Jump to content

Welcome to TheMalibuCrew!

As a guest, you are welcome to poke around and view the majority of the content that we have to offer, but in order to post, search, contact members, and get full use out of the website you will need to Register for an Account. It's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the TheMalibuCrew Family today!

BUILD QUALITY OF A NAUTIQUE TO A MALIBU


Recommended Posts

OK.......what do you say to all these correct craft nautique dudes(and dudettes,) that claim a nautique is superior to a malibu in build quality?.....All this ranting about how the foam they use is treated for mold/mildew.....tougher vinyl than malibu, better thicker "armor coat" gelcoat..etc. Not taking into account the 10-15 grand price difference, how do most of you fellow malibu addicts respond?...I love the choice I have made in getting a malibu, I just need some ammo for my nautique people arguments!

Link to comment
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • SunriseH2OSkier

    5

  • M3Fan

    6

  • 88Skier

    5

  • maliboo

    10

why do you need ammo - or even a response?

lots of choices in boats - they made theirs, you made yours...

Here's a good response - 'You spent money to get what you wanted... so did I. Mazeltov.' (a little yiddish always makes a nice point)

"-)

OK.......what do you say to all these correct craft nautique dudes(and dudettes,) that claim a nautique is superior to a malibu in build quality?.....All this ranting about how the foam they use is treated for mold/mildew.....tougher vinyl than malibu, better thicker "armor coat" gelcoat..etc. Not taking into account the 10-15 grand price difference, how do most of you fellow malibu addicts respond?...I love the choice I have made in getting a malibu, I just need some ammo for my nautique people arguments!
Link to comment

Maybe the crew members that have owned a Correct Craft in the past will chime in.

Edited by wakeace
Link to comment

I ski better than the guys that I know that have CC's so I just point out that they spent a lot more money than I did and they still suck. :lol:

Link to comment

I think we've reached a level of maturity on this board where a topic like this doesn't really light any fires. Both brands do things differently, both brands make great boats. I quite frankly think that there are things on a nautique that clearly cost more money to do/make/include, and thus the difference in price is justified to some degree. I also think Malibu makes the best crossover boats and most versitle hulls ever. Bu's are also better layed out ergonomically with space and storage to spare. I'd buy either brand. Behind the boat, behind the wheel, at the end of the day, the price difference is probably not justified. However, if you want to talk component to component, feature to feature, objectively, on a component to component to raw material to labor-time to labor-time basis (as in, putting this part/feature on the boat costs X to do), I'd say the statement that you are paying merely for the Nautique name is false.

Link to comment

I've spent quite a bit of time in both types of boats. I have to say, that there's a lot to like about both brands to be honest.

In the end, it doesn't really matter as long as you're on the water and having a good time.

Link to comment
I think we've reached a level of maturity on this board where a topic like this doesn't really light any fires. Both brands do things differently, both brands make great boats.

Well put.

Link to comment

I have been to the old Nautique factory and what we came away with was that they build a nice product inspite of themselves. Some of the the steps they took were impressive, some just ridiculous. I am sure the new factory will help streamline the process. Will this make there boats cheaper? I doubt it. They have to pay for that new factory somehow. To me CC seems to be living in the past when it comes to technology and design. When I saw the new 226 my thought was, WOW they really don't get it. They don't know what is selling well and what people want.

Now after I have PO'd SGY. If I didn't own a Malibu it would likely be a CC. Still not a huge fan of MC but, they are trying. I did love my 93 Prostar.

If I had to try and rate what they do:

Malibu

Engineering A+

Design A+

Execution A-

Nautique

Engineering A

Design B-

Execution A

Mastercraft

Engineering B-

Design A

Execution B

What Malibu really brings to the table is the overall package. That is why they are still growing at leaps and bounds.

Dwayne

Link to comment
I've spent quite a bit of time in both types of boats. I have to say, that there's a lot to like about both brands to be honest.

In the end, it doesn't really matter as long as you're on the water and having a good time.

Jklein, I agree with you. I have owned both brands and when it came time to purchase a new boat I looked at both brands. I couldn't justify the extra money they wanted for a Nautique. I live in Orlando and like you have toured their old factory on Orange Ave. I have lived here for 36 years and it was here long before me. One of my best friends parents both work there. When I bought my Response,Southeast Correct Craft Wanted more for a 2 yr old Ski Nautique w/ 200 hours, than I paid for my boat brand new. I'm really just happy to be on the water. My 2 cents

Link to comment

it seems to me , the people who are so concrened about boat brands, wake size, tracking etc... should spend more time skiing/wakeboarding and worry less about the boat.

Link to comment

Every boat I'm on that I don't own is great. Thumbup.gif At least I didn't have to haul it out and deal with prepping it and tearing it down after a day on the water.

I've come up with two observations since I've owned a boat:

1) Everyone thinks their boat is the best one. (And, it is....to them)

2) Everyone wants the whole lake to themselves.

Link to comment

One of my buddies has a 2002 Nautique 210 team. I think It's a very well built nice boat and I really like it,it's just too small for me to consider buying one for my family. Now if they made a 210 style and quality boat around 22' with room like the VLX or LSV I would consider taking a closer look at the 07 models.

Link to comment

Most Ski Nautiques I have skied behind have a hard rooster tail at 22 off. Other than that, a Nautique will fall apart just like any other boat if they are not well cared for. Word!

Link to comment

hay big D.. they do. new for 06 is a SAN 220 and it looks a lot bigger than the 210. think the 210 no longer has the "Super air" name, its been given to the 220.

my 2cents:

not worth the extra money. at the current exchange rate for us it would cost about $50K US for a 196 team edition going through a dealer, while about $40K US for a response with similar features. i converted the AUS dollar to US.

So for $14K AUS it aint worth it IMO. plus i dont like the wake as much...

Link to comment

OK everyone...I guess I need to clarify something........I am not looking to cause arguments or battles. I am not the kind of person to thumb my nose at people for what I own compared to them. I am simply asking an objective question as to the build quality and fit and finish of a nautique to a 'bu. I know we are all happy to be on the lake, everyone thinks theres is the best yada, yada, yada......I am not trying to be philosophical, and when i say "AMMO" TO ARGUE WITH, I MEANT THE FRIENDLY RIBBING KIND... not the hey loaer mine is bigger than yours argument......Just strictly build and fit and finish to justify these prices..I looked at correct craft and they storage and all the gizmos seem cool enough...just looking for objectivity.....sorry about the confusion everyone..

Link to comment

How about the 7% surcharge on every boat that the regional warehouse adds. All owned by family members of the Maloons. Thats not something they use in there advertising.

Component costs, I don't really understand where there stuff is so much more money. I realize that PCM engines are more expensive then Indmar but, not necessarily better. They bag the foam in the upholstery, ask SGY about this one, a step that is unnecessary and can create problems. They shoot thicker gelcoat then sand all of it off to get the right thickness, WHY!!! They move the boat 19 times before it ever gets to final assembly. The new factory should take care of this circle jerk. Do they still use pinstripe tape instead of proper gelcoat taping? There boats overall are smaller using less material yet more expensive. Why does the prop still spin the other way. It can't be cheaper when your company is the only one that buys these, and it makes the boat harder to drive.

There is one step that use that I wish everyone would adopt. They route 2 lines, one above and one below the screws that hold the rub rail on. Keeps stress cracks from ever climbing any further then that line.

lxirod - If I lived in your climate I would not be typing. Biggrin.gif We still need +40 degrees and for the damned wind to stop. This has been by far the windiest winter in Colorado that I have ever witnessed, say that fast 5x.

Personally, I like the boat wars it shows the passion for the sport and it serves to educate people on the differances and similarities of the brands. I have learned more from other brand owners as I have from anywhere else. I guess that is not really saying much. Crazy.gif

Dwayne

Link to comment

A couple items that may cost more, just materials and labor wise- you asked:

1. Custom made for CC PCM 1:23-1 reduction trans. Cannot be cheaper than the completely standard trannies bu's have. That's why the prop spins the other way. Lets the engine sit level since it also angles down 9 degrees to the shaft. Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive. Since 1989.

2. Clamshell motorbox, complete with gas shocks, custom foam noise protection inside the engine box- has to be more expensive than bu's standard 1 piece motorbox with optional aluminum-foil style noise suppressant. Since 1995. Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive.

3. Floor actually built into the boat- there is no "floor piece" (or stringer piece) that is dropped in place and glued in. It simply has to cost more to do. Eliminates blind injection foaming. Add into that the aluminum engine frame which is glassed into the stringers, and also integrated into the pylon mount. Has to cost more than dropping in a pre-fab stringer system (FIBECS), gluing it down, and bolting the engine directly to it. Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive.

4. Custom touch pad dash. Guys, this cannot be cheaper than the standard switches that bu uses. Come on. Custom made and engineered touch pad dash components since 2000. Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive then switches I can grab from West Marine.

5. AME 5000- I don't know how much more expensive this is than bu's resin. Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive.

6. Glassing in IsoDamp CN into the hull for vibration and noise reduction. How could this be cheaper than not glassing anything into the hull for vibration and noise? Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive.

7. FCC - fuel control cell. Since 1996. HELLO!!!! Probably costs a dollar or two more to engineer this little guy. This way I don't have to drill portoles in my engine box to avoid vapor lock like some bu owners have. Has to cost more. Has to be better in this case.

8. Engine mounts. Just look at them relative to the Indmar mounts. Can't be cheaper.

9. Vinyl and carpet- I don't know who uses the most expensive of these currently. I'll take a guess though...

10. Custom throttle control built right into the gunnel. Has to cost more than the off-the-shelf morse MV3 control bolted on to bu's. Worth every dime since it looks about 100x cleaner. CC's had this since 1996.

Gosh, I can't think of anything else right now but you get the point. If you itemize components, one to one, bu vs. CC, CLEARLY, OBJECTIVELY, CC stuff JUST COSTS MORE TO DO.

Link to comment
hay big D.. they do. new for 06 is a SAN 220 and it looks a lot bigger than the 210. think the 210 no longer has the "Super air" name, its been given to the 220.

my

Still not the good looking boat the 210 is. or near the room of an VLX or LSV IMOP.

Link to comment
A couple items that may cost more, just materials and labor wise- you asked:

1. Custom made for CC PCM 1:23-1 reduction trans. Cannot be cheaper than the completely standard trannies bu's have. That's why the prop spins the other way. Lets the engine sit level since it also angles down 9 degrees to the shaft. Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive. Since 1989.

2. Clamshell motorbox, complete with gas shocks, custom foam noise protection inside the engine box- has to be more expensive than bu's standard 1 piece motorbox with optional aluminum-foil style noise suppressant. Since 1995. Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive.

5. AME 5000- I don't know how much more expensive this is than bu's resin. Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive.

Number 1, 2 and 5 were all on our old 1990 Supra, nothing new.

1. The 1:23-1 trans and level motor worked great with the older less powerful carb. motors of the day.

2. We didn't have the gas shocks but did have the custom foam insulation. I have purchased this material for my old Malibu engine cover and it’s the same price as the foil.

5. Gel work on the Malibu looks as good if not better then the Supra or CC.

I think these differences in building make each manufacture unique and make them strive to come up with new ideas, if they do coat more I don't believe it's as much as there price shows. It would be pretty boring on the lake if all the boats looked the same. I have and still would look at CC when buying a new boat, my only problem with them other then the over inflated price is that most of them look butt ugly to me. Just my 2 cents.

Link to comment

A couple items that may cost more, just materials and labor wise- you asked:

1. Custom made for CC PCM 1:23-1 reduction trans. Cannot be cheaper than the completely standard trannies bu's have. That's why the prop spins the other way. Lets the engine sit level since it also angles down 9 degrees to the shaft. Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive. Since 1989.

2. Clamshell motorbox, complete with gas shocks, custom foam noise protection inside the engine box- has to be more expensive than bu's standard 1 piece motorbox with optional aluminum-foil style noise suppressant. Since 1995. Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive.

5. AME 5000- I don't know how much more expensive this is than bu's resin. Not saying it's better, it's got to be more expensive.

Number 1, 2 and 5 were all on our old 1990 Supra, nothing new.

1. The 1:23-1 trans and level motor worked great with the older less powerful carb. motors of the day.

2. We didn't have the gas shocks but did have the custom foam insulation. I have purchased this material for my old Malibu engine cover and it’s the same price as the foil.

5. Gel work on the Malibu looks as good if not better then the Supra or CC.

I think these differences in building make each manufacture unique and make them strive to come up with new ideas, if they do coat more I don't believe it's as much as there price shows. It would be pretty boring on the lake if all the boats looked the same. I have and still would look at CC when buying a new boat, my only problem with them other then the over inflated price is that most of them look butt ugly to me. Just my 2 cents.

Ok, I knew this would go this way. I did not say new, innovative, or better. I said MORE EXPENSIVE, bottom line.

Link to comment
Ok, I knew this would go this way. I did not say new, innovative, or better. I said MORE EXPENSIVE, bottom line.

Sorry I don't think that everything you listed is MORE EXPENSIVE, just different.

Edited by onamission
Link to comment
The most impressive thing I saw at the Nautique dealer was a 2006 Centurion T5.

I agree that Centurion looks to be coming on really strong. They had a lot of really nice boats at the boat show this year, much better than I remember them looking.

The Nautiques were the exact opposite. The new models looked and felt uncomfortable. I think it was the 226 or whatever the big Nautique is. Terrible layout and tons of gadgety plastic gizmos all over the boat. Just terrible.

The 210 is still a sweet boat and my third choice after a V-Ride/VLX or MC X-1. But I agree with others that the new Nautiques are just unappealing.

Link to comment

NH_WAKE - see what you started Biggrin.gif

I don't think that anyone can ever question the build quality of a Nautique. They are built very well. I just don't like how the company does it. The clam shell motor box is a perfect example. Can you say old school. There is absolutely no benefit to this. All it does is make it twice as much of a pain in the a$$ to get to anything. That is why Malibu stopped this in 95' 0r 96', everybody hated it. MC does the same dumb thing. All Malibu's have gas shocks, don't they?

1:23 trans is not why the prop spins the other way it is because they wanted to counter act the weight of the driver, reason MC has the ballast tank under the observers seat, Malibu's don't need either. Wider boats dont have as much of an issue with this. And the reduction is no longer needed. Once again, old school, slow reactions to the market place.

Iso-damp = MSST = $200 retail.

Look at the back seat in that 220. Once again, old school, slow reactions to the market place. I could go on but, anybody thats an M3FAN has got to be a good guy.

NH_WAKE - just show them all the storage that your boat has that theres doesn't, go drag race, let them drive it, and it will be game over.

I noticed that [email protected] just started a thread that makes me look like a wuss.

Dwayne

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...