I currently have a 2003 Ski Nautique.  Considering finding a 1971-1981 model with the narrower beam and shorter length as an additional boat.  My mechanic recommended either a Ford or Chevy driveline vs Chrysler indicating parts would be easier to obtain. I like the smaller size of these boats and the exhaust note.   I have a couple questions:

1. Can these older boats be fairly reliable (I know they would be less so than my current since they are not fuel injected and have point ignition.

2. Are these older models challenging to find parts for regardless of driveline?

3. Any recommendations on where to best find one?  I assume CL, Facebook are the most common

4. What should i expect to pa?   I assume in the 5-10k range for a nice one.

5. Is a Mustang and Ski Nautique essentially the same boat in these years?

6. I know it is important to find one with sound stringers and floors which can be challenging.

Please let me know.  Thank you in advance for any replies.

2.  Certain parts can be hard to find, but as a general rule, engine/transmission parts can be had.

3.  Older Ski Nautiques pop up regularly on FB marketplace, CL and Fleabay.  There is an interesting thread here on CCFan that is dedicated to interesting CL finds.

4.  Cost is typically a function of the condition of the boat and level of restoration (if any).  There are some low-hour and well maintained 2001 hulls that carry asking prices of $15,000+.  However, you should be able to find a very nice boat under $10,000

5.  I'll let the Mustang experts comment here...

6.  The general consensus is that a boat with wood stringers will need a stringer job at some point.  There are "unicorns" out there that have no rot, but they seem to be quite rare.

The Ford 351's seem to have been more available in the Ski Nautique and parts are easy to come by. www.ski-it-again.com might be a source for used older boats.  Classic Correct Craft on Facebook seems to have a few for sale on a regular basis. 

Some of the older boats had no foam in the floor so the stringers held up much better over the years. The foam held water against the stringers and caused rot and water moved through the fiberglass polyester resin. 

 

mine is for sale, 1979 new as follows ; stringers floor gauges steering controls wiring custom front seats rear seat dog box and swim platform.  All documented w/ about 800 pictures 

New engine parts belts hoses starter, ring gear, trans cooler lines, dampener, cutlass bearings delrin packing gland, full fluids filters and plugs, rebuild kit for the carb.

The ignition was converted to electric before i got the boat.

New axel, hubs, bearings,winch, tires, lights, couplers, bunks, extended tongue (easy tow and backing).

Just ground, sanded, ospho'd and painted the trailer with qaulity material (see build thread, i'll attach them)

Clean title and registration 

100 % solid trailer, 100% solid boat,  100% encapsulated (no bare wood anywhere) 

Heres the deal, i am not an engine guy, parts are available, but the last 2 parts were wrong, so instead of completing the install i'm dealing with delays, today it was an oil drain line "for 351w old ski boats" 

I will install this engine to locate it for correct prop strut spacing, align it and re bed and glass the stern tube, everything i would've done exactly the way i would do it for myself.

Sell it hull and trailer with or without the engine and all the new parts that are stacked up.

Edit in; everything the person i got the boat from told me about it has rung true, i am very confident it's under 400 hours and have no doubt it will run strong and be reliable.

Selling for what i got in it.

thanks,

1, Is that a good combo of boat/motor?

2. If I want to improve reliability what is recommended to do to it?  

3. The trailer is not equipped with a winch.  Would it be hard to float on if needed?  It has the typical side guides and bow stop with the large pads on each side.  

4. Will parts be relatively simple to find for it ie motor, tuneup and drive parts?

5. If stock, is that 215 hp?

Please advise thoughts.  thanks again for the replies

A 70 Mustang will be the "2nd generation" hull. Gary's is the first gen so there are some minor differences. Gary answered some but I can add. Skiing behind it will be good but as with anything, later hull versions say with the Ski Nautiques are better. The trailer is a drive on so there's no need for a winch however, some have added them.

Where in Wi. are you? 

I agree.

Swen,

Any pictures you can post?

I'm not surprised that the dealer "advises solid floors and stringers and everything works on it."     I would expect nothing less from the dealer.  As the potential buyer, you may want to follow Ronald Regan's advice: "Trust, but verify".  I would recommend doing a bit of poking around.  Do a search here on CCF and you'll find some good suggestions on how to look for stringer and floor problems.

JQ

Except for the color and valve covers this is what the engine should look like. You can also see the fiberglass floor pan that was in all the later Mustangs

Swen, thought I'd chime in with a few comments, mostly mirrors what Morfoot said but ..... you own a 2003 Ski Nautique.  When you ski behind a 16 'or 16 1/2' Mustang you'll love the sound, love that you're behind your classic boat, but the novelty ends there.  If you slalom with some decent ability you'll yank the boat around quite a bit. You'll launch crossing the wakes, they have a hardness that is nothing like your 2003.  So beyond the novelty now and then, you won't choose the Mustang for slalom if the 2003 is available.  Add to that the lack of storage and general room and you just aren't going out skiing with 4 people in that boat without being cramped for space.

As mentioned, in rough water those hulls are a bear.  Pound the daylights out of you, we would sit on cheapo orange life vests to absorb some of it at times.

No reason you can't make the boat just as reliable as your newer Nautique.  And you'll get SO much enjoyment out of it, but more often as a smooth water cruiser and occasional water sports tow boat.

Here's my quick thoughts on boat vs. price in the small size you are looking for.

'60's or early '70's Mustang or similar - classic boats, amazing sound, not very practical but awesome calm water cruisers.  Could pay as low as $2,500 for a running one in rough shape, or up to $6,000 for one in really good shape.  Paying on the high end for boats like this doesn't make much sense to me as almost without exception they end up needing work, unless you find a true gem like Gary's.

'70's Ski Nautique or Ski Tique - slighly more modern, still not all that practical but a bit more so and still great sounds and still a classic.  Similar pricing to the older boats.  Tique's are hard to find but fit your smaller boat desires, but a Ski isn't a big boat either.

'80's 2001 - getting bigger so might not fit your small boat desires, more usable for water sports and better riding.  Can be found in decent running condition for $4,000-7,000 but nearly all need stringer replacement, but then again most of the older ones likely do too.

I'd say that the 2nd generation hulls (70's into 80's) are better that the 1st gen (60's) for slalom. 

Hollywood wrote: The wood stringer paranoia is about as bad as the covid.

You are right, and sorry I posted in a way that says nearly all old boats need them.  Since I own a 58 year old boat with stringers in excellent shape you'd think I'd know better.

Swen, let me correct the last sentence of my post by saying, look closely at stringers before you buy.  Well maintained boats can be found with stringers that still have plenty of life in them, but it's worth a close look so you know what you are buying.

Swen

I did a video a few years ago on Stringer inspection:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r89aVI_LVBg" rel="nofollow - Boat Stringer Inspection - YouTube

This is worst case scenario, i put these up to show you where to look, not turn you away from a 70's model.

Pic1 the floor popped / cracked loose from the inner stringers and hull sides, this allowed water in from the top.

The carpet would hide that fact unless you really dig into.

Pic 2, 3 & 4, close look reveals only a foot or so of cutting / grinding the floor loose around the whole perimeter, it peeled right off, water got in and had no way out.

Fast math and not accurate either says 100 sq ft of 2 pound foam to make the floor,  200pounds total. 

could hardly pick up one of those garbage bags in the background of those shots, the foam was soaked, bet it all easily weighed 400 pounds

Pic 5&6 shows how all stringer were affected by rot from bow to stern, partially from what can be seen in pic 4&7,

Pic 4 you can see the drain hole between the exhaust pocket and bilge 1 inch hole drilled in the vey front of the exhaust pocket, and pic7 if you look close, the stringers were roughly cut at a 45 after installation as a drain.

Both the drilled and cut drains were not glassed shut and this allowed water into the stringers at the bottom.

Wood does what it was designed to do, efficiently move water from the source to the other end,

i.e. from the ground to the leaves. This was compounded by using dimensional lumber, 2x8 and 1x6 material.

Sections of the outboard stringers as seen in pics 2,3,4,5&6 were barely tabbed in, and only in a few places with chopped strand mat, some of the wood that shaped the exhaust slots were just thrown in place, (nailed or stapled with an air gun) and filled with foam.

The main or engine stringer were tabbed in with chop strand mat but did have some woven thrown over in some key spots.

I have good pictures of the tabbing but no one probably wants to see them.

The last pic is one of the outboard stringers i used for a template on the stringers i made.

The main or engine stringers were mush/moosh/mulch etc from front to back.

So i would go look at the tigue w/ the carpet pulled, and inspect the entire perimeter around the hull sides and stringers,

Poke your fingers into the drain holes about mid engine under the exhaust, lay down on your stomach and reach under the gas tank to feel the main stringers back on the transom to see if drains were cut in. Look for any other drains too being a different model.

I have more pics, the only dry piece of wood on this boat was the rudder port, again this is worst case scenario, and my opinion is whoever laid up the hull did a really good job, the gauges, steering, controls, etc looks like it was qaulity stuff, but after 40 years, just weathered in appearance. The running gear/underwater hardware is good stuff.

But when the boat went to stringers floor and rigging the ball was dropped, the floor had maybe 1 to 1/12 inch of tab up the hullsides, it was wafer thin, nothing was sealed, add that to inherently wet conditions via use and the ole "it's a boat how does water hurt it", 

and after so many years it's not loved on or as pretty the kids go to college, covers are expensinve  so some neglect is expected.

Swen

And, if it's close to me, I'd be willing to go take a look at it.

BTW Swen, don't worry about me picking it up before you since I already have a Tique. 

Thanks again,

Swen

Swen

What does "redone" mean?

Painted?  Not gelcoat reapplied?  Personally, I would stay away from a painted ski boat

Oil on top of intake manifold can be breather or PCV

302 is a good engine.  No worries if it is in good working condition.

Just my 2¢

JQ

I think you either had a dyslexic moment, a typo, or it's a really one of a kind boat, an 87Ski Tique didn't exist.

Maybe a 78 Ski Tique?

Stripes repainted or whole boat?

That looks like a case of "stripes gone wrong" 

It happens when somebody makes their template for the stripes from a photo, transfers it to a pattern and you get that funky curve in the front.

It's not a 1987 anything, but a 70's Ski Tique whose year you can't tell from the photo.

If you had the HIN number  from the upper right corner of the transom, that would tell a story.

There are a lot of '70's era boats that don't need to be re-jelled, in fact it's not all that common for people to have it done.  And me personally, I wouldn't rule out a painted boat.  If done well and if you take care of it paint can look good for a long time.

If you test drove that boat and it started, idled, and ran great, and the stringers appear to be sound, and the interior is in decent shape, then maybe you should consider it.  $5,000 should get you a good running boat in decent shape.  No, there aren't a lot of Ski Tiques around but you can find them.

http://www.ski-it-again.com/php/skiitagain.php?endless=summer&topic=Search&category=Boat_Vintage&postid=60936" rel="nofollow - https://www.ski-it-again.com/php/skiitagain.php?endless=summer&topic=Search&category=Boat_Vintage&postid=60936

Rory,

Nice find, hope he's enroute. 

Boat appears intact, windshield intact, trailer intact & If hull is cosmetically good, minor dock rash expected,

it's worth the asking price. 

Hull ID says B:2180

Can you decipher that number into a year?

Rory

That's my old Cuda. Bought new in 70 and sold it in 72. (it's a 1970) Since I had it there were two owners after me. I was asked to take a look at it about 10 years ago. It showed plenty of hard usage as it had been "ridden hard and put away wet". I highly recommend you take a very close look at the stringers since they were on their way out back then. I don't want in any way to discourage you as it is a great boat that I feel just needs some work. I had some great times and fantastic memories with it. Post some pictures and please keep us informed on what you are doing with it. 

Enjoy, Pete

EDIT: the hull number you found is before the days of the formal HIN's. The "B" stands for Barracuda and the the numbers are simply CC's serial number system. 

Wow....small world!!  I think you're right , that the stringers are tired. There is some "Great Stuff" around the exhaust tubes where they leave the manifold so I know they were trying to band-aid something.  One thing I'll say is the engine sounds awesome, idles great, and jumps when I hit it.  It came with a nice Eagle Trailer and the lines of that boat are awesome so I'll put it in the water this weekend just to get the feel for it and then prepare to fix it up.  I was hoping to get away with new upholstery, buffing the hull, some better gauges, polishing the metal, etc.  It sounds like I may need to consider replacing the stringers.............I saw some pictures of that work in progress.  It looks like a LOT of work, and that's if I knew how to do it.  I just retired (early), so I have time and some energy so I'll see if it's in scope for me.  I need to get it in front of an expert to see if the stringers need to be replaced (I'm guessing they didn't repair them after you looked at it.  The timeline of their purchase in 1972 or 73 seems to match but they screwed up the registration along the way and it now states that it is a 1973 boat.

I really wish you could see it and tell me what's right and what's wrong.  I don't want to replace upholstery and have to replace the floor and stringers after.

We'll be in touch I'm sure.

Rory

Gary,

College years needing the $$$

I think he put some of the money aside to start saving for his Fleetwood Bro-Ham  a few years down the road 

Or maybe he had to buy a new wardrobe to go with the Caddy

A quote from the CCF archives

8122pbrainard wrote: There sure are idiot car salesmen out there. Seem like they are a separate class of people. Back before I got married, had kids and consequently had money to spare I went shopping for a Cadillac. Stopped after work one day in my work clothes at my local dealer. I was the only customer in the showroom and 2 salesmen were over sitting at a desk (one of them even had his feet up on the desk) 10 minutes of my looking at one of the cars go by and one of the salesmen yells over to me "do you think you can afford it?" Ha ha! big joke between them but the joke was on them. I walked out of the dealership and the next day went to another dealer close to work. Bought a Fleetwood Brougham coupe with the leather de'eligance package, diesel, wire wheels, Vogue tires and sunroof. I wrote out a personal check for the full amount and drove off with a new car!!

Rory

By the way....1970 Correct Craft Barracuda

you should start your own new thread about your new purchase so as not to confuse info with the OP’s original topic.

Rory

Rory,

You're fine with what you've done. Starting a new thread would just eliminate any confusion between your boat and any the OP'r has. 

I'll take the challenge and say the Tique will be better than the Glastron. Flatter bottom so a flatter wake on the Tique. 

Swenster wrote: realize this might be challenging to answer but was wondering if anyone had input.  Would a Ski Tique offer a better slalom experience over a Glastron SX175 with a Volvo Penta outdrive.  I realize the initial pull would likely be better but was wondering about the Wake and pull at speed.  We have the SX today and would not want to take a step backwards.  Please advise thoughts and thanks again.

2 part answer.

Part 1 - we have a 2005 Glastron GX185 with 190 HP V6 and VP outdrive, similar boat to yours. For the first time in a very long time I went to slalom ski on it 3 weeks ago. 2 small people in the boat. Trying to deep water start I dragged and fell twice. 3rd time I got up with difficulty. I'm 205 lbs. or so. Are you getting up fine behind the SX175 on a slalom ski? The Tique would pull me up easily by contrast.

Part 2 - the Glastron has a decent wake, maybe smaller than the Tique. But, the tow point at the back rather than the mid hull pylon on the Tique is a major difference. If you really want to slalom, you can't do so very well with a transom tow point like the Glastron.

A 70's Tique isn't a good slalom wake by today's standards, but it is workable.  If slalom is your primary focus moving up to a 90's vintage boat is the way to go.

What a gorgeous boat!

I forgot you have a 2006, so you know the difference.

Yes, a different prop would help the Glastron.  But, it already winds pretty high at WOT and cruising, which the boat is used for most of the time, would be impacted negatively I think.

Get a Tique! We can tell how much you look forward to the old school sound and feel. It will be a blast to ski behind.  One more comment ... after having an inboard to ski with most of the time for 40 years now, I really don't enjoy the I/O. I remind every skier it's back there when they are ready to jump in, and just generally prefer not to have a prop and outdrive as compared to the safety of the inboards.

 Ahhhhhh but that's the joy of skiing behind a classic CC. Kermit isn't exactly the ideal wake to ski behind but at 30mph there isn't a better sound ANYWHERE than the duel muffler subwoofer driven by a 302HM amplifier, and especially when the driver has to throttle up to maintain speed. 

1. Is a later tique essentially the same as a Mustang?

2. Is a 302 easy to winterize?  I imagine the steps are drain the block, drain the intakes, disconnect the waterpump pickup, place waterpump intake in RV antifreeze, start fog.  

Is that correct?  also realize oil change and filter should occur too.

Please let me know.  I have always had my newer Nautique done for me but was wondering if i could do this one.  Thanks to all for the replies.  Great site.

Block

Exhaust Mnflds

Fresh Pump

Re-Circ Pump

Speedo Hose

I've never wasted antifreeze, but you can sure do whatever makes you comfy.

The fin:    I had a '66 Mustang.  I installed a fin.  It did not make much of a difference.  The one difference I did notice was that It turned tighter without the fin.   As far as keeping it between the bouys with really good skier,  not much difference.