Ski Nautique vs. MasterCraft
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=4000
Printed Date: September-21-2024 at 8:43pm
Topic: Ski Nautique vs. MasterCraft
Posted By: Nautique2001
Subject: Ski Nautique vs. MasterCraft
Date Posted: June-27-2006 at 4:31pm
|
For those of you who have much more boat knowledge than me, what's the major differences between the 1980's Ski Nautiques and MasterCrafts? Looks like both boats had 351 engines and the MasterCraft was lower profile. Can you notice the difference in quality? Wake size? Handling? I'm not a big fan of the stars and stripes graphics. I believe in 1986, MC had sort of rainbow shaped graphics. Anyway, I'm just courious. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1052&sort=&pagenum=4&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990" rel="nofollow - Nautique 2001 |
Replies:
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: June-27-2006 at 5:19pm
|
MC began using fiberglass in the floors and stringers in 83. That's a big plus on the MC side in my mind.
Both had good ski wakes for the day. MC was perhaps a bit smaller, and softer, but I believe had bigger spray at shortline. MC did have lower freeboard. MC really doesn't like rough water. Beats the hell out of you in even moderate chop. The 80s MCs make lousy wake board boats. Whereas the 80s CCs are very coveted by the wakeboard community. Obviously, I'm a CC guy, but I just helped a neighbor rebuild an 85 MC and I have to say, that for its day, the boat was very well built. There are some nit items I don't care for, but in terms of quality of construction, the MC really did a nice job for that era. 86 is considered an anomoly year by MC enthusiasts. The company was sold to AMF, and they changed the very popular Stars and Stripes Graphics. In 87 the first "prostar hulls were introduced." BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: stang72
Date Posted: June-27-2006 at 7:53pm
|
Because I have both correct crafts and a MC S&S...
BKH has hit the major points...to add some...MC had the powerslot tranny and turned a 14 X 18 prop...also a plus...Great hole-shot. The MC is not as deep a hull but wieghs more...Still it will slap ya around in the chop,where as the SN cuts through it better. The MC handles great when it's smooth and turns on a dime at high speed. Both certainly have there merits and are well built! Wakes...Again Brian covered it! The MC once you add 500-600 pounds of fat sack does OK for boarding...SN will give a better wake though. ------------- stang Face plants are not that funny when it's you face! http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/images/3720/photo1.jpg" rel="nofollow - The Super Air |
Posted By: Bradley950
Date Posted: June-27-2006 at 8:42pm
|
Ski Nautiques and who!! LOL!! ------------- Brad Miller bradley950@yahoo.com |
Posted By: M3Fan
Date Posted: June-27-2006 at 9:58pm
| I heard they changed the hook on the hull for 86 only and thus it is the most coveted year for the pre-91 MCs for slalom wake. |
Posted By: 86SN2001
Date Posted: June-27-2006 at 11:16pm
| Since we're talking about the differences between CC and MC. Can anyone tell me why the MC has a higher Coast Guard person limit than the CC? All the sncb's that I have ever seen say 6 people while the same size MC can legally carry 8 or 9 people. Why is this? |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: June-27-2006 at 11:54pm
I think it's because folks with smaller and lighter brains buy MCs. Just kidding. I never noticed that difference before but it would be interesting to know the answer. BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
86SN2001 wrote:Posted By: M3Fan
Date Posted: June-28-2006 at 7:15am
I noticed this too, even in my buddy's 88 Prostar it says it has an 8 person capacity. |
Posted By: 81nautique
Date Posted: June-28-2006 at 8:05am
|
Even if it can legally carry the weight where the heck do you sit 8-9 people in a closed bow ski boat? Unless they're advocating the 2 on the gunwale and 1 sitting on the motor cover. Sounds like a marketing ploy. "We carry more people than the Other Brand"
Just my useless 2 cents. ------------- You can’t change the wind but you can adjust your sails |
Posted By: Nautique2001
Date Posted: June-28-2006 at 11:28am
|
I grew up around Correct Crafts and MasterCrafts. There weren't any other real compet*tors at that time (1980-1989). I was around seven years old when I was introduced to inboard ski boats. Again, I only knew SN and MC. For one reason or another, I was able to pick out SN's as my favorite boat. I liked the large Ski Nautique graphics and didn't really care for a bunch of stars. I thought MC looked like a 4th of July firecracker. I loved the instrument cluster on the SN vs. MC. What was MC thinking? I'm now 33 years old and still feel the same way. I now wonder about the true technical differences. You guys are right, I don't see many older MC's with wakeboarders. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1052&sort=&pagenum=4&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990" rel="nofollow - Nautique 2001 |
Posted By: 81nautique
Date Posted: June-28-2006 at 12:12pm
|
My 82 Stars and Stripes had the molded Speedo housing similar to my 81 Ski. In 83 they went to that instrument cluster that looked like it fell off a spaceship and looked like crap. they also changed from the curved windshield to the angular one and I didn't think that looked as good either.
My 82 had the same PCM 351w as in my Ski. Powerslot trans was a hugh difference over a boat with a 1:1 trans though. Powerslot was a great option. As for Stars And Stripes you either like um or you didn't, that was classic Mastercraft though. If you ever get a chance to drive an old MC do it, they handle really nice and don't roll in the turns at all, incredible how flat they turn. They were years ahead of CC in getting rid of wood in their construction, not just in the floors either. Their observer seat bases were glass as well where CC where wood for years later. I don't know why it took CC so long to do that. All said, I loved my MC but my old CC ski is a true classic boat, It has completely different lines and resembles the old woodies more than the MC does and that's where my loyalty lies. ------------- You can’t change the wind but you can adjust your sails |
Posted By: Nautique2001
Date Posted: June-28-2006 at 1:14pm
|
MasterCraft had a 14X18 prop! Must have had some punch to it. Did they have 454's as an option like CC? ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1052&sort=&pagenum=4&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990" rel="nofollow - Nautique 2001 |
Posted By: GottaSki
Date Posted: June-28-2006 at 1:24pm
|
Trans has 1.5: gear reduction, hense the big pitch. It let the revs come up faster. The pull was stronger but the 351's ran out of lungs earlier. A little ahead of its time, it could have really used the gt40 heads for the extra rpms.
Yes, 454's were available but not common. ------------- "There is nothing, absolutely nothing, half so much worthwhile as messing around with boats...simply messing." River Rat to Mole |
Posted By: Nautique2001
Date Posted: June-28-2006 at 3:35pm
|
What was WOT speed? The hull looks sleaker than the Nautique's, almost racey looking. MC was smart getting rid of their wood construction. Sounds like they liked playing around with their transmissions too. I recall MC's being very loud, specifically when gunned. Nice boats, but Nautiques are definitely my favorite. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1052&sort=&pagenum=4&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990" rel="nofollow - Nautique 2001 |
Posted By: 81nautique
Date Posted: June-28-2006 at 3:46pm
|
I ran the 14x18 prop and it topped out at 44 but pulling a footer or 2 it did die off in a turn. I went to a 14x16 with double cup and that thing pulled 3 deep start footers and ran 42 with anything in tow. Raised the rpms a bit further than suggested but 800 hours later it was still running strong.
------------- You can’t change the wind but you can adjust your sails |
Posted By: GottaSki
Date Posted: June-28-2006 at 4:06pm
|
I think a 70's-80's Nautique will have more speed for similar HP. The nautique gets just a little more lift above 40 mph where the MC's wetted surface doesn't change much, and the hard concaves underneath make it track nice, but at the expence of some speed to accelerate all that water along those curves.
I think where that shine is for the 28-32 mph family youth and women skier, where a nautique will launch you into orbit, the MC flatter wake is so much nicer. If you can get ito shortline the difference disappears, the trick is getting that good without wrecking yourself first. ------------- "There is nothing, absolutely nothing, half so much worthwhile as messing around with boats...simply messing." River Rat to Mole |
Posted By: Nautique2001
Date Posted: June-28-2006 at 4:18pm
|
My 1980 Nautique wake had a defined rooster tail at 28 MPH. It was rough crossing the wake and trying to get as little air as possible. Sounds like MasterCraft didn't have that rooster tail. I skied on a friend's 1982 Nautique 2001 as a kid. I recall that wake being forgiving.
Ken ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1052&sort=&pagenum=4&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990" rel="nofollow - Nautique 2001 |
Posted By: MaddMarxx
Date Posted: July-01-2006 at 12:13am
| I worked CC in Oville back in the mid 80s.I was told then that someone took one of the old moulds and used it start MC and thats why they started cutting them up when they got outdated.Im not sure if its true thats just what I was told. |