196 asking prices

[swc5150]

I'm notorious for going for top dollar on my boats, so I don't begrudge anyone either. If someone can get $21k for a '99, more power to them. IMHO, it's crazy to pay that much.

[DanielC]

I do not mean to start another this boat VS. that boat discussion, but here goes.
There is no doubt in my mind that a Ski Nautique 200 is a better three event boat than the TSC 1, TSC 2 or TSC 3 Ski Nautique boats were.
But in my opinion, the performance of the earlier boats is in many cases better. (Higher top speed, better fuel economy, quicker accelerating) There is also the issue of beam width. I know some people who would have to change the actual concrete in their boat house to fit a 200.
Many people like the short nose, closed bow look of the Ski Nautique (196). They like that a seated driver can reach down into the water and pick up a trick rope that was released from the boat. They like the few extra more miles per hour you can get, that helps with barefooting.
They like the fact that the 196 was designed first as a closed bow boat, and then modified to accommodate having an open bow, and more cupholders, instead of being designed as a "universal hull" that either a closed bow or open bow deck can be attached to.

In short, because a very good designed boat was discontinued, and replaced by something bigger, the older very good designed boat is going to retain its value.

[swc5150]

I won't argue how great the 196 is, it's just crazy seeing asking prices shoot up. I've never seen that happen with each new variation of the 196. I also agree that CC should make the 200 & 196. I personally prefer the 200, but understand the desire for the 196. The 200 is overkill for many hardcore skiers, with all it's creature comforts and space.

[TRBenj]

I find the cockpit on the 200 a bit cramped compared to a 196, due to the longer nose and saddle bag storage.

I think DanC hit the nail on the head. The reason youre seeing 196 values holding strong (or increasing) is because the 200 is a very different boat. While it does some things better (tracking, slalom wake), there are other things that it doesnt do as well as the 196. I think that few would argue that each successive 19'6" hull that was introduced (1990, 1997, 2002, 2006) was a marked improvement over the one that it replaced, in nearly every single way (with very few exceptions). Both in regards to creature comforts, ski wakes, handling and performance. I dont think one can say the same for the 200... CC took it in a little different direction.

I bet if this forum had existed back then, there would have been very few people calling for the return of the NWZ after the TSC was introduced, nor the return of the TSC when the TSC2 debuted. No one mentioned reverting back to the TSC2 when CC introduced the TSC3, thats for sure.

[swc5150]

Agreed! At the most, maybe some people would've griped over the addition of the trunk in '02? I always hated climbing over it to reach the platform.

Since the two boats are so much different, I still think it would be a good idea for CC to build both, but understand that it probably doesn't make financial sense.

Interesting that you find the 200 cockpit cramped. I feel like it's huge in comparison. I actually don't think the seat goes up far enough to the dash to fit my 5'8" body, which would be my only complaint.

[TRBenj]

Interesting that you find the 200 cockpit cramped. I feel like it's huge in comparison. I actually don't think the seat goes up far enough to the dash to fit my 5'8" body, which would be my only complaint.

It certainly had the potential to be much larger with the longer and wider hull... but the longer noise to accommodate the open bow pushed the driver's seat so close to the motorbox that you cant really walk between them. They made the observer seat so wide (on the CB) that you cant get a leg between the driver's and observer's seat. The saddle bags infringe on the floor space to the side of the motorbox, and also make the rear seat narrower. Theres plenty of legroom for the rear seat passengers, though I dont find that particularly useful. Unless one planned to utilize the open bow, the cockpit in general just felt more cramped, and certain things just seemed to be poorly executed.

[swc5150]

True, there is less room between the driver's seat and the motorbox. I also think the motorbox is bigger than it needs to be, plus it should taper on the bow side like the 196. The bags are the best thing since the swim platform in my opinion, so I'd glady give up that interior space.

There's a sweet looking 200 that popped up on SIA for $39.9k obo. I bet 200's priced in the 30's will sell quickly.

[jdarwin]

True, there is less room between the driver's seat and the motorbox. I also think the motorbox is bigger than it needs to be, plus it should taper on the bow side like the 196. The bags are the best thing since the swim platform in my opinion, so I'd glady give up that interior space.

There's a sweet looking 200 that popped up on SIA for $39.9k obo. I bet 200's priced in the 30's will sell quickly.

That's my old 200 that I sold to a friend in Atlanta - really nice boat.

[swc5150]

I've been drooling over it all morning. Just need to talk the better half into it. So far just getting the little smirk giggle out of her - which means no. I learned long ago that "do whatever the **** you want to do" is NOT permission!

[Rick]

Kind of like "That's OK" isn't.