196 Pricing

[swc5150]

Agreed. If anything, the 196 windshield didn't look pretty on the showroom floor, but was highly functional. If the call to bring back the 196 starts again, I vote it be a bubble back too

[196 die hard]

Step over bubble back with removable seat for flat floor all the way back. No Gate.

[TRBenj]

For us, the 200 exceeds the performance of the 196 in every way but WOT - but for us, the boat only needs to go 34, so we don't care. It's also a rocket ship out of the hole, even more so than our 196's were. Fuel economy blows on the 200, but is wasn't purchased with gas mileage in mind.

If you put a similarly smaller prop (14.25" vs. 15.5" pitch) on a 196, it would be faster out of the hole than the 200. The shorter prop is required because the boat presumably struggles against its increased girth (specifically the weight, when coming out of the hole, and wetted surface, at skiing speeds). The shorter prop is what hurts your fuel economy, as it brings revs up across the band.

If I had no knowledge of either, I'd actually think the 196 appeared outdated

Disagree there... I think the 200 looks a lot more MC/Bu esque than any CC that preceeds it. The styling changes to the Ski Nautique/196 were largely evolutionary, dating back to 1990, when the 19'6", 91" platform was introduced. That boat was a clean sheet redesign and looked wild and modern in its day... yet it still maintained the short deck/short windshield, form follows function approach that CC has built into their designs (especially the flagship ski boat) dating back to its inception. I agree with DanC, the 200 is a departure from design methodology, as can be seen in a lot of the intangibles that seemingly got "goofed up" for no good functional reason.

[TRBenj]

Why cant CC make a hull without the hydro gate? The CP and TXI dont need them and the wakes on those boats are as good as the 200.

Do you know how the gate works? Its not a band aid that was added to an already designed hull... at least not from a slalom perspective. The TSC2 196 didnt have the gate, but instead had a fixed fiberglass lip at the trailing edge of the padded keel that forced the bow down and eliminated most of the definition from the rooster tail (softening it and making it smaller). The gate, as introduced in '06 on the TSC3 196, when in the down position (or fixed plate on gate-less boats) does the same exact thing. The gate in the up position essentially removes that lip, and allows the nose to ride a little higher at speed, increasing top speed (good for jumping, barefooting and cruising). It also gives the wake a lot more definition, which greatly helps the boat's tricking performance. Nose up vs. nose down on the boat's running attitude and defined/crisp vs. undefined/soft wake are obviously 2 competing design philosophies. The hydrogate is designed in from the beginning on the new hull because it allows the boat to be better at everything. I dont think you'll hear anyone say that the TSC3 was worse than the TSC2 in any way, either- and the gate was basically the only change to the way the boat skied.

I dont have any first hand experience on the CP or TXI, but as far as I can tell, those 2 boats were designed to achieve good slalom wakes using a much different approach than CC. They appear to ride much higher in the water, using their reduced/lightened running surface as a way to make the wake smaller. My guess is that handling and tracking suffer incrementally because of it... though I bet theyre a good bit faster on the top end! CC has become very good at planting the boat and effectively managing the water flow around and under the hull.

[swc5150]

Disagree there... I think the 200 looks a lot more MC/Bu esque than any CC that preceeds it. The styling changes to the Ski Nautique/196 were largely evolutionary, dating back to 1990, when the 19'6", 91" platform was introduced. That boat was a clean sheet redesign and looked wild and modern in its day... yet it still maintained the short deck/short windshield, form follows function approach that CC has built into their designs (especially the flagship ski boat) dating back to its inception. I agree with DanC, the 200 is a departure from design methodology, as can be seen in a lot of the intangibles that seemingly got "goofed up" for no good functional reason.

I see your point, but that's strictly a personal perception, as far as the 196 looking dated. I don't see what intangibles got goofed up on the 200 though? Perhaps the need for a curved boom, but right or wrong, I'm sure the designers didn't have barefooting in mind at all with it. The revs are higher, but that can be helped with a prop change. We can still hit 43 to 44 WOT gate up, which is plenty for us. I've skied behind TSC 3's everday since 2007, up until Oct 2011 upon delivery of the 200. I'll take the 200 all day long over the 196, goof ups and all If they came up with a new boat, built with like you guys want (as a designated CB), and it was better than a 200, I'd make my brother buy it

[swc5150]

Again, don't get me wrong! I love all TSC hulls too! The bubble back being one of my all time favorite designs.

[TRBenj]

I see your point, but that's strictly a personal perception, as far as the 196 looking dated. I don't see what intangibles got goofed up on the 200 though? Perhaps the need for a curved boom, but right or wrong, I'm sure the designers didn't have barefooting in mind at all with it. The revs are higher, but that can be helped with a prop change. We can still hit 43 to 44 WOT gate up, which is plenty for us. I've skied behind TSC 3's everday since 2007, up until Oct 2011 upon delivery of the 200. I'll take the 200 all day long over the 196, goof ups and all If they came up with a new boat, built with like you guys want (as a designated CB), and it was better than a 200, I'd make my brother buy it

You call it dated, I call it timeless! My point was that Im disappointed that they compromised on function in order to get the form they were looking for. They were able to it better, with fewer compromises in the past (1990, 1982), IMHO.

43-44 isnt getting it done for me, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. No argument that the performance from the end of a ski rope is awesome on the 200 (and better than the 196)... so long as its a slalom ski rope, of course.

DanC touched on the goofed intangibles- the windshield is a huge one. Inability to reach a ski, help a skier, use a straight boom, grab a dock, etc. And for what purpose? You cant get a leg between the observer's seat and driver's seat on the closed bow... requiring a contortionist move to get into the driver's seat (again, what were they thinking?). The way the motorbox cant be fully opened unless its removed entirely- why? The clamshell on the '98-09 boats was great and served the same purpose. I wont get into the storage pockets and long deck/open bow discussion, as thats more of a personal use thing... though neither work better for the way we use our boats.

Long story short, I couldnt be happier that dad has what could be the last of the classic Correct Craft's ('09 196). As for me, the TSC and TSC3 are atop my used boat wish list if I ever upgrade from my '90 slalom tug. (My entire argument is probably moot since Im clearly not CC's target market.) With the way 196's are holding their value though, I may not be alone?

[swc5150]

Your dad's '09 is probably the sweetest 196 I've ever laid eyes on. I watch it hit near 60mph at Green Lake, and it gave me chills!

We can open the motor box all the way on the 200? This is the first I heard of that. Not saying it's not true, just saying we can pop ours all the way open. It also has a clam shell. You're right on too - if it's a slalom rope, you're golden! Definitely not a footing machine, unless you 6.0 I suppose. The seating position, to me, is the best of all time in the 200. I'm only 5'8 and change, and I feel like I'm on top of the world with the full spectrum view. It's actually a really weird feeling when come right from a 196.

[ClemsonDave]

SWC, here are my issues with the 200.
Price. I would only buy the 6L knowing what I know about the 5.7 history in the 200. The price for the 5.7 is out of control and to add another 5k for the right engine is insane.
fuel
RPMs
Gate. Why cant CC make a hull without the hydro gate? The CP and TXI dont need them and the wakes on those boats are as good as the 200.

Now, lets pretend that you know nothing about 200s or 196s, or even Nautiques for that matter. Pretend they did not exist until today when you go down to the lake to test drive/ski both boats and could care less about useless open bows. After driving and skiing both I would bet most people would love the sports car feel of the 196. It skis better and handles better at slow speed in tight quarters. I still think it tracks every bit as well as the 200. I cannot believe that they do not make the 196 anymore.

What is wrong with the 5.7? The hole shot on the 200 is better than a 196. It does not have the top end, but the market for that is pretty small. Toss on a different prop and you will get a little more out of it. With the 6L, you will pick up a few mph and drop just a few RPMs. Not worth the price difference to me. I prefer the pull of the 5.7, but that is also what I'm used to....

I think the 200 handles just as well as the 196 if not better. It feels like it is suctioned to the water. The 196 is very loose. Turning radius for both is darn close. If you think a 196 tracks as well through the course as a 196, I suspect you have not driven a 200 much. You will be just about alone in that thought.

FYI, I have owned 3 196s and 3 200s. I ski 3-5 times a week and compete in apx 14 tournaments a year. I'm a Senior Driver so I've driven many boats and have also driven pro skiers in tournaments.

If you put someone, like you describe above, in both the 196 and the 200, I'd be shocked if they didn't pick the 200. Based on the way it drives, build quality and interior design. Remember, it's not really that much bigger. Just better designed. In the same way I've seen 5k sq ft houses both look huge and cramped.

[qstufflebeam]

Not sure how we got off of the topic on this thread but in a nut shell if you like the 196, great. It is an awesome boat(I've owned two). The 200 is also a great boat(I have a 2012). At the end of the day I wouldn't trade the 200 for a 196 and I spend 99% of my time in a course. My ski partner has a 196 and I love to ski behind it. You can't go wrong either way. Both awesome boats and both made by CC.

[swc5150]

Agreed. The greatness of the 200 is shown in strong resale value, which in turn provides string resale to the also great 196. There, tied it all together

[TRBenj]

Y
We can open the motor box all the way on the 200? This is the first I heard of that. Not saying it's not true, just saying we can pop ours all the way open. It also has a clam shell. You're right on too - if it's a slalom rope, you're golden! Definitely not a footing machine, unless you 6.0 I suppose. The seating position, to me, is the best of all time in the 200. I'm only 5'8 and change, and I feel like I'm on top of the world with the full spectrum view. It's actually a really weird feeling when come right from a 196.

The last half dozen 200's Ive crawled all over couldnt open the motorbox... the top half of the clamshell, yes. The bottom half is clamped to the floor (not on hinges, as far as I can tell). Removal would require 4 thumb screws and you can pull the whole thing out. Makes anything but looking at the motor next to impossible- I dont understand it. Maybe Im missing something.

Disagree about the seating position- the visibility may be excellent, but I dont care for the way youre tucked down in the boat further than the 196. Your arm rests on a piece of upholstery, not up on the gunnel- and youre tucked down below the windshield which I dont like. Very MC/Bu esque.

Again, I think it is misleading to say that the 200 has a "better holeshot than the 196". While probably technically true, at least if looking at 0-30mph times, it assumes youre using the stock prop. Powertrains between the 2 boats are the same, and if propped the same, the 196 will be faster AND quicker due to its lower weight and lower drag.

[196 die hard]

I guess I should be happy that the 200 price point is high or our 196 would not be worth what it is today. When I was in the promo program I couldnt sell my 196s because the LXI and MC were cheaper with open bows. Now everyone wants the 196s due to the price.

[swc5150]

Disagree about the seating position- the visibility may be excellent, but I dont care for the way youre tucked down in the boat further than the 196. Your arm rests on a piece of upholstery, not up on the gunnel- and youre tucked down below the windshield which I dont like. Very MC/Bu esque.

Again, I think it is misleading to say that the 200 has a "better holeshot than the 196". While probably technically true, at least if looking at 0-30mph times, it assumes youre using the stock prop. Powertrains between the 2 boats are the same, and if propped the same, the 196 will be faster AND quicker due to its lower weight and lower drag.

Hmm, I feel like I'm riding up high in the 200, looking down on the path in front - completely different than a Bu or MC, or 196 for that matter. I've never driven a boat I could really compare it to. This also makes the view down the course amazing. When I talk holeshot, yes we're using the stock prop, and it is a terror out of the hole. One could no doubt prop a 196 to do the same thing, we've just dealt with stock versus stock.

I received a confirmation email from CC a while back that they would break out the 196 molds, if the order qty was high enough - this number was NOT stated however. For those who really want one, start a commitment list and get in contact with them. They'll build them if the demand is there, but I'd have to assume the price could put you in a base 200? I think why the 196 is so hot right now is the fact that it's by far the best $30k tow boat one can buy.

[teamseal]

I have now had 3 200 Nautique's, the first being a open bow and now 2 closed bow's. I would have to say that my current 200 equipped with the 450 hp package is probably the finest three event boat I have ever owned.. I used to think that the bubble back 97-01 could not be beat as a three event boat. However after this past year with this current package I have changed my mind as this boat is absolutely phenomenal. I think the only grey area on my 200 is the 22 off rooster as it is a little stiff. This current 200 was utilized at the US National championships as our #1 jump boat, It has pulled Chris Parrish through 41 off four times in tournament matching his world record once. Pulled jumpers in excess 225' and trick scores over the 11000 mark. Along with pulling a number of other international records in all three events and far too many personal bests particularly in slalom.
Been with Nautique's Now for over 25 years and have had at least one example of every model in that time frame. Keep in mind the latest generation of Ski Nautique has manifested itself from a new breed of design by a group of new school designers, In my opinion they have by far set the bar to a new level for three event waterski tow boats, Never has an older generation Ski Nautique performed like what we have today...
The slant back's and bubble backs along with the TSCIII boats were great performers in their time however if one can spend that bit more on a SN200 new or used you will never want to go back to the older generation hull!