat is fine. Decent wake, etc. Put it in rough water and it's all over. The boat is practically useless for wakeboarding.

Unless your buddy is getting the for for a couple grand or less, there are lots of better inboards out there.

BKH


-------------
Livin' the Dream



Posted By: jbear
Date Posted: September-26-2005 at 9:11pm
AS usual BKH has all the facts. Don't know how ya do it. Hope all is goin well. Remember, Friends don't let friends drive junk. It only costs a few dollars more to go top shelf.

-------------
"Loud pipes save lives"



AdamT sez "I'm Canadian and a beaver lover myself"...


Posted By: 63 Skier
Date Posted: August-31-2011 at 10:53am
Originally posted by jbear jbear wrote:

Remember, Friends don't let friends drive junk.


That's a classic, I love it!

-------------
'63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique


Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: August-31-2011 at 11:00am
Moomba was an Australian company before Supra or Skiers Choice bought it. A place in Maine was selling them when they first came out and I was told that rudder set up was how they did it down under. They appear to be a cheap, bare bones boat. I loved them when they first came out, mainly due to the price and that they were different. If it is in good condition and the price is right, it's probably a good entry level boat.

-------------


Posted By: eric lavine
Date Posted: August-31-2011 at 11:21am
i dont like the shallow freeboard either, reminds me of a stars and stripes, needs to be higher than your knees

-------------
"the things you own will start to own you"


Posted By: Jones
Date Posted: August-31-2011 at 1:43pm
I skied behind one years ago. It seemed really cheaply built. The pull was good but the wake was deceptive. It looked incredibly flat but very hard when you crossed it.

-------------
1979 Ski Nautique (sold)

1997 Ski Nautique

1998 Super Sport Nautique


Posted By: storm34
Date Posted: August-31-2011 at 1:56pm
Like mentioned several times above, they were built cheap and an entry level boat. Keeping that in mind, they are wood stringer boats and I would assume they are going to face the same problems as any CC with wood stringers. It would be my guess that you would see stringer rot on a Moomba way before you would see it on a CC.

They are cool looking boats, and hold true to that 'hot rod' ski boat feel from the 70s and 80s. If I had a chance to pick one up for really cheap I might think about it. But a CC is going to be a much better all around boat.

-------------


Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-31-2011 at 2:36pm
FYI guys, this thread was recently bumped to the top by a spammer... it originally dates back to 2005.

-------------


Posted By: kapla
Date Posted: August-31-2011 at 3:27pm
Originally posted by TRBenj TRBenj wrote:

FYI guys, this thread was recently bumped to the top by a spammer... it originally dates back to 2005.



Exactly!! LOL I was curious on how it was brought out!!! back from the past!

-------------
<a href="">1992 ski nautique


Posted By: Jones
Date Posted: August-31-2011 at 3:29pm


-------------
1979 Ski Nautique (sold)

1997 Ski Nautique

1998 Super Sport Nautique


Posted By: storm34
Date Posted: August-31-2011 at 5:03pm
...still think they are cool boats!

-------------


Posted By: Downward32
Date Posted: September-15-2013 at 4:36pm
I bought a 92 Moomba Boomerang this summer and aside from the low freeboard the thing rocks forthe money. The wake is adequate for a beginer and with a 300 lbs fat sack in the back it has a substantially better wake. Not buch for extra bells and whistles, but again, the price is lower than the Supra.



Print Page | Close Window