What do ya'll think of the new MC Prostar
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: Off Topic
Forum Discription: Anything non-Correct Craft
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=31202
Printed Date: September-26-2024 at 1:47pm
Topic: What do ya'll think of the new MC Prostar
Posted By: Swatkinz
Subject: What do ya'll think of the new MC Prostar
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 4:04pm
|
I'll go first: Not a fan of a picklefork on any boat Think the open/closed bow convertability is clever Like the idea of a reclining driver seat. More walk room b/w the gunnel and motorbox than the old prostar even with skis stowed. Hate the lack of the windshield sides, but think the functionality would be good. In case you haven't seen it, here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lMAeHNweE_s" rel="nofollow - 2014 MC Prostar Video ------------- Steve 2011 Sport/Air 200 Excalibur 343 2017 Boatmate Tandem Axle Trailer Former CC owner (77, 80, 95, 88, all SNs) Former Malibu owner (07, 09) |
Replies:
Posted By: mdvalant
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 4:06pm
|
The windshield sides are an option or so I've read. I think you can order the normal windshield. In fact..I think the convertible style like the one shown is the optional one. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5009 - '90 Ski (sold) http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5479 - '00 Sport Mississippi River - Bellevue, IA |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 4:19pm
For those who havent seen it yet: As I posted on the other site: The picklefork seems to be driven entirely by style (which I dont care for)... but other than that, it seems like a really impressive boat. I dont like the look of the windshield, but it seems incredibly functional. Not only do you have great vision and access to your skier (or drop ski, etc) but the integrated bimini is pretty cool and functional as well. Pushing the driver and dash forward is a great move- efficient use of space. I wonder if you can walk between the driver's seat and the engine cover? It will be interesting to see how the bow cover works... it seems a little clunky to put in and take out. For those planning to leave it in, it would be nice if it hinged forward with shocks for easy access to the storage underneath. Its interesting that MC has mentioned a few times that the new PS is lighter... lighter than what? Ive seen 3300 lbs "fully optioned" listed on MC's facebook page and the "under 3000 lbs" that Marcus mentioned in one of the videos (not sure which is right, if either), but both are higher than the outgoing 197 (2800 lbs dry) and 200 (2850 lbs dry). ------------- |
Posted By: quinner
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 4:48pm
| Looks are important, and the Prostar has always been alright in that category, really curious about the wake/handling/performance ratings on this thing. Hate the look of a slant back windshield frame but what a great way to mount the bimini and no straps!! They sure took some design cue's from the 200 on it though, lol |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 4:50pm
|
I don't like the fork and I don't like the double hump way they are going with all the hull sides. ------------- |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 5:23pm
I'm gettin one! Then I'm a gettin me an Aztek and paintin to match as my tow car  ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: storm34
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 5:38pm
|
Some nice changes but nothing overly impressive. Not a fan of the Spork Nose.  ------------- |
Posted By: ny_nautique
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 5:50pm
Hah! Ugliest. Car. Ever. I think the Prostar looks great. The windows remind me of the styling of the much-maligned Bayliner Ski Challenger. But, it's a good point about giving you more access. I missed the integrated bimini that Tim mentioned... gotta look at the video again. Not sure about the performance reasons for the convertible bow and the pickle fork... ------------- - Jeff 1999 Ski Nautique |
Gary S wrote:Posted By: lewy2001
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 9:00pm
|
That nose does not add much to the looks and not being that wide would add almost zero functionality. Hey MC must think it looks good. The SN 200 has raised the bar so high MC had to do something. I do like the minimalist interior look and those racks appear functional. Serious skiers would like this style of interior but as a family or group boat with multi water sport usage the lack of storage will not appeal. The bow "hood" in theory is a very good idea but need to see how difficult it is to change from the closed bow to open bow configuration. The windscreen looks weird but is functional I could learn to tolerate it. The closest ski school to me has MC 197's, have always thought they were a nice looking boat. I was over there last weekend for a agility dog trial and noticed they have a new Malibu now and one of the MC 197's was missing. I was hoping they would change to Nautique.    ------------- If you're going through hell, keep going http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2999" rel="nofollow - 89 Ski <a href="http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5685" ta |
Posted By: SNobsessed
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 10:39pm
Must not have ever seen the AMC Pacer! ------------- “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” Ben Franklin |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 11:09pm
|
-Don't like pickleforks on ski boats, including the ones on Nautiques. -Don't like the look of that windshield. However, functionally, I much prefer that windshield over the wraparounds which have become so popular. . When driving, you should be able to look directly at your skier in the water, not look through a windshield. The driver should also be able to reach out to a dock without having to reach over the windshield. This ugly windshield solves that problem. - Why would anyone want a reclining seat on a ski boat. Stupid. Not like we don't have enough crappy drivers out there, now we need them lying down like they do in cars. I've had three back surgeries, and there is no issue with a fixed back on a drivers seat. -Convertable bow. Haven't decided what I think. I beleive I would have to see one. I'm sure they will be popular. BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: 74Wind
Date Posted: August-14-2013 at 11:27pm
OH...SHAME on the AMC naysayer! My bro had a Gremlin X, ugly but unbelievable little rocket it was, tiny little car with a V8, what fun! My friend also had a Hornet (3-on -the-tree, loved those, why no longer?) in which we sucessfully descended a veeerrry loooonnnng set of cement steps at Quinnipiac College 30+ years ago in a raging blizzard. That car was unkillable. I'd swap my 74 SW even on a 74 AMX or Javelin anyday. Any takers?  ------------- 1974 Southwind 18 1975 Century Mark II |
Posted By: ny_nautique
Date Posted: August-15-2013 at 12:10am
|
My dad had an orange Gremlin for a little while after blowing the engine on his car on a road trip. Good times... ------------- - Jeff 1999 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: M3Fan
Date Posted: August-15-2013 at 1:57pm
|
Looks of the boat are growing on me, including the pickle fork. Kudos to MC for being so progressive on a lot of these features. I'd seriously consider this boat if I had the money to buy one (straight out) which will not be in the near future. Not financing a ski boat in this economy. On the previous 197 hull, the low-speed wake had been a major problem. I mean major. Also, the -22 wake even at 34mph was absolutely brutal IMO. Driver ergonomics were also silly with the steering wheel so far from the dash. There's no denying that those boats were visually stunning, though. I'm immediately really happy about the new hull because the next time I go to ski school that has MC I can cut it to -22 without worrying about hitting a concrete wall behind the boat. Sidenote: What an amazing marketing piece this quick video with Marcus was. Good lesson for other ski boat manufacturers as it totally helps sell the boat and explain all the features for pretty much zero dollars. Awesome video. ------------- 2000 SN GT40 w/99 Graphics/Gel 2016 SN 200 OB 5.3L DI https://forum.fifteenoff.com |
Posted By: IAughtNaut
Date Posted: August-15-2013 at 2:36pm
|
I wonder what the difference in construction quality is between the new MC and SN? I've heard that historically the CC edge was significant (with the exception of MC going to composite stringers first), can't imagine that would be the case anymore ------------- bring the ruckus http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5347" rel="nofollow - 2000 Pro Air |
Posted By: dip
Date Posted: August-15-2013 at 2:40pm
|
-I don't think I like the pickle fork but I'll hold judgement til I see it. I hate it on the wakeboard boats though. It looks entirely like a styling queue though since it is so minimal it can't make much difference in seating. The fork and the hump are clearly the Mastercraft thing now, just like Malibu is going for the stealthy look. - The hump actually looks good on some of their boats from a distance so I'll reserve judgement on that too. - The windshield looks terrible to me. Reminds me of an old Evinrude boat.  I'm not sure when wrapping a windshield became such a problem for maintaining openness next to the driver. My boat has side windows and yet it stops short of the throttle. My least favorite thing about my friends' Malibu Responses is how tightly you're packed into the drivers seat. -I like the interior but I'd like to see more picks. I love the ski racks. I've never had side lockers so I don't know how much I'd like them but having access to the skis without having them on the floor is great. - The bow cover seems like a decent idea. It will be interesting to see how it plays out over time. - If it skis as well as a 200 but has better fuel economy and high-end performance, then the bar has been raised for CC to improve which will be fun to see. All in all, I think its great to see the investment in direct drive slalom boats. I just wish I could afford one! |
Posted By: Hollywood
Date Posted: August-15-2013 at 3:32pm
|
So is it really only shorter because they chopped the nose off? Bow cover seems like a rattle trap. Lots of classic MC "innovations". Windshield had been done before, same with ski racks and the gauge screen. They basically slam the 197 the whole time, lol. I want to knowing about the hull. ------------- |
Posted By: mdvalant
Date Posted: August-15-2013 at 3:40pm
|
While at the National Show Ski Tournament this weekend I got to be up close and personal with... 1. SN 200 1. SAN 210 2. MC PS214V 3. MC X46 4. Tige RZ2 5. Tige RZ4 6. Sanger DXII (Kick butt BF boat from what it looks!) 7. Sanger V237 8. Sanger V210 I'm sure I'm biased a little...the fit and finish on the CC's were all above the rest IMO. MC was VERY close...The rub rails on the MC's are not my flavor. What baffled me is the Tige RZ boats had sticker prices of over 100k...wouldn't you just drop that on a CC then if you're not getting the budge price any more? Their interiors were plain and lacked the stitching where I wanted. The only newerish MC I've ever driven was a 2005ish PS197 and it drove absolutely terribly. Hard turning, mushy when it did turn, slow out of the hole...really gave me a bad taste for them. Handling was awful IMO. Again..only one boat but unfortunately it gave me a bad feeling about them. EDIT: Hope I got the boat names right, I didn't pay as close attention to them. There were a lot of bikinis there this year. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5009 - '90 Ski (sold) http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5479 - '00 Sport Mississippi River - Bellevue, IA |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-15-2013 at 3:44pm
http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/showthread.php?t=56531" rel="nofollow - Post #9. ------------- |
Posted By: 74Wind
Date Posted: August-15-2013 at 6:46pm
|
Great photo, I have always loved those old Evinrude boats, and the old MFG's but I am hopelessly stuck on Memory Lane. Ya just don't see many tri-hulls these days and I loved 'em. ...I don't like the new spork-bow boats but if you squint you can see a little tri-hull DNA... ------------- 1974 Southwind 18 1975 Century Mark II |
Posted By: dip
Date Posted: August-15-2013 at 7:11pm
|
Our neighbor 2 doors down on Lake Norman had an Evinrude and a guy I used to ski/ board with on Mountain Island Lake outside Charlotte also had one. He used to use a bunch of 30 gallon adhesive tanks filled with water to ballast it. He was the first guy I ever saw pull a legit air raley. This was circa 1994 or so. They are just stylish enough to be retro cool. The photo you linked Tim also caught my eye. Some interesting things going on there. Seeing more pics of the interior, it looks like they are grabbing some of the minimalist interior features of a Carbon Pro. I'm secure enough in my Correct Craft love to say I can't wait to see one and ski it. I'm hoping my well to do Mastercraft owning friend upgrades, since I haven't been able to talk him into a 200. |
Posted By: M3Fan
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 11:39am
MC construction quality has traditionally been outstanding. On par with, if not exceeding CC depending on the period of time we're talking about. Also as a side note my family had one of those tri-hull 60's Evinrude boats back in the 80's. Brings me right back! ------------- 2000 SN GT40 w/99 Graphics/Gel 2016 SN 200 OB 5.3L DI https://forum.fifteenoff.com |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 11:42am
|
MC, like Malibu, is gluing their stringers down these days. Ive heard its a really good glue- but not quite the same as glassing the whole structure together like CC does. It also appears as though they use some sort of bilge pan, also similar to Malibu. ------------- |
Posted By: dip
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 12:04pm
| The 197 I am in a lot is really beautiful but I've been surprised by the little things that seem to go wrong all the time. The upholstery has not held up well despite the fact it lives indoors on a trailer. This new PS is their first significant change in over 10 years so the line was a bit neglected. What is the quality/ reliability of their newer wakeboard boats? |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 12:08pm
|
Well you sold me right there on Nautique Timmy. There are reasons boats are cheaper than others. There has to be compromises for something to be cheaper. Not saying I agree with our baseline ski boat costing near the 70k mark but you get what you pay for. Glued stringers? cool. Mine are still glassed in after almost 30 years. I can't imagine that will be the case with glued in stringers. But maybe thats some good glue!! Gary, I say go for the Aztec!! I hear they handle toung weight on ramps really well too  ------------- |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 12:11pm
|
Dip, Every single MC we get in on trade newer than 05 or so needs significant interior work unless the boat was never used and sat inside covered. Story was different on my dad's 92 prosport. It needed no interior attention until 2 small stitch repairs last season before we sold it. ------------- |
Posted By: 81nautique
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 12:19pm
You know I don't really mind the MC bashing but you guys have to go a little easier on my Aztek please. It's paid for and I'm driving into the ground.  ------------- You can’t change the wind but you can adjust your sails |
Posted By: M3Fan
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 12:34pm
These two factors do not change what it is. Let the Aztek bashing continue. ------------- 2000 SN GT40 w/99 Graphics/Gel 2016 SN 200 OB 5.3L DI https://forum.fifteenoff.com |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 12:35pm
| I hope they don't set the trend with that pickelfork on a ski boat. |
Posted By: dip
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 12:42pm
|
So you're the guy that bought it? ;) I would love to have an early 80's Stars and Stripes. What I take is that MC has had an inconsistent build history which I guess goes with the corporate changes through the years. So the question is what you're getting now. Thank god for them though because they have pushed CC to make better boats. I remember really well how much of a game changer the 1987 Prostar 190 was. Whether the 1990 NWZ was already in the works or not I don't know but it seemed to occur because of the 190 at the time. It also points out how consistent CC has been at least since the 70's, maybe the 60's. |
Posted By: quinner
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 12:54pm
|
Wondering how much R&D money any of the manufacturers are going to put towards the tournament inboard moving forward. Guessing they are a small percentage of total production, if the money is dolled out proportionally don't hold your breath for any more new hulls anytime too soon. That also could be a factor in driving the cost thru the roof, 70k for a closed bow tug is pretty insane. |
Posted By: IAughtNaut
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 1:05pm
|
You know, I read the MC thread that Tim posted, all 13 pages, and I've never spent any time on that forum, but one thing stood out to me...there were several, I'd say 15 or more references to CC products, specifically the 200, and none of them were derrogatory. With the exception of this thread, I very rarely see MC references on here. And if...IF this boat competes with the 200, good for them (not sarcastic at all), but I'd like to see them make a run at the 200V. There were several places in the MC thread were people were like, oh you want a crossover boat, 200V. End of conversation. haha My favorite part of the thread was the guy who asked repeatedly how the surf wake was...3 or 4 times until somebody finally was like, seriously, if you would consider surfing this boat then you're an idiot. And another guy said there was something in the retail agreement that if MC ever found out you bought this boat to surf it they could take it from you! hahahaha ------------- bring the ruckus http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5347" rel="nofollow - 2000 Pro Air |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 1:10pm
CQ, how much did a Ski Nautique list for in 1980? Has it outpaced the cost of cars, etc by a wide margin? 1980 Ski Nautique base price = ?? 1980 Corvette base price = $13,140 2013 Ski Nautique 200 CB base price = $65,590 2013 Corvette base price = $50,595 ------------- |
Posted By: dip
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 1:21pm
| Tim, I know in 1991 when I graduated college my girlfriend and I boat a Nautique together. We considered a new 91 at the time. I think it was 21,000 +/-. We ended up buying an 89 with 39 hours on it instead. Granted I have a mortgage, two kids and a stay at home wife but I was much closer to buying a new one then than I am now. So the price has more than tripled in 22 years. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 1:42pm
|
Comparatively speaking, perhaps that 1991 SN was bargain priced! The 1991 Corvette MSRP was $33k. I bet that the pricing in '80 tracks closer to 1:1. ------------- |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 2:07pm
|
Tim, way too many variables to make that comparison. Amongst others, Chevrolet made 40K Corvettes in 1980. In 2013, a 60th anniversary year, they will make about 14K Corvettes. BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: quinner
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 2:10pm
|
From the pricing sheet in 1999 for a closed bow no trailer, single axle trailer add 2,300 22,190 351 260hp 23,065 351 290hp 26,250 GT-40 26,806 Apex |
Posted By: M3Fan
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 2:19pm
|
My 2000 was 37,500 in 5/2000 with trailer FWIW. ------------- 2000 SN GT40 w/99 Graphics/Gel 2016 SN 200 OB 5.3L DI https://forum.fifteenoff.com |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 2:40pm
I dont think its a bad comparison, Brian... sure, there are a lot of variables, but we're talking high end luxury toys. Chevy didnt discount the '80 Vette just because they had a great sales year, did they? I'm sure it was still the high end of their lineup. Pricing has steadily increased over the last 50 years, as has the SN. I think it would be neat to plot the MSRP trend lines- maybe include median household income over the same period- my guess is that there would be a pretty strong correlation. ------------- |
Posted By: SNobsessed
Date Posted: August-16-2013 at 11:31pm
|
Whether car or boat, it's unfair to compare prices from days gone by. The technology is much more sophisticated in today's products. Also, there are more government regulations, but let's not go there. The good news is that you can have a ski boat of any vintage in like new condition, with the help of CCF! ------------- “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” Ben Franklin |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: August-17-2013 at 12:11am
A very good point. The inflation rate from 1980 to today is 2.99 meaning that even if they build the exact same cars or boats today as they did in 1980, you could expect them to cost 3 times as much. But, they are not the same. In the case of boats, they are bigger, have more extensive upholsterey, have electronic gadgets that did not exist in 1980, have fuel injection and other elements to the motors, etc. etc. That's not to mention different resins, patterns in the gel coat, composite stringers, and other features that don't necessarily stand out to the eye. So a 15K boat in 1980 would be expected to cost 45K today, before we every changed a thing. Not surprising at all that a ski boat costs 60 or 70K. Expensive, but not surprising. BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: backfoot100
Date Posted: August-17-2013 at 12:27am
|
Brian, I love the way that you rationalize everything  ------------- When people run down to the lake to see what's making that noise, you've succeeded. Eddie |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: August-17-2013 at 1:00am
|
Well, it goes the other way as well Eddie. I don't make much more, if any more than I did 15 years ago. At the same time, milk cost double, gas is two to 3X, my insurance is double, on and on. Not to mention, I now pay for a wife and kid. So, not too hard to rationalize down either. BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: AirTique98
Date Posted: August-17-2013 at 1:59am
Tim: You are spot-on: my 1980 [with trailer] was $13,200. The 1990 [purchased when '91's were just out] was $18,000. The '98 jumped up to $35,000...and there we stay! Of course that was an Air/Sport and not a Ski. ------------- Bill http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5549 - 98Air Nautique Former Owner: 1990 Ski Nautique 1981 Ski Nautique 1976 Ski Nautique 1971 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-17-2013 at 8:30am
All true- and you can say all the same things about cars- bigger, more luxurious, more powerful. Consumer expectations have escalated as well! My point was that cc's are expensive- just like they always have been. ------------- |
Posted By: ultrahots
Date Posted: August-17-2013 at 12:38pm
|
Did anyone else notice his head in relation to the windshield at the 10:30 mark or so. A few small waves and a bottle of Advil later. Looks pretty close from that shot. Would like to see it in person to verify. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=6960&sort=&pagenum=2&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990" rel="nofollow - 1980 Show Nautique |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: August-17-2013 at 5:46pm
Or to rationalize as Eddie would say, not inexpensive :) BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: yangyangabc
Date Posted: August-28-2013 at 4:46am
|
You know, to make certain all customer can email us anytime, were providing the best online service 24/7 here. So anytime, any place, should you have any risk or question or if you wish any http://www.sellgw2.com/" rel="nofollow - Cheap Guild Wars 2 Gold , you possibly can come and buying http://www.sellgw2.com/" rel="nofollow - Guild Wars 2 Gold from and have it soon since you paid. Many thanks coming http://www.sellgw2.com/ |
Posted By: harddock
Date Posted: August-28-2013 at 8:25am
|
My prep school was $1,000 a year in 1970's. My daughter starts today at that same school for $13,500 this year. Same school, with yes more technology and better food but everything jumps disproporrtunately over the years, In the 70's a SN or MC were in the $7000-8000 range now $70,000 - 80,000 That's why most of us are loyal to only one brand...... USED! As for GM discounting the Corvette in the 80's... Chevrolet had their look before you import campaign and I fanagled an extra $1,500 off the price of a new Corvette. As for the new MC I like it but I'm saving for a used Andy Mapple edition SN. Hopefully there will still be one around when the price comes down to what I can afford! ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=4487" rel="nofollow - 1998 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: March-04-2014 at 3:54pm
|
I was just able to check out the new 2014 Prostar at the New England boat show this past weekend, and since Quinner wanted to know what my impressions were, I figured this was the best spot for them. First of all, Im a die hard CC guy. So any and all praise for other brands is usually well deserved. Normally my love for other brands comes primarily from my experience at the end of the rope- lots of great ski boats out there. Ive always had a strong preference for the way CC set up their boats from a functionality standpoint though... the short nose, stubby windshield, driver's-elbow-on-the-gunnel layout was a trademark through the run of the 196 (ending in 2009). I always liked the way CC's drove and handled compared to the competition, which seemed to feature longer noses, low slung, swept back windshields and cockpits where you sat down low in the boat. CC's latest 200 has sort of moved in that direction, IMHO- longer nose (to accommodate the open bow), longer wrap around windshield, etc. Not having driven or skied one (all reports say its improved over the 196 in almost every way in terms of wake and tracking), I have not been the biggest fan of the boat's layout. I just have not taken a liking to the way the boat utilizes its larger size, as the open bow isnt necessary for us. I'd rather have the under bow storage, and the roomier cockpit rather than room up front. The side storage lockers are a neat idea, but they hog a lot of space that could otherwise be used for people sitting on the floor facing the rear. I do understand that CC has to make the boat appeal to a wider market than just hardcore purists who ski off the dock- so I get why they made the changes. What I find harder to understand are a few details that seem to have just been missed or overlooked in the boat's development. Things like: - The wrap around windshield (concession to looks?) extends further back than ever before, preventing the driver from picking up a ski in the water, or communicating easily with a skier. It also prevents the use of a straight boom- the 200 requires a universal contour now. - Side lockers... like I mentioned above, a neat idea, but they hog a lot of space, making it difficult to fit things or people between the motorbox and gunnel. Back seat is narrower too. A 95" wide boat shouldnt be this cramped. - You cant open the motorbox all the way. The clamshell design only allows the upper portion to hinge open. To get the lower piece up requires full removal of the box. And that is not easily done like it was on the 196. Instead of pulling 2 pins on the rear hinges, there are at least 3 thumbscrews that need to come off so you can unclamp the thing. If you need to do any serious maintenance or reach down into the bilge, this would be a serious PITA. Even reaching the drain plug is difficult. I think this design was a concession to making the motorbox as narrow as possible, as the base tapers in a bit and probably will scrape the exhaust manifolds upon removal. - Observer seat is too wide... they pushed it to within an inch or 2 of the driver's seat. Great for fitting the max number of people up front, but it makes getting into the driver's seat much harder- you need to step over or on top of the observer seat cushion. The 196 and the SN's that preceded it always got this detail right, not sure how they managed to goof this up. - The thing is slow... I know its pretty much inevitable when making a larger, heavier boat with more wetted surface and a smaller wake, but its a bummer for guys who like or need speed... like barefooters. If you want to go faster than 43 (so maybe 41 with a footer in tow), you gotta spring for the 6.0L. OK... sorry for the long winded intro. The new Prostar. As far as looks go, the mini picklefork front is not very attractive to my eyes. Neither is the new windshield. Jury is still out on how the boat skis, but with the 4 year lag behind CC in releasing this new boat, one would hope its up to par with the 200 (early reports indicate that is the case). Performance is also TBD, but based on what Ive heard from dealers and the like (reliability unknown), theyre saying the boat is several hundred lbs lighter than the outgoing 197 (which performed similarly to the 200 in terms of top end speed) and quite a bit faster. One dealer said 5mph faster- that the 350 powered boat would be good for 48mph. No idea if thats true or not, but its impressive if it is. The optional powerplant is a 6.2L Ilmore, which is probably putting out ~425hp. So Im guessing it wont be any slower. My initial impression in crawling all over the thing at the boat show is that it's really well done. MC seems to have fixed all the things I never liked about non-CC's in terms of their layout, and it even nails a bunch of the details that bug me about the 200. First of all, its overall size matches that of the 200 (20' long, 95" beam). Putting the dash off to the side is another clue that the 200 was used as its benchmark. - The boat seems really wide... mostly because it is. The motorbox is as narrow as possible, and so are the gunnels. It seems like they pushed the dash forward a bit. Theres space to walk between the driver's seat and box. - Instead of side lockers, MC is putting in folding ski racks if you want them. When not in use, they take up almost no room. Step on the bottom foot piece and they open up, and you can fit several skis on each side. Really slick. - Cockpit... There is a useful storage area in the dash just ahead of the steering wheel. The gauges are off to the side. Accessories and ZO are in the touchscreen, and the menus are laid out really well. Even for a non-ZO expert, you can access and change settings very easily- very intuitive. - Windshield- its not much to look at, but boy is it functional. No problem reaching a ski in the water or talking to a skier. No problem running a straight boom. The bimini is incorporated in the frame- no extra mounts in the gelcoat, straps, etc... very clean. - Bow... unlike CC, MC doesnt have 2 deck molds, there is no true "closed bow". But, you can get a hard molded insert that installs easily over the front seats, effectively making it a CB. Its a little cumbersome due to its size, but install and removal is pretty easy. Strong enough to walk on when installed. Storage up under the bow doesnt look too bad... not quite up to true CB levels, but close. I'd rather have a true CB, personally- but I wouldnt be surprised to see this idea repeated by other manufacturers, rather than offer 2 different decks. - Seating. The driver's seat didnt have a lot of side bolstering, but it had some... it didnt take up a lot of space and it reclines- not a bad idea. The portion of the observer seat that flips down to allow bow access does so very nicely- notches into place and makes for a very solid step. CC's just folds forward and presses the back and bottom cushions together (kind of clunky). Like I said, Im anything but an MC fanboy, but the Prostar really impressed me. If as much thought went into the skiing and driving performance as it did the interior and layout, theyve got one heck of a boat. Hopefully some competition is a good thing and CC pushes the envelope even further! |
Posted By: mdvalant
Date Posted: March-04-2014 at 4:03pm
|
Great write-up Tim. Thanks!!! ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5009 - '90 Ski (sold) http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5479 - '00 Sport Mississippi River - Bellevue, IA |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: March-04-2014 at 5:06pm
Tim, glad MC went away from Indmar because in the future that nice skinny motor box would have been a big as the whole cockpit  ------------- |
Posted By: M3Fan
Date Posted: March-06-2014 at 3:04pm
|
Skied and rode this boat a couple weeks ago. First set of the year so I skied it at -15 32mph and 34mph and -22 34mph in the course. The wake seemed comparable to all modern ski boats at those lines and speeds. So, 200, TXi, etc. modern wakes, way better than the previous 197 hull. -22 bump was definitely there but no worse than the competition. My wife skied the boat at 26mph and loved the wakes. She said there is no wake at that speed and I've never seen her pull across the course so confidently. I was very impressed with the interior space, functionality, and comfort. The boat had the pull-out sponge-like floor covering which went over the true hard decking. Snap-out carpet is another option available. I really liked the spongy material-- very good feeling on the feet and the water just runs right through it. Awesome material. This one had a tower on it which only ways 60lbs and can easily be pulled off with 1 person. The boat exudes quality all over and I actually really liked how it looked on the water FWIW. Tons of interior space and those ski racks really work well. These guys upped the ante IMO. Few pics below: http://www.flickr.com/photos/m3fan/sets/72157641613757075" rel="nofollow - New 197 Skiing at The Boarding School, Orlando ------------- 2000 SN GT40 w/99 Graphics/Gel 2016 SN 200 OB 5.3L DI https://forum.fifteenoff.com |
Posted By: Swatkinz
Date Posted: March-06-2014 at 6:13pm
|
good write up. What is the purpose of the gauges being off center? I would think that you'd want them straight ahead and in your line of sight? ------------- Steve 2011 Sport/Air 200 Excalibur 343 2017 Boatmate Tandem Axle Trailer Former CC owner (77, 80, 95, 88, all SNs) Former Malibu owner (07, 09) |
Posted By: IAughtNaut
Date Posted: March-06-2014 at 6:33pm
------------- bring the ruckus http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5347" rel="nofollow - 2000 Pro Air |
Posted By: Hollywood
Date Posted: March-06-2014 at 7:03pm
|
When pulling slalom your line of sight is the driver side boat guides, so offset gauges (to the right) is better. ------------- |
Posted By: dwouncmd
Date Posted: May-12-2014 at 12:33am
|
So I skied behind the ProStar for 3 days, and I got to drive it, though I didn't get to pull a skier. I consider myself a beginner, but wow. Very flat/soft slalom wake. One of the coaches kept telling me to feel the second "bump" in the wake to time the glide before the turn; I didn't tell him how hard it was to feel it was even there, making it pretty useless in that regard. With the 5.7, not as fast as I would like since I might like to use it for barefooters (it probably topped out at 40, but with just 20 hours on the boat, we were not being very aggressive), but it had a four blade prop, and the coach/driver/dealer who also helped develop the boat thought it would run faster with a 3 blade. Nice sound behind the boat, and down the lake, but whistling/mechanical sounding in the cockpit with almost no perceptible "rumble" sitting up front. Lots of room around the dog house; the back seats were out making the boat seem huge. With carpet out and the bare floor, which is the way we used it all weekend, I felt like I was in a center console fishing boat. Very functional. There is a very nice wooden platform that folds up, and a step into the boat from the transom. When the back seats are in, the step remains open, so no one has to step on the seats. Nice helm layout, intuitive to drive. The one I drove had a lot of pre-load/tendency to steer to the right. After years with clunky mechanical shifter/throttles, it seemed too easy, just fingers on the throttle, but I could get used to that very quickly. Despite the pickle fork bow, which I hated in pictures, it looks less aggressive on the water, even less than it did when I saw it at a boat show indoors. Over all, I thought it was a nice looking boat, sitting still, and moving in the water. There are not too many choices that I am aware for well-built, direct drive, pure slalom/3 event boats. A lot of thought when into this one, and I think it shows. I am sorely tempted  ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=6535&sort=&pagenum=2" rel="nofollow - 89 SN <a href="http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=6567&sort=&pagenum=1" rel="nofollow">7 |