Buying 1st pure Ski Boat / Pro Ski Coach Water Ski Forum

NoVaSkier · #1 Wed, Sep 29, 2010 5:05 PM

I've had two I/Os multi-purpose boats back in the late 70s and 80s (first was a 21' Glastron) but nothing since mid-80's --- and now want a Mastercraft ProStar 190 like those I've been skiing behind. I see many 1987-1992 PowerSlot models with 300-1100 hours out there for $5,000-$7,500 and that seems to be very attractive for what I'd be getting.

Assuming I have a pre-purchase inspection on the engine and a visual (or more involved) survey of the hull --- what else can you 190 owners advise me to have looked at by a pro that knows what they're looking at? What are the (any) sore points of this model? And what's the top end of the "Hours" range I should consider. Thanks.

Winter in mid-west states is a great time to buy, so I'm gonna take advantage of it.

Last edited by NoVaSkier (Wed, Sep 29, 2010 5:32 PM)

HO410 · #2 Wed, Sep 29, 2010 5:56 PM

I've been told that vintage of MasterCraft is one of the best skiing hulls ever.
Worst case scenario, if the hull is going on strong, is that you'd have to put a
new motor in. Get a new enough motor and you could have the mythical
early '90s MC 190 with Zero Off.

NoVaSkier · #3 Wed, Sep 29, 2010 6:47 PM

Sounds solid so far --- really appreciated. Any other thoughts anyone?

Jhughes · #4 Thu, Sep 30, 2010 1:16 AM

91-94 Prostar is a dramatically improved hull from previous 190 designs. 95-97 ain't too shabby either. A 93-96 Ski Nautique would also be a nice ride- they made that particular hull from 90- 96 but 93 is the year CC went all composite so you won't have to worry about wood rot in the boat. I'd make those your target years/boats for a 8-10K price range. I wouldn't worry as much about the hours as I would the general condition of the boat. A new interior can cost as much as a new long block in most cases. 1000 hours wouldn't scare me one bit if the boat was in great shape otherwise. I wouldn't be afraid to spend a little more money if needed for the right boat. A "deal" can quickly turn into a money pit if you need engine, trans, interior, or gel work.

h20dawg79 · #5 Thu, Sep 30, 2010 1:36 AM

Since your looking for a "Pure" ski boat, then the lack of space in the 190 will not be an issue. They are truly a competition ski boat. I would suggest taking into consideration the over all cond. more then the total hrs... A very well kept MC with 1200 hrs. would probably last as long as you would need it to. But, a low hrs. Boat could have a false hr. meter and be used and abused.

Look at the color of the oil in the engine and the gear box. Look at the air cleaner. Look for wear and tear on the seats and carpet, etc... that would correspond with the indicated hrs.. Grab the prop shaft, see if there's any play. Look at the prop, rudder, skags and Hull bottom for signs of impacts or beaching. Has the Boat been kept inside or outside? Moisture or fungus signs? Has it ran in salt water? Signs of corosion? A competent Boat mechanic can check the vitals when you get to that stage. (Cyl. compression, gauges, test drive, etc...)

The tell/tell signs are usually written all over a Boat if you look close enough. But, Not always. So, I'd error on the side of caution if you don't know the seller or have a reputable referal...

Good Luck!

h2oski1326 · #6 Thu, Sep 30, 2010 2:26 PM

91-94 MC 190 hull is the one that is highly touted.

Chalky gelcoat with stains should not worry you, that is an easy fix. Any 91 or later MC will be all composite so you should not have to worry about stringers rotting and etc (they went composite sometime in the late 80's, I forget the year exactly).

The big concern is the motor. You HAVE to take a test drive. Check all the fluids for water, and make sure it sounds pretty strong (not missing, bogging down, etc). Then do a compression check. No water in the engine or transmission and a good compression check the motor is likely in good internal condition so you should not have to worry about rebuilding anytime soon.

Most anything else you can do in your driveway if you have to. However, keep a list of things you find wrong and use them to negotiate price.

We bought a 94 MC 190 last February that fell right into this category, strong motor, dirty, and needed some engine accessories replaced. The dealer didn't want to fiddle with it so he gave us a fantastic price on it. We now get world class slalom pulls with zero boat payment.

Last edited by h2oski1326 (Thu, Sep 30, 2010 2:30 PM)

Sully · #7 Thu, Sep 30, 2010 2:32 PM

Look for a 94 to 95, these have fuel injection and in my opinion were built a little bit better than the earlier versions. Upholstery, fit and finish seemed better.

Nice boats either way, I grew up with a 93 Prostar 205 and we loved that boat.

NoVaSkier · #8 Thu, Sep 30, 2010 4:07 PM

Thanks for everything folks .... have made my decision and will be back when I have the keys. Thanks for the great feedback --- hope I can reciprocate in some way.

MattP · #9 Thu, Sep 30, 2010 4:09 PM

I was going to chime in and say look for an 90's MC but about 4 people beat me to it. They are great boats! I still have an 84' MC Stars and Stripes still skis and runs great!

NoVaSkier · #10 Fri, Oct 1, 2010 8:46 PM

Ok .... and another question .... are all these various year's hulls capable of producing virtually the same wake? Or are there variations from year-to-year --- again sticking with a ProStar 190.

dleenhouts · #11 Fri, Oct 1, 2010 11:50 PM

Compared to your Glastron's wake, any year Prostar's wake is going to seem like heaven. My 1980 Stars & Stripes is just about to roll over 1400 hours & still running strong. Yeah, there'll be differences between the wakes from different hulls, but it's possible to tweak them with ballast or running with 1/4 tank of gas. I think you'll be hard pressed to find someone that wouldn't recommend a Prostar.

NoVaSkier · #12 Mon, Oct 4, 2010 2:47 AM

Sorry, my question wasn't about MC vs. other boats. Is there much of a difference in the wake in ProStar 190s as we move generally from 1987 to 1994. I have to imagine there are subtle differences made to the hull every few years, but maybe not given its perennial success.

And apart from true owner loyalty and Mfgs reps that read this, what's the overiding reason to choose MC over Ski Nautique? Everyone's feedback is really appreciated.

NoVaSkier · #13 Wed, Oct 13, 2010 6:19 PM

With my eyes opened to more options by you good folks ---- in a mid-90's ProStar, what do you figure the price penalty is for s "Seller" not having Cruise Control/Perfect Pass/Zero Off? And what am I looking at to install same? Thanks.

Killer · #14 Wed, Oct 13, 2010 7:37 PM

PP is around $1000, you can install yourself easily. 91-94 prostar skis considerably better to ski behind than the 87-90 & the 95+ IMO.

Nautiques of the early 90s are also great to ski behind. Malibu response came out in 95 and are great value, better to ski behind than the mastercrafts of the same era, esspecially at long line and -22off.

overriding factor is going to be condition and maintenance performed IMO, not brand. they are now almost 20 years old and anything will start to break down. all the big OEM's made solid boats, but if abused they will be a nightmare for you.

Last edited by Killer (Wed, Oct 13, 2010 7:39 PM)