Jump to content

ajgear

Members
  • Posts

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • Preferred boat
    2020 Ski Nautique
  • Home Ski Site
    Lake Wausau
  • Real Name
    A. J. Gordon
  • Ski
    HO CX Superlite
  • State
    Wisconsin

ajgear's Achievements

Contributor

Contributor (5/15)

  • Conversation Starter
  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. Here’s an article about the battle in MN: https://www.minnpost.com/environment/2020/03/the-battle-over-wake-surfing-has-made-its-way-to-the-minnesota-legislature/ Doesn’t sound like much is going to happen just yet, but other states will certainly be watching.
  2. There are proposals to limit boats with “wake enhancing devices” deployed to certain depths of water (I think 15 feet or so) and no closer than 200 ft from other vessels or shorelines. They’re doing the depth thing under the theory of preventing bottom stirring which releases nutrients from the bottom into the water, feeding algae blooms. The rest is obviously shoreline preservation and safety. It would essentially eliminate wake boats from smaller, shallower lakes. As a recovering surfer, I get the arguments on both sides, but agree that wakes have gotten WAY beyond what any amateur surfer can even handle. At that point it’s just a phallus measuring contest. But if they keep building them bigger, people that feel the need to compensate for certain shortcomings will keep buying them. And eventually there will be enough backlash to stop the madness.
  3. @Horton, I wasn't suggesting that the actual skier/driver accounts of the SN were fabricated or invalid. I know many have actually skied behind it and or driven it, I appreciate those critiques and the validity of their preferences. My point was that a lot of the negative comments were from the peanut gallery, not actual accounts of experience with the boat. And if you haven't driven or skied it, or at the very least been in it, it's a hollow critique. Hence, the comments later in that post. It was essentially a more verbose version of, "Don't knock it 'til you've tried it." Perhaps I'll go with that next time. ;) Those peanut gallery comments reminded me of an experience I had about 20 years ago. I had a just gotten a new Corvette (car, not boat). I got out of it at a bar where some guys were smoking outside. One guy with a Dodge shirt on proceed to ask me how I felt about the Viper being quicker, faster, etc. I said it didn't really bother me, as they were very different cars, but I'd be glad line up my Vette with his Viper. He responded that he didn't have a Viper. I just gave him a polite smile and nod, and walked into the bar. On the setup thing, it seems like maybe there are dealers that are so focused on wake boats that they don't know how to deliver a ski boat with the right setup and basic instructions. Could be wrong.
  4. @6balls, I couldn't agree more. A quick setup guide on a laminated sheet/ring of sheets to throw in the glove box similar to an airplane checklist, but obviously simpler/smaller. Another thing that has truly surprised me in three of my most recent boat purchase is that there are NO independent reviews and comparisons of new boats out there. There are boat "reviews" that seem more like advertisements than reviews, and many are simply regurgitated from the manufacturers websites. I was shocked that no one was out there getting demo boats from area dealers, putting them on a lake, riding behind them one after another, and then writing a comparison/review. Instead, you have to scour forums and sift through all the homerism to find even a brief, honest take on a boat. It seems like there's an opportunity there. If someone did that, the poor SOBs that are looking at buying a new 200 or SN and are trying to find some insight could be saved from my rantings. :)
  5. @Horton, absolutely. It really does throw a pretty significant wake with ballast full, hydrogate up and lower speeds. A buddy of mine did trick in his younger days and was inspired to break out his trick ski. That wake scared him a bit. I had to go to about 50% ballast before he would try anything. He finished 3 inverts in 4 tries. By that I mean that he made it about 3/4 of the way over each of the four times. :D @tru-jack, I'm not sure about surfing w/o a rope. We did wake foil behind it last weekend. It was all of our first times on a foil, so it was a bit of a mess, but I think if we played with it, we could get that to go ropeless, as my buddy was able to ride with a fair bit of slack for quite some time before failing both epically and comically. If the weather cooperates this weekend, I'll gladly load it up and pop a wake shaper on the side to give it a shot. I'll let you know.
  6. @horton, to which do you refer? The SN or the VTX? I can understand the argument for either.
  7. I’m just glad I sold my crossover so that I can now look disapprovingly at wake boats when they go by. Most of them on our lake belong to my buddies, and I’ll gladly take a surf pull, but it feels good to have the moral high ground. Soon I will also shake my fist in the air as they pass, but I haven’t perfected the disapproving look yet, so first things first. In all seriousness though, one of the reasons I switched to a pure ski boat was because our 20 VTX was getting swamped by the behemoths in the surf lanes. 3 years ago, it was us and maybe two other boats with similar wakes. Now there’s 10 out there, and the small ones are 22’ and weigh 4500# dry. It’s an arms race. Now we ski before they get on the water and pontoon in the shallow parts where they can’t go when they are out there....or hop on the big ones and surf with them. ?
  8. @RAWSki, that’s how the new 200 heaters come from the factory. The nozzles come out on the right side of the foot well. Couldn’t figure that out for the life of me. I’m sure it’s a routing issue with the open bow, but man, would that bug me. And that electrical panel placement... https://nautique.com/assets/img/models/2021/n200/gallery/2021_Nautique_200_I_Gallery_03.jpg
  9. @dave2ball, I make apologies neither for zealously defending my baby, nor my prolixity in doing so. ? Also, I really like externalizing all of the internal justifications I used to part with the wad of cash I had to drop to adopt her.
  10. @dave2ball, by all means, feel free to extol the virtues of the 200 vs the SN. Given your vast experience with, and knowledge of, CC, surely you can fill in the blank spaces in my comparison and specify the nature of the cliffs from which I’ve left so many hanging. Should it be less explanation that you truly seek, and not more, I’ll mark that as an accomplishment. If it’s just more of my flowing prose you’re after, ask, and ye shall receive. ?
  11. @dave2ball, I guess I'm not understanding your definition of "better". Those "creature comforts" are a HUGE portion of the enjoyment of a boat. If every time you get the heater hose out, it gets tangled in your legs, it sucks to use the heater for passengers. If every time you swing your foot into the foot well, you stub your toe on the battery switch, it's annoying. If you don't have anyplace to put your skies and other stuff, and you're tripping on it every time you try to move around the boat, it's frustrating. And for me, having to step onto the swim deck to use the center gas fill is a gigantic pain in the arse. All of those thing absolutely make a difference. I would posit that there's not a huge difference between the wakes of most newer ski boats from the Big 3, and that the vast majority of those differences are purely subjective. Hence, my earlier comments regarding enjoying skiing behind any of them. I think most skiers would agree. Thus, the differentiating factors for MANY buyers are those very creature comforts. So what data are you looking for? I haven't done a 3D camera scan of the wakes to measure the deviation in water level from side to side. I don't have any gyroscopic data to measure how much the skier and ski bounce when crossing the wake. I also don't have any 0 to 60 times or lap times around the Nurburgring for you to compare. I'd also posit that while you feel them insignificant, MicroTuners and 450 # of weight reduction are not small things. They change how the water reacts when leaving the bottom of the hull, and there should be no doubt in a rational person's mind that those things have an effect on wake. While those effects are demonstrable, it doesn't mean they're desirable to everyone. The reality of the matter is that when it comes to ski boats, almost all of the performance factors that people care about are subjective. So I suppose if you don't include subjective measures and creature comforts in your definition of "better", then the cheapest fiber glass tub with a motor in it wins the contest so long as it creates a wake that you like. Wait, that wake is subjective too. I guess we're stuck. ;)
  12. @DavidN, Can't dispute the 22 off thing. ;) BUT, I haven't had any complaints from guys that are at that length going from the 2019 PS to the 2020 Ski (perhaps because they're all at 34 mph), including the owner of the PS. The feedback I've gotten from them is that it's not a "hard" bubble, so as long as they're pulling through it, it's not kicking them. I have noticed in observing that if they back off before the wake, it's a more noticeable pop, as one would expect. Nothing is perfect, I guess. I love my Ford Raptor, and it will do unnatural things (in a good way) off-road when pressed. But I sure miss the Expedition's rear air suspension when I'm pulling my tractor. As far as the SeaDeck is concerned, I can absolutely understand the look of it being a sticking point. But from a functional standpoint, I don't see anywhere that "makes no sense". Perhaps you're seeing something I'm not. I like having the entire gunwale covered, as it allows people to step in and out anywhere along the side from another boat, a dock, or the platform without slipping or grinding sand into the gelcoat. I hate feet on fiberglass, so maybe that's my own issue, but I also view it as a safety concern. Slips getting into/out of a boat scare the heck out of me. I've also found that the small step forward of the front speaker is quite nice for our shorter folks when entering/exiting from the side. I also like it on the motor hood both as a secure stepping point from the gunwale to the opposite side of the boat or vice versa when getting in and out, and for using it to work on skis. The exterior upholstery? I get the criticism. I like the feel reaching over the side from the helm, but it certainly could have been made smaller. I've seen wear there on other boats from the bungee rope going from the pylon to a dock that's lower than the gunwale. I put a 2' shock tube over my bungee rope to prevent that. Luckily for me, our lake is actually a reservoir, and though it doesn't fluctuate too much, people's docks are generally higher to avoid the occasional rise in water level. The looks are certainly subjective, as may already be clear, I personally love the angles and the snub nose. It's like a mid-engine supercar had a lovechild with a stealth fighter. It's aggressive, and certainly a departure from the classic look. I read an article in an auto mag a few years back talking about criticism of "modern" automotive design. One of the more controversial designers commented that, if everyone likes a new design, you did something wrong. His point was that if it's not causing some people to scratch their heads, it's not a big enough departure from past designs. He argued that, if it wasn't controversial, it would age much more quickly and wouldn't move the design language of the industry forward. As more people are exposed to the new design and warm to it, others in the industry start to incorporate elements into their cars, and eventually they all start to resemble a car that's been around for years. It certainly doesn't always play out that way, and this may not either, but I fully support pushing the aesthetic boundaries. Perhaps it will end poorly. Perhaps it's just ahead of its time, and others will emulate it more subtly until they resemble it. Perhaps it will crater and forever be known as the Pontiac Aztec of boats. Time will tell, I guess.
  13. @mancy, it's about 450 lbs lighter with less displacement. It has a newer hull design to flatten wake and redirect spray. It's 3" wider. The footwell doesn't have an electrical panel where your left foot goes. The heater tube doesn't have to go under the driver's leg to get to the passenger seat (and get tangled or stepped on when the driver gets in and out). The driver position sits just a tad lower so taller drivers don't have their hats blown off (not a benefit to everyone, I guess). There's a place to put skis other than on the floor, so you don't need a tower with ski racks if you have four skis and kid's stuff onboard (you can theoretically put a ski or maybe 2 under the observer seat, so long as you have nothing else in there - it's not roomy or convenient in the 200). It has MicroTuners that, much to the dismay of technophobes, work quite well. It has fuel fills on both sides of the boat so you don't have to step off the dock to put gas in it (and the cover has fuel ports, unlike the 200). Leaky gas cans also don't drip on the non-skid on the rear step. With the closed bow, there's a lot more room for extra life jackets, boat bumpers, towels, etc. (again, may be a detriment for those needing the seating area, but a benefit to me). The windshield is cut back to allow easier conversation/interaction with the skier without standing or reaching uncomfortably over the side window. It has 400 lbs of ballast to beef up the wake if (God forbid) my kids end up wanting to do a little wakeboarding or tubing. It has a heated observer seat to keep my wife and kids happy. It has docking lights for those late evenings coming back into the lift. That's my short list, and most of the reasons I chose the ski over the 200. I could probably find a few other things I like better (like the larger glove box) if I really thought about it. Oh, and I happen to think it's dead sexy as well, but clearly, YMMV. Again though, these might not be the same preferences as others have, and I'm only comparing the new 200 to the Ski. The comparison between the new Ski and the previous 200CB would certainly be slightly different w/r/t storage and such. For a number of reasons, I didn't really consider the pre-2019 boats when I was looking.
  14. @mancy, as I said, not all new technology is better or, more to the point, better for everyone. But this is more like the iPhone 11 Pro is better than the iPhone 11. You may not find proportional value in the better camera, better water resistance, or better display for the $300 upcharge. Both are certainly perfectly functional, and if the 11 suits your needs, you certainly don’t have to pay for the upgrades. You may even find it frustrating to have to deal with the additional camera modes and whatnot. In fact, you may feel like your iPhone 8 is all the smart you need in a phone. If you’d miss your home button or earphone jack, by all means stay with what works for you. But to deny that those upgraded features are useful to those who are willing to pay for them and learn to use them is simply replacing fact with preference. There are demonstrable differences. Some will like them. Some won’t. The beauty is that both camps are free to vote with their wallets. I did choose to vote with my dollars, and thus far, I’m extremely happy with that choice, as are those I’ve skied with or talked to about their experience with the boat. Most of the negativity I’ve seen, on the other hand, comes from people who haven’t skied or driven one, and is based on their perception of its price/value balance. If you have skied/driven one after learning how to use it, and you don’t like it, great. It’s not the boat for you, and there are lots of other choices out there. If you did like it but think it’s too expensive, again, great. Find a less expensive boat you like, or wait until used ones start popping up at more affordable prices. If, on the other hand, one hasn’t skied/driven one that’s set up properly, but still feels it necessary to enlighten the world with their critique, forgive me if I take that with a very large grain of salt.
×
×
  • Create New...