’85 Hull
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=2704
Printed Date: October-31-2024 at 10:20pm
Topic: ’85 Hull
Posted By: BoardRider
Subject: ’85 Hull
Date Posted: November-09-2005 at 9:40am
|
Does anyone know if the '85 Ski Nautique 2001 hull is the same as the '86-89 models? I hear the late 80's Ski Nautique 2001's are a great begininning wakeboarding boat because of the hull shape putting out a great wake.
Thanks. |
Replies:
Posted By: 81nautique
Date Posted: November-09-2005 at 11:14am
|
The 2001 Hull started in 1982 and ran through 1989. From what I have read once you weight down a 2001 they are a very desirable wakeboard boat. ------------- You can’t change the wind but you can adjust your sails |
Posted By: jon4pres
Date Posted: November-09-2005 at 12:42pm
|
Yes I have an 82 and with these little boats weight will really help out the wake. I have heard many people say they would rather ride a properly weighted 2001 opposed to some new boats. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1801&yrstart=1976&yrend=1980 - 82 2001 jon4pres@gmail.com Fort Scott Kansas |
Posted By: markb
Date Posted: November-09-2005 at 2:49pm
|
Yep,
Same hull all the way through, can confirm that they make a great but very rampy, vert style wake. Best bet is the 1986 onwards as they have the nicer interior. But basically anything from 1976 onwards are good as long as you don't mind the funky old interior |
Posted By: 82tique
Date Posted: November-09-2005 at 3:22pm
I like to describe it as 'retro' when luring bikini clad women to the lake for a spin 
2001 hull was around from 82-89...Mark is right the wake is much more vert than most new boats....add some weight and a few passengers and you can make it thigh high. |
markb wrote:Posted By: markb
Date Posted: November-09-2005 at 3:29pm
|
When I say funky... I mean "FUNKAAAY" :-)
Here is a friends wake from an '81 Nautique, 300kg stern and 80-100kg in the bow. Rope length 75-80ft and rider is 6ft tall. 
|
Posted By: mars88
Date Posted: November-17-2005 at 8:17pm
|
2001's are great. My family owns an 88 and with a skylon and a couple buddies it was great. After my brother blew out his knee I decided to skick to slalom. But the wake was great even without the weight. We had a guy with a new air offer us 15,000 for the boat and hadn't even seen it. ------------- mars |
Posted By: jon4pres
Date Posted: November-18-2005 at 1:00pm
|
Mark, Awesome wake. I just bought mine this year and ran with out ballast.
Did you have to swap out your prop to run enough weight to get a wake like that? 86 forward do have nicer interiors but these boats are not made to take out the family for the afternoon. It can be done but they are a little limited on space especially when you start filling up fatsacs. I go out with 3 or 4 people most of the time and I couldnt think of a better boat to own. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1801&yrstart=1976&yrend=1980 - 82 2001 jon4pres@gmail.com Fort Scott Kansas |
Posted By: 82tique
Date Posted: November-18-2005 at 1:22pm
|
Mark- that wake looks nice...I guess your just getting fired up for summer down under.
jon4pres- really with four passengers you don't need much more weight for a nice shaped wake....but I can recommend weighting near the middle of the boat. I got a pair of side sacks that add 250lb. on each side of the motor. This seems to add size to the wake, while making it slightly less vert giving it more pop of the lip. Man winter sucks. |
Posted By: kchinn15
Date Posted: January-04-2006 at 11:08pm
|
Heres what you gotta do to make a 2001 nautique a sick wakeboard boat! First of all, upgrade your prop to an Acme 542 13x11.5 pitch. Your whole shot will be amazing and your gas bill will be lower. Put 2 440lb sacks on the side of the motor box, 400lb sack in the back, and 150lb of weight up in the bow. The wake will be huge! That prop is the money maker though! I swear by it!
When will winter end!!! ------------- Ride More, Work Less! |
Posted By: 64 Skier
Date Posted: January-05-2006 at 3:05am
|
I have the older 1972 16' model with a 289. Prior to removing the water soaked foam it threw a great wake, but without the additioanal weight that the foam was carrying and the new Acme 13 by 11.5 prop we have to start from scratch getting a nice wakeboard boat. She does a great job slalom skiing now, but the kids like to wakeboard.
I keep hearing talk about weight forward, weight on either side of the motor box and weight in the rear. Can someone explain the difference in wake characteristics for the 3 different positions? Thanks! ------------- 64 Skier 66" HO VTX and 67" HO Triumph http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1071&sort=&pagenum=3&yrstart=1971&yrend=1975 - 71CC |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: January-05-2006 at 10:33am
|
If you put all the weight in the back, you will get a tall wake, but it will also be excessively steep. It's like running into a wall, and if you do make it up the wake, you will be thrown straight up, making it difficult to clear the wakes and get out into the flats on the other sides. You also get excessive bow rise, and poor visibility from the driver's seat.
If you put too much weight in the front, the wake will wash out, you'll have foam at the top of the lip, and you'll be subject to burying the bow. You are looking for a comination of weight that produces a wake that is tall enough to suit your needs, has a desirable ramp shape, and is "clean at the peak" of the wake. These characteristics will vary, even within the same boat, if you go at different speeds. If you find a speed and wake that works well for everyone you board with, then you will only need a single setup. If you have a mixture of advanced boarders (usually want to go faster, and with bigger wake which requires a lot of weight) and beginners (even no weight may be sufficient) than you will need to figure out a couple of combinations. Usually a good starting place to put about 60% of your weight in the back of the boat, and 40% towards the front. You can experiment from there. Many people find that with the direct drive boats, you can place weight on each side of the motor and that is sufficient. Next they will usually add weight to the back which improves the height of the wake, but makes it too peaky, so they end up putting a little bit of weight, all the way in the tip, to improve the shape. BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: surroundsound64
Date Posted: January-05-2006 at 10:58am
|
Being as low tech as possible, hehe, when we go to the lake it's usually just me and another friend, maybe 2. Usually there are 2 people up front, so I just throw a few cinder blocks back infront of the rear seats.
The weight seems to even out pretty good, and they don't move around, you just have to be careful not to scrape your foot on them. That combined with a 1/2-full tank of gas makes for a pretty descent wake! ------------- 1981 Ski Nautique 2000 SAN Looking for a 2000-2006 SAN |
Posted By: jbear
Date Posted: January-05-2006 at 7:29pm
|
BKH; You never fail to impress with the amount of info you cram into your posts.
surroundsound; please tell me you are only joking. No one would really put cinder blocks in their Nautique, would they? jbear ------------- "Loud pipes save lives" AdamT sez "I'm Canadian and a beaver lover myself"... |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: January-05-2006 at 8:09pm
|
Just wordy John.
BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: surroundsound64
Date Posted: January-05-2006 at 8:21pm
lol... Like I said, low tech. I don't leave them in there all the time. Just when we are actually wakeboarding. Skiing, or when we're just hanging around, they come out. If that makes it any better.  ------------- 1981 Ski Nautique 2000 SAN Looking for a 2000-2006 SAN |
Posted By: jbear
Date Posted: January-05-2006 at 8:29pm
|
81; I quess it does. Just can't imagine it for myself tho. Well, whatever works to get ya skiing the way you want is cool.
Brian; Wordy....naaahhh! jbear ------------- "Loud pipes save lives" AdamT sez "I'm Canadian and a beaver lover myself"... |
Posted By: 64 Skier
Date Posted: January-06-2006 at 1:37am
|
BKH....great post. My boat was doing exactly as you described....launch you straight up and about 1/2 way across the wakes. The board was just slicing through the peak and getting no pop.
When we increased speed, the wake would just lay down. Seems the little 16' can throw a very peaky wake so your comments will be put to good use. Thanks! ------------- 64 Skier 66" HO VTX and 67" HO Triumph http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1071&sort=&pagenum=3&yrstart=1971&yrend=1975 - 71CC |
Posted By: slalomguy
Date Posted: January-06-2006 at 8:23am
|
I didn't know Cliff Clavin could wakeboard?
So how much weight do you ride with BKH? ------------- [QUOTE=79nautique] yea kiss me ass the rest of you sob's, [/QUOTE] |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: January-06-2006 at 10:21am
|
Slalomguy,
I'm 42 yrs old, 7 knee surgeries, two feet reconstructions, multiple broken ribs, multiple disclocated shoulders, and a laundry list of other injuries. The only reason I started wakeboarding at all is because waterskiing kills my back. I'm lucky to do a good wake to wake 180, consistently. That said, I'm fine with stock ballast (about 800lbs I think) , or no ballast at all in my Super Air. My wife is a real beginner and never uses ballast. The stock wake is about kneee high, and I only ride at 70' and 22 mph. Lately I've been improving, and riding a bit faster, so I've been experimenting with a little more weight. I'm never going to be a 26mph, 85', waist high wake type of rider though. We do have some world class riders here in the Delta. I've pulled some of them -amazing. We've put a couple of bags in the boat for them. What I've found though is the better the rider, the less they complain. These guys can do flips off an ollie in the flats. They just have fun and pratice what they can with the wake presented. Heck, the good guys never even complained behind my 98 ski nautique. What's your setup/abilities? BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: jon4pres
Date Posted: January-06-2006 at 10:48am
|
This thread is killing me I bought my boat at the end of the summer last year and finally bought 2 440lb sacks. That I havent got to use yet. I really hate winter. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1801&yrstart=1976&yrend=1980 - 82 2001 jon4pres@gmail.com Fort Scott Kansas |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: January-06-2006 at 11:04am
Well, at least you didn't recruit two 400 lb friends who you have to feed all winter BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: slalomguy
Date Posted: January-06-2006 at 11:34am
I'm more of a free skier.I just love the speed of a slalom ski on glassy water. I do some boardin' and can ussually nail an invert or two,and I'm consistant on wake to wake 360's (some hard falls while learning though) As far as weight goes, I don't add any weight except for a large cooler full of beer, freinds, and a full tank of gas to start the day ------------- [QUOTE=79nautique] yea kiss me ass the rest of you sob's, [/QUOTE] |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: January-06-2006 at 12:31pm
|
Slalomguy,
sounds like a perfect setup to me BKH------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: jbear
Date Posted: January-06-2006 at 6:08pm
|
slalomguy; sounds like the way I equip my boat now.
Brian; gotta sit and have a cold one or two with you. Theres gotta be some stories behind all those injuries. I mean come on, 7 (!) times havin' your knees fixed!!??...john ------------- "Loud pipes save lives" AdamT sez "I'm Canadian and a beaver lover myself"... |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: January-06-2006 at 8:41pm
|
John, I look forward to it.
BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: kchinn15
Date Posted: January-08-2006 at 1:09am
------------- Ride More, Work Less! |