Anyone skied behind this boat yet? Skinautique, you out there man? I'm curious to hear if there is any difference in the slalom wake. (I understand there is none but in reading the recent CC press release, I'm curious.)
-
-
Re: 2006 TSC3 SN
Yeah, anyone? The suspense is killing me. Yellow_Flash_Colorz:Originally posted by SGY2007 Ski Nautique 196 Limited/ PP/ Mods
Ludwig Classic Mapple Double Bass/ Zildjian Overhead -
Re: 2006 TSC3 SN
No difference in the slalom wake. Only for tricks and jump. This is an AWESOME boat!Originally posted by SGYComment
-
Re: 2006 TSC3 SN
Thanks skinautique!! Mines better than new and paid for. Don't need to hear it's better than the TSC2. Whew!! Yellow_Flash_Colorz: Mike 2002 196Originally posted by skinautique2007 Ski Nautique 196 Limited/ PP/ Mods
Ludwig Classic Mapple Double Bass/ Zildjian OverheadComment
-
RE: Re: 2006 TSC3 SN
Drove and skied this one today. NICE!2019 Ski Nautique 6.2 arriving soon
16 other Ski Nautiques
3 MasterCrafts
18 Ski Supreme's
1 SlickCraft Squirt BoatComment
-
RE: Re: 2006 TSC3 SN
I read on the Nichols forum that the TSC3 hull is essentially the same as the TSC1 hull but with the hydro gate. True? Looks pretty close from what I can see????Comment
-
RE: Re: 2006 TSC3 SN
Why would they take a step back to something less advanced? Are they saying that the original TSC hull was the best to begin with?[color=blue][size=2][b]I Nautique, therefore I am.[/b][/size][/color]Comment
-
RE: Re: 2006 TSC3 SN
I don't know that they're "taking a step back." They're trying to make the best 3 event boat out there.
Apparently, they can get the slalom characteristics of the TSC2 or better with the hydrogate, and they improve the trick/jump performance. Seems like a good thing.
BKH2001 Super AirComment
-
RE: Re: 2006 TSC3 SN
This is pretty stupid but what characteristics do you look for in a trick/jump wake? Why go behind a 196 for those sports? At first I just thought you wanted a small wake for jump so theres less of a bumb when crossing over to the jump, but now I don't really know...[color=blue][size=2][b]I Nautique, therefore I am.[/b][/size][/color]Comment
-
No, TSC hull is very different of TSC3. Both hulls have not lifting strakes but the shape is very different. I don't have now a good pic of the TSC hull but is very easy to note it.
Another thing is the TSC3 hull with lifting strakes as seen in this thread:
http://www.planetnautique.com/index....ewtopic&t=4105
I guess TSC3 hulls with strakes are TSC2 hulls Yellow_Flash_Colorz:Comment
-
"This is pretty stupid but what characteristics do you look for in a trick/jump wake?"
What we look for in a jump wake is similar to what a slalom skier looks for. For tricks, the wake size is not as important as wake shape. And a smooth table (area between wakes) for peforming surface turns. The table has been the biggest knock against the TSC2. I have a 2005 SN and a 1997 SN. The slalom wake is extremely similar. The trick wakes are similar but the table behind the 1997 is MUCH better. Therefore, if you are looking for the best "3-Event" hull, many of us believe the original TSC hull is preferred.
"Why go behind a 196 for those sports?" Typically you try to train behind what you will see at a tournament. Since CC chooses to put the 196 out as their preferred tournament boat, it only makes sense to spend time behind it.Comment
-
That A-frame Ramlin trailer under the TSC2 looks like it'd fit the 2001 hull quite nicely. Hmmm.....Comment
-
Thanks, that's just what I was looking for. I was only wondering why people in general would use teh 196 for the trick boat, because of my original thought of bigger wake the better. Thought you'd want a 210 for that but now I get it, thanks...Originally posted by jdarwin[color=blue][size=2][b]I Nautique, therefore I am.[/b][/size][/color]Comment
-
It will work ok for this (not perfect though) but you definately can't put a tsc2 hull on a 2001 and earlier trailer design.Originally posted by HollywoodComment
-
It looks like the best since the TSC hull came out. Those bunks look too wide.Comment
Comment