TSC1 Vs TSC3
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: Ski, Ride and Foot Talk
Forum Discription: Share photos, techniques, discuss equipment, etc.
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=37089
Printed Date: November-15-2024 at 3:28pm
Topic: TSC1 Vs TSC3
Posted By: Riley
Subject: TSC1 Vs TSC3
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 4:00pm
| I have limited experience skiing behind newer Nautiques, but did get to ski behind a mint '99 196 on Saturday and the wake was small and soft and really nice. It seemed smaller and nicer than the late model 196 I have skied behind. I only ski at 30-31 mph, and no doubt none of these boats a designed for that speed, but I was really impressed with this '99. Are the TSC1 hulls better at slower speeds than the TSC3's? |
Replies:
Posted By: Orlando76
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 4:30pm
|
I'm a 30-32 mph today. Most of my skiing this year has been behind a TSC1 and no doubt I love it, but boy the rooster is pretty noticeable on this particular boat. Once in a blue moon I get to ski behind a TSC3 (yesterday morning) and I can't tell the difference in wake between the two. Even the owner who is a short line skier claims at 34 the TSC 3 feels like his TSC1 did only difference is zero off. ------------- Please support The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation 1976 Ski Nautique 351 Escort 1993 Ski Nautique purple and black 351 HO PCM |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 4:36pm
| Nah, both are excellent. TSC2/3 is a little better at knocking down the rooster, which will help certain speeds and line lengths more than others. Otherwise they're very similar. |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 5:40pm
| At 15 off the rooster tail seemed to be just in front of where I was crossing the wake and I didn't even notice it. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 5:45pm
| Yup, not an issue unless you're running 36 and/or or 22-28. Both boats throw nice wakes at the speed/length you're skiing. |
Posted By: Hollywood
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 5:49pm
| Think it could have been perhaps a case of having a good/bad ski day? |
Posted By: Jonny Quest
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 5:56pm
|
I really need to get behind a TSC1 or 3 soon. My NWZ hull is OK, but the roostertail at 22 to 28 off is bothersome. I ski at 33 to 34 mph on a normal (flat water) day. On my hull, 32 off gives me the best wake. I want to see what the TSC can do at 33/34 at 28 off... ------------- Current 2003 Ski Nautique 206 Limited Previous 2001 Ski Nautique Open Bow 1994 Ski Nautique Open Bow Aqua skiing, ergo sum |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 6:20pm
That may be part of it, but this boat has a very nice wake. I have found Nautique wakes to be a bit larger, but softer than a Bu wake, but I thought this one was pretty small and soft. |
Hollywood wrote:Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 6:23pm
| I've only skied a few malibus but did note the response lx had a very small but very firm wake. Comparable in size to a tsc1/2/3, but definitely not as soft. |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 6:41pm
|
I've skied one Response Lx and found the wake to be small and softer than our Sportster. Our Sportster, as long as the tank is less than 1/2 full and only a couple people in the boat has a smaller, but harder wake than both of them. I like this '99 196 boat a lot though. I was about ready to make a trade for it. I drove for Dave and he didn't pull it around like he does our boat. It tracks very solid, probably perfect pass helps a bit with that. |
Posted By: Hollywood
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 7:04pm
|
It only took 11 years but you're starting to come around Bruce! Tim has been awfully nice not letting you know the "196" moniker did not apply to the TSC hull. It debuted with the newly designed 2002 Ski Nautique with the rear locker. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-17-2015 at 7:11pm
|
^^wrong^^ 196 moniker came in '03 (probably to differentiate from the 206), '02 was still just a Ski Nautique. |