Grady White or Boston Whaler or Mako or Pro Line?
Kevin
I'm interested in buying a 19-22 ft center console with outboard &
trailer for day trips on Chesapeake Bay and nearby rivers. GW seems
to be the best boat of the group... they are expensive and hold their
resale value. BW boats are about the same. I don't know much about
Pro Line or Mako... only that they are less expensive than GW and BW.
What web sites could help me pick between the 4 boat manufacturers?
Which boats should I avoid? Thanks.
Kevin
Harry Krause
Whaler and GW are at the top of the list you mentioned. There are others
in that category, such as Contender, Pursuit and about a half dozen
more. Parker makes a really nice 21' and 23' CC. ProLine and Mako are no
more than halfway up the list. But anything Bayliner makes...including
its Trophy line...is at the bottom, and should be avoided.
JDavis1277
It would be silly to pick between the boats based on web sites. Look at them
very carefully... then make a decision based on all the information you can
gather.
Butch
Kevin wrote: >I'm interested in buying a 19-22 ft center console with outboard
Harry Krause
One of the delightful side effects of increased use of the internet is
that many first-class university and research libraries are less busy,
because the "interneter" think all the "good research" is available via
www pages. Of course, the comparision the poster is seeking *is* the
kind of info you might expect to find on the internet...
Don't tell anyone, but...
Most of the good stuff isn't available on web pages and won't be.
There's too much "stuff" that predates wide use of the internet and
won't be scanned and too much of the new "stuff" won't appear until
options for payment for use are viable.
That's why I giggle sometimes when some yahoo "insists" upon a URL. As
if URLs were the answer.
Ahnko Chee
console, a great boat at a great price, with a unsinkable hull that's
practically indestrutable, at it comes with a lifetime warranty. IMHO
the best bang for the buck in this size range. www.triumphboats.com
Harry Krause
There have been any number of reports of "strange happenings" with those
powder molded boats, including some problems with the hulls, fittings
and consoles, seats, et cetera.
John Herring
Had it out on calm days and in thunderstorm days (not by choice). With
the trim tabs down it rides fine in 2-3 ft. (Maybe not fine enought
for wife, but fine enough for me!) The boat seems very solid and well
put together. Nothing has worked loose so far. In the three years I've
owned the boat I've replaced the tachometer (under warranty), and
repaired the fuel guage sending unit (loose ground wire). The newer
Prolines are all outboard (I believe) at least in the lengths you're
talking about.
They're probably not the perfect boat, but having read some of the
Grady White review stuff, I am even more pleased with it. Check out
the review at:
http://www.docksidereports.com/boatreviews/grady_white_272.htm
I'm not putting Grady's down. Hell, I wouldn't mind having one myself,
if I could afford it.
The site above has lots of reviews. A lot can be learned about what to
look for just by reading them.
In any case, I wish you good luck and good feeshin'!
John
On the "Poco Loco" out of Deale, MD
Kevin
>
> It would be silly to pick between the boats based on web sites.
Of course. I would never make a major purchase based solely upon
information I read on web sites. I'm interested in reading online
reviews/previews of center console boats of various makes before I get
into the car and drive to the nearest boat dealer. A little analogy
comes to mind.... http://www.edmunds.com is to cars as [blank] is to
power boats. Fill in the blank.
Thanks,
Kevin
Steve
I'm a Whaler fan from way back. I've owned both the 18 and 22 Outrage
Whalers. My current boat is a 25 Guardian (Commercial Whaler Outrage.) If
you want a lot of info on Whalers try :
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/
You'll find a host of other true Whaler fans in the forums behind that url.
I've found that the higher end boats sell well when you need to sell them.
In the long run, I doubt they actually cost more to own than the lesser
boats. If creature comforts and lots of built in fishing stuff makes you
happy, the Grady is probably a better bet. If you want to consider other
similar quality boats look at Regulator and Contender. I think Pursuit and
Albemarle are two other good choices, but probably not so much so in center
consoles. Each has strength and weakness. The Contender is light and fast,
but rolls badly in a beam sea. The Regulator is solid and pretty, but heavy
enough you'll need a lot of engine both in the boat and the truck to pull
it. The Whaler is solid and light, but has almost no stowage (everything is
full of foam). And so on ....... You need to try out as many as you can
find to try. Consider guides how have these boats in your area.
"Kevin" <kevin...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8a16d488.02072...@posting.google.com...
NOYB
you ask about.
"Kevin" <kevin...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8a16d488.02072...@posting.google.com...
NOYB
that didn't like Grady's. When everybody else says one thing, and they say
another, then everybody else is wrong...or Pendleton is the smartest man on
the Earth...or Grady's a great boat.
"John Herring" <jherringR...@cox.netTRASH> wrote in message
news:ac49kucs33j4dtehq...@4ax.com...
NOYB
Whaler...but the wife hated it. BTW--the thief that stole it, liked the
Whaler too.
"Kevin" <kevin...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8a16d488.02072...@posting.google.com...
BillS
IMHO. The main difference is the swamped capacity of the boat. Whaler is
one of the few manufactureres who test and publishes data for swamped
capacity. Whalers differentiate themselves (since their inception) from
others in the market by their method of construction and unsinkability.
Depending on where you boat, and the conditons there, this may (or maybe
not) be important to you. If you want to do more research, or get some
other opinions, check out the Whaler Forums at www.continuouswave.com.
The Whaler outrage 21 and Dauntless 22 sound like they are right up your
alley. The Outrage is more of a rough water boat with a deeper V'd hull
than the Dauntless. But, the Dauntless is very flexible in the way you
can reconfigure the interior with the removable rear seat/baitwell. Find
a dealer and check one out firsthand. Be sure to stick your head up
under the gunwale and look at the hull to deck joint. Stick your head
inside the anchor well and look up at the underside of the deck. Look at
how the inside of the hatches and baitwells are constructed. Look inside
the bilge and up under the deck there is possible (hand mirror helps).
If you can recognize quality, and think it matters, you'll end up buying
the Whaler.
BillS
David Pendleton
Up until now, I had never heard of Triumph boats.
--
ROT13 my email address to reply
"Harry Krause" <harry...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ai1srb$8tu$1...@slb4.atl.mindspring.net...
David Pendleton
--
ROT13 my email address to reply
"NOYB" <NO...@NOYB.com> wrote in message
news:sb219.21958$s8.6...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
NOYB
"David Pendleton" <qni...@gpd.arg> wrote in message
news:ai4gm...@enews4.newsguy.com...
Paul Schilter
Why didn't the wife like the BW? Was the BW a dry riding boat? What's
preferable about the GW?
Paul
"NOYB" <NO...@NOYB.com> wrote in message
news:kd219.21970$s8.6...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
Paul Schilter
I thought the report was authored by David Pascoe, who is Pendleton? Pascoe
does provide photos about the complaints he makes, kind of hard to refute.
Paul
"NOYB" <NO...@NOYB.com> wrote in message
news:sb219.21958$s8.6...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
David Pendleton
--
ROT13 my email address to reply
"Paul Schilter" <psch...@ford.com> wrote in message
news:ai4rhe$q...@eccws12.dearborn.ford.com...
Skipper
> Pascoe does provide photos about the complaints he makes, kind of hard to
> refute.
Not at all. While back he published photos as representative of a
builders workmanship. When he was confronted with the obvious fact that
the Pics where of hurricane damaged boats he quickly pulled the
photographs. Pascoe is a flaming sniper. You'll not see him defend his
position in an open forum. He's self-serving, narrow-minded and stable
blind. There is good information on his site for a newbie but it's
overcome by considerable misinformation.
--
Skipper
David Pendleton
Oh, come on Skipper. I've been reading Pascoe's site for years, and I've
never heard of this 'confrontation'.
When did this 'confrontation' take place? What manufacturers were mentioned
in this illustration of poor workmanship?
--
ROT13 my email address to reply
"Skipper" <fair...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3D46063F...@cox.net...
Skipper
> Oh, come on Skipper. I've been reading Pascoe's site for years, and I've
> never heard of this 'confrontation'.
> When did this 'confrontation' take place? What manufacturers were
> mentioned in this illustration of poor workmanship?
You will find the invitations to discuss well documented in Google.
Do a Google on Pascoe and Hurricane. Here's one:
From: Gould 0738 (goul...@aol.comspamkill)
Subject: Re: David Pascoe Sold Out
Date: 1999/06/28
Rich Stern wrote:
> I'm personally disappointed to learn that I will no longer see his
> unfiltered opinion in his reviews. Boaters everywhere lost when he
> pulled his controversial reviews.
David Pascoe is a good resource for technical information.
His "reviews" have been critiqued by many people as being highly
subjective. They are, and he admits they are. He even states in his
introduction that he is offering them to try to "balance" what he
considers to be overly sunny reviews in the major boating magazines.
The following rumors have developed about some of the boats Mr. Pascoe
"reviewed".
1. One of the boats was dropped several feet by a forklift onto a
concrete
slab. Mr. Pascoe was inspecting the boat for the insurance company.
2. More than one of the boats reviewed by Mr. Pascoe were damaged in
hurricanes.(Mr. Pascoe does state in his site that he does a lot of post
hurricane work for insurance companies)
3. At least one boat reviewed was vandalized by the people who stole
it.(This is vaguely referred to in the review).
The tough part about Mr. Pascoe's review process was that instead of
putting up the information and saying: "The construction of brand X is
such that when subjected to an extreme stress (such as being dropped
from a forklift or blown 3 blocks from the beach by a hurricane) the
following sturctural members fail"....many of the reviews were written
in such a manner that
an individual looking for information on a boat could easily conclude
that if he purchased Brand X, Brand Y, or Brand Z his boat was going to
literally break apart beneath his feet at this first sign of 4 foot
seas.
I commend David Pascoe for making his excellent site even better. Once
the
sensationalistic stuff is eliminated, the criticisms that remain will
certainly have greater credibility.
It might well be that when Mr Pascoe first assembled his site, he didn't
expect it to become such a resource. Maybe in response to the vast
number of hits his site is getting he decided to put on a little more
objective face? That would be a natural tendency in a good surveyor,
objectivity.
--
Skipper
Skipper
> Oh, come on Skipper. I've been reading Pascoe's site for years, and I've
> never heard of this 'confrontation'.
> When did this 'confrontation' take place? What manufacturers were
> mentioned in this illustration of poor workmanship?
Here's another:
Harry Krause wrote:
>> Mr. Pascoe was invited to discuss his rather myopic boating views in
>> this forum but declined. Did he decline because he didn't feel free to
>> discuss his views in an open forum? I think we all know the answer.
>> This is a case where rec.boats and open communication has served us
>> well.
> No, he declined because he thought it fruitless to engage in a debate with
> the likes of know-nothings like you, who add nothing to a technical
> discussion because they know nothing. How could *you* possibly debate
> anyone who knows anything about boats? You can't even answer simple
> questions about your own boat. What a horse's ass you are, Skipper.
An advanced degree in English and all you can say is, "you're a
know-nothing horse's ass"? The reason he declined to discuss the issues
is because of your many recommendations that it would not be wise. In
that respect, you were quite correct.
--
Skipper
Paul Schilter
I remember seeing pictures of hurricane damaged boats. In the ones I seen,
he stated that the boats were hurricane damaged. His point was their inner
construction or lack of it. This may different than the pictures you are
referring to.
Paul
"Skipper" <fair...@cox.net> wrote in message news:3D46063F...@cox.net...
Harry Krause
> Oh, come on Skipper. I've been reading Pascoe's site for years, and I've
> never heard of this 'confrontation'.
>
> When did this 'confrontation' take place? What manufacturers were mentioned
> in this illustration of poor workmanship?
>
>
There was no confrontation. Skipper the idiot didn't like Pascoe's
comments about Bayliners (Pascoe had some photos of a shoddily built
Bayliner with 1" stringers on his site), and the idiot from Kansas (aka
Skipper) "challenged" Pascoe to "come on this newsgroup" and "debate"
his findings. Naturally, Pascoe never bit at Skipper's troll bait.
That's all there was to it, aside from Skipper's continuous reissuing of
his idiotic "challenge."
I did exchange a couple of emails with Pascoe about that Bayliner, to
get a little technical information. Pascoe later removed the Baylikner
photos from his site because idiots like Skipper kept sending him really
nasty emails.
Thus was born another of Skipper's "In Defense of Bayliner" fantasies.
In the last few weeks, Skipper has been nailed several times for making
up absolute BS stories about several posters here and, when nailed, has
backed off or stated he only made the posts in question to "push buttons."
Harry Krause
>
> Harry Krause wrote:
>
>>> Mr. Pascoe was invited to discuss his rather myopic boating views in
>>> this forum but declined. Did he decline because he didn't feel free to
>>> discuss his views in an open forum? I think we all know the answer.
>>> This is a case where rec.boats and open communication has served us
>>> well.
No, crap-for-brains, I did not write the paragraph immediately above you
attribute to me. *You* wrote that paragraph.
This is the paragraph I wrote:
>> No, he declined because he thought it fruitless to engage in a debate with
>> the likes of know-nothings like you, who add nothing to a technical
>> discussion because they know nothing. How could *you* possibly debate
>> anyone who knows anything about boats? You can't even answer simple
>> questions about your own boat. What a horse's ass you are, Skipper.
And now, returning to our favorite newsgroup idiot, Skipper:
>
> An advanced degree in English and all you can say is, "you're a
> know-nothing horse's ass"? The reason he declined to discuss the issues
> is because of your many recommendations that it would not be wise. In
> that respect, you were quite correct.
It doesn't take an advance degree in English to write that you're a
know-nothing horse's ass, Snippy. There are high-school dropouts reading
this newsgroup who have come to the same conclusion about you.
And your posit is absurd. Pascoe is his own man. He doesn't need
recommendations from me to decide what to post and where to post it.
I've always maintained you knew nothing about boats, Skipper. Thank you
for proving my case.
Captain Liberty
is a fact that he did so. I read them about 2 years ago, and it is true
that they were very unfavorable.
--
---
Roger J. Buffington
340 Sea Ray Sundancer "Bounty"
"Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
news:l47dkuo18tvof0edm...@4ax.com...
> This was primarily due to rumors started, I suspect, by someone on
> this newsgroup. See:
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&frame=right&th=70c702fe70
4dd030&seekm=19990628013419.11022.00004045%40ng-fm1.aol.com#link17
>
> With respect to any articles being withdrawn, consider this: Pascoe
> is a marine surveyor. He looks at boats. One would rationally
> conclude, all types of boats and manufacturers. Why, then, do you
> suppose he doesn't have ANY reviews of Bayliner on his site?
NOYB
transom. By comparison, the grady has a 9'3" beam, a much higher freeboard,
and a closed transom with bracket. I liked the handling on the Whaler much
more. In fact, it was a drier boat too.
"Paul Schilter" <psch...@ford.com> wrote in message
news:ai4s1h$q...@eccws12.dearborn.ford.com...
NOYB
"Paul Schilter" <psch...@ford.com> wrote in message
news:ai4rhe$q...@eccws12.dearborn.ford.com...
NOYB
"Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
> Another abortion from Genmar. Rotomolding is the same process used to
> make plastic milkbottles. Just what I want to take offshore
No kidding. Milk bottles even make poor floats for marking artificial
reefs. Now if they only made a boat out of bleach bottle material...
NOYB
somewhere along the line about Grady's, and he's stuck with it. He says
they're decent boats, but not worth the money. I don't agree, but that's his
opinion. Where he's truly wrong, however, is when he then says they're no
better than your run-of-the-mill boat. While I agree that they might not be
the *best* boat in their class, they are certainly not middle-of-the-road,
either. On a scale of 1-10, they're an 8 or a 9...he's just pissed that
they charge like they're an 11. I say rate the boat on it's merits and let
the consumer decide if the boat warrants the extra price. Pascoe blurs the
lines too much in this regard.
"Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
news:l47dkuo18tvof0edm...@4ax.com...
> This was primarily due to rumors started, I suspect, by someone on
> this newsgroup. See:
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&frame=right&th=70c702fe70
4dd030&seekm=19990628013419.11022.00004045%40ng-fm1.aol.com#link17
>
> With respect to any articles being withdrawn, consider this: Pascoe
> is a marine surveyor. He looks at boats. One would rationally
> conclude, all types of boats and manufacturers. Why, then, do you
> suppose he doesn't have ANY reviews of Bayliner on his site?
>
> Personally, I think it is an excellent site, go develop you own
> opinion:
> http://www.yachtsurvey.com/
Skipper
> I do not know why Pascoe removed the Bayliner reviews from his site. But
> it is a fact that he did so. I read them about 2 years ago, and it is true
> that they were very unfavorable.
They were removed because his rather myopic comments were indefensible.
Shame he ducked the invitation to discuss those issues raised in an open
forum. Would have been educational, entertaining, and made a good
record.
--
Skipper
Ron M.
> concrete
> slab. Mr. Pascoe was inspecting the boat for the insurance company.
Pascoe's point was that this kind of damage allowed him to inspect
parts of these boats that you normally wouldn't be able to access.
Many of his observations are quite interesting. For example, he's
astonished at Bayliner's use of cheap, weak pop rivets like one would
find on a child's toy.
Let's face it, a cheap pop rivet is a cheap pop rivet, unless perhaps
Mr. Pascoe was hallucinating and just imagined them, which I serious
doubt was the case.
Ron M.
Skipper
> Skipper wrote:
> Personally, I suspect there is a lot more to that story than we are
> likely to ever hear. Pascoe would most probably be the victim, rather
> than the perpetrator.
While true that several industry experts were waiting in the wings to
discuss the issues with David Pascoe, the invitation was for a
one-on-one discussion in this NG. Not sure he'd have been a victim, but
the errors in his views would have been illuminated. Open discussion
tends to do that.
> Historically, conglomerates can afford more justice than a single
> person.
--
Skipper
Skipper
>> 1. One of the boats was dropped several feet by a forklift onto a
>> concrete slab. Mr. Pascoe was inspecting the boat for the insurance
>> company.
> Pascoe's point was that this kind of damage allowed him to inspect
> parts of these boats that you normally wouldn't be able to access.
> Many of his observations are quite interesting. For example, he's
> astonished at Bayliner's use of cheap, weak pop rivets like one would
> find on a child's toy.
Actually, Pascoe's posit was that those pictures were representative of
the builder's shoddy workmanship. In truth, Bayliners fair as well or
better than their competitors. Generally, they do not just fall apart as
Pascoe claims. There is no record of abnormally high hull to deck
failures with Bayliners.
Seem to remember you have one of those hard riding and wet Robalos.
Didn't they just get rescued from bankruptcy by Chaparral?
--
Skipper
Skipper
>> While true that several industry experts were waiting in the wings to
>> discuss the issues with David Pascoe, the invitation was for a
>> one-on-one discussion in this NG. Not sure he'd have been a victim, but
>> the errors in his views would have been illuminated. Open discussion
>> tends to do that.
> Who were these "industry experts"? Discuss which issues?
Do a Google. It's there.
--
Skipper
BillS
Beach Bum wrote:
> Just where is the G-W taking on water that a boat with an open
> transom, narrow beam, and low freeboard didn't? Defies my ability to
> picture it.
>
Probably spray pushed up by the bow and blown back into the cockpit or helm. The
Whaler has a very effective lip (Whaler Smirk) molded into the hull that somewhat
follows the sheer line. It does a good job of knocking down the spray, or
forcing it far out to the sides. Most of the newer Whaler hulls (1990s) have the
smirk.
BillS
BillS
NOYB wrote:
I'm going to figure out a laminating process to make a boat out of old
cigarette filters. They are practically indestructible and last forever.
I'll glue it all together with Mahi-Mahi blood. Instead of gel coat, I'm
going to use Trigger Fish skin. It will be a bitch sewing all the little
pieces together, but the thing should last a lifetime.
BillS
NOYB
between the cabin and helm. The boat must have been stored on a lift with
the bow slightly down causing pooling of water...the entire bulkhead is
dry-rotted and needs replacing. I don't understand why they were using
non-marine-grade plywood as recently as 1991.
"Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
news:gcbdkukir648pe508...@4ax.com...
> Well, his pictures of the Grady seem to show some crappy work. I
> haven't seen the lack of glassing, as his picture shows. I'm anxious
> to see, my neighbor just took delivery of a Sailfish. Lack of glassing
> is unforgivable in any cost of boat. Grady wiring does, in some
> instances, suck big time. I'm not sure, though, that this is the
> fault of the factory. Many of these amateurish stabs at wiring are
> add-ons after the boat leaves the factory.
>
> I do believe, though, that Grady makes a boat that falls in the upper
> quality class. And, yeah, I own a Grady. I paid for the privilege to
> bitch. I've had to replace a lot of amateurish wiring that I believe
> was added later, but still haven't found any un glassed areas.
NOYB
boat. The large beam and heavy weight pushes out alot of spray.
"Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
news:p0cdkukmi8frenv2l...@4ax.com...
> Just where is the G-W taking on water that a boat with an open
> transom, narrow beam, and low freeboard didn't? Defies my ability to
> picture it.
>
>
>
NOYB
"BillS" <Bi...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3D46CADA...@austin.rr.com...
NOYB
"BillS" <Bi...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3D46CC90...@austin.rr.com...
Paul Schilter
Thanks, I'd hold a high priority on a boat running dry. I only like to get
wet when that is my intention.
Paul
"NOYB" <no...@noyb.com> wrote in message
news:cLx19.274$cI.3...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Harry Krause
> Beach Bum wrote:
>
>> Skipper wrote:
>
>>> Captain Liberty wrote:
>>>> I do not know why Pascoe removed the Bayliner reviews from his site. But
>>>> it is a fact that he did so. I read them about 2 years ago, and it is
>>>> true that they were very unfavorable.
>
>>> They were removed because his rather myopic comments were indefensible.
>>> Shame he ducked the invitation to discuss those issues raised in an open
>>> forum. Would have been educational, entertaining, and made a good
>>> record.
>
>> Personally, I suspect there is a lot more to that story than we are
>> likely to ever hear. Pascoe would most probably be the victim, rather
>> than the perpetrator.
>
> While true that several industry experts were waiting in the wings to
> discuss the issues with David Pascoe,
This is more total bullship from Skipper. His idea of a boating expert
is anyone who doesn't totally pan Bayliners. He knows no one in the
industry who posts here who has Pascoe's expertise and knowledge of boat
construction.
Industry experts...he's going to drag out Fournier again, who has no
credentials whatsoever in boat construction. Or Gould, who sells boats
but has no credentials in boat construction.
Anytime Skippy is at his keyboard, you can bet he is lying.
Skipper
>> While true that several industry experts were waiting in the wings to
>> discuss the issues with David Pascoe,
> This is more total bullship from Skipper. His idea of a boating expert
> is anyone who doesn't totally pan Bayliners. He knows no one in the
> industry who posts here who has Pascoe's expertise and knowledge of boat
> construction.
> Industry experts...he's going to drag out Fournier again, who has no
> credentials whatsoever in boat construction. Or Gould, who sells boats
> but has no credentials in boat construction.
> Anytime Skippy is at his keyboard, you can bet he is lying.
Jeeze, Fournier is Editor of the ABOS Marine Blue Book, lecturer at
industry trade shows and executive board member on NMMA. Chuck's
credentials are equally impressive as Editor of Nor'westing Magazine and
as a well known boating author for starters.
http://www.sheridanhouse.com/reviews/howtopowerboatreview.html
You bet they and others were waiting in the wings to discuss with
Pascoe.
--
Skipper
Harry Krause
Absolute total BS on Snippy's part. As usual. Here's the skinny.
Pascoe had a feature article on his site discussing the poor design of
mid-sized "bubble boats," express cruisers in the 20-30 foot range. He
used a 26' Bayliner as his bad example, and picked it apart from the
point of view of design, safety and structure. He also had numerous
photos showing how poor the structure of a 26' Bayliner bubble boat was,
and had some photos of some 1" thick stringers (that's right...one
inch thick stringers) as an example of how poorly made the Bayliner was.
And just as bad, the stringers curved and became closer together as they
approached the bow.
In all, it was a devastating analysis of a crappy line of boats.
Pascoe told me he took down the Bayliner stuff because idiot Bayliner
fans like Skipper were bombarding his email address with crank emails
and trying to crash his site. As he depends upon his site for part of
his living, he simply removed the Bayliner articles.
Skipper tried for years to get Pascoe to post in here. As is obvious
from the nature of Skipper's posts, Pascoe displayed superior judgment
in ignoring Skippy.
There are from time to time some really interesting "readers" of this
newsgroup who do not post here because of Skippy. One is a top of the
line naval architect who has designed some of the very best
ocean-capable sportfishing boats in the 20-45' size range. He once told
me he didn't post here because he didn't want to get into a "pissing
contest" with Skipper, whom he referred to as a "puddle of piss."
As should be obvious to anyone who knows boats, Skippy doesn't know
boats. Or much of anything else. He's a sour old man approaching 70 who
made some wrong decisions in his lifetime and is now stuck in Wichita,
Kansas.
Think about that...especially if you have dreams about being a blue
water boater. As Skipper does. Only in his case, they are delusions.
Harry Krause
> Well, his pictures of the Grady seem to show some crappy work. I
> haven't seen the lack of glassing, as his picture shows. I'm anxious
> to see, my neighbor just took delivery of a Sailfish. Lack of glassing
> is unforgivable in any cost of boat. Grady wiring does, in some
> instances, suck big time. I'm not sure, though, that this is the
> fault of the factory. Many of these amateurish stabs at wiring are
> add-ons after the boat leaves the factory.
>
> I do believe, though, that Grady makes a boat that falls in the upper
> quality class. And, yeah, I own a Grady. I paid for the privilege to
> bitch. I've had to replace a lot of amateurish wiring that I believe
> was added later, but still haven't found any un glassed areas.
>
Gradys are good top-middle of the line boats, as are the Whaler
"recreational" boats. There are better production boats out there, and
there are a lot worse production boats out there. I think both Gradys
and Whalers are overpriced when new by about 20 per cent. I'm sort of in
the market for a 21'-23' trailerable CC fishing boat, and neither Grady
nor Whaler are on my list. In fact, at the moment Contender is at the
top of my list and Parker is in second place. Parker is a notch below
Grady and Whaler in quality, but it is more than good enough.
Harry Krause
Whatever their "credentials," neither is an expert in the construction
of boats or the forces that tear them apart. Pascoe is. Smoke that.
Skipper
>> Jeeze, Fournier is Editor of the ABOS Marine Blue Book, lecturer at
>> industry trade shows and executive board member on NMMA. Chuck's
>> credentials are equally impressive as Editor of Nor'westing Magazine and
>> as a well known boating author for starters.
>> http://www.sheridanhouse.com/reviews/howtopowerboatreview.html
>> You bet they and others were waiting in the wings to discuss with
>> Pascoe.
> Whatever their "credentials," neither is an expert in the construction
> of boats or the forces that tear them apart. Pascoe is. Smoke that.
Yep, and 911 would not have happened if Gore were President.
--
Skipper
NOYB
near 100% of the time. Too bad you're so f*cked up politically. ;)
"Harry Krause" <harry...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ai71vp$nde$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net...
Skipper
>> They were removed because his rather myopic comments were indefensible.
>> Shame he ducked the invitation to discuss those issues raised in an open
>> forum. Would have been educational, entertaining, and made a good
>> record.
> Absolute total BS on Snippy's part. As usual. Here's the skinny...
What you mean is, bend over, I'm about to give you the spin. The truth
is documented in the Google archives...and the discussing *would* have
NOYB
and a 20 knot wind? You'd be the only boater here, then, that that did not
happen too. The fact remains, though, that my Grady is definitely wetter
than the 22 Revenge I had.
"Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
news:344ekuc6ahcojtf8s...@4ax.com...
> Never had this problem with my G-W.
Harry Krause
never came up...
Harry Krause
> You never had spray coming over the glass when heading into a quartering sea
> and a 20 knot wind? You'd be the only boater here, then, that that did not
> happen too. The fact remains, though, that my Grady is definitely wetter
> than the 22 Revenge I had.
>
>
footer, up the front of the cabin and into the flying bridge. Quite
refreshing once the terror fades.
Harry Krause
The truth on this matter is pretty much exactly as I've stated it here,
Snipper, both with David Pascoe and the naval architect I mentioned.
You're a liar, Skipper. And you manipulate the posts of others. And you
make up really nasty rumors about posters here and regurgitate them with
the hope someone will believe them and help you perpetuate them.
Your stench is nearly overwhelming. Why don't you move on out of here
permanently and annoy some other newsgroup, eh?
You have nothing to contribute here.
Skipper
> Skipper wrote:
>> Harry Krause wrote:
>>>> They were removed because his rather myopic comments were indefensible.
>>>> Shame he ducked the invitation to discuss those issues raised in an
>>>> open forum. Would have been educational, entertaining, and made a good
>>>> record.
>>> Absolute total BS on Snippy's part. As usual. Here's the skinny...
>> What you mean is, bend over, I'm about to give you the spin. The truth
>> is documented in the Google archives...and the discussion *would* have
>> made a good record.
> The truth on this matter is...
> You're a liar, Skipper. And you manipulate the posts of others. And you
> make up really nasty rumors about posters here and regurgitate them with
> the hope someone will believe them and help you perpetuate them.
> Your stench is nearly overwhelming. Why don't you move on out of here
> permanently and annoy some other newsgroup, eh?
> You have nothing to contribute here.
You would be much happier if you purchased a boat, took some pride in
it, and posted a few pictures. Really, you seem to be a very frustrated
fellow.
--
Skipper
NOYB
"Harry Krause" <harry...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ai74o8$2pe$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
Harry Krause
What you think of me matters not. What you are, however, is plain to see
and becoming more obvious each time you smear the wall here with your
feces.
Harry Krause
Please, I'm a Yankee... That would be.... floun-dah.
NOYB
eyes migrate to the other side of the head. Boy, they're weird fish.
"Harry Krause" <harry...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ai7ajh$6en$1...@slb7.atl.mindspring.net...
Harry Krause
> Even in the summer? When do they officially change names? And how do the
> eyes migrate to the other side of the head. Boy, they're weird fish.
>
>
>
I have a giant of a friend in Jax, he's about 6'8", and he uses a
trident-like spear to catch flounder on some walkable flats just north
of an inlet in the St. Augustine area. He walks along the flats - waist
deep on him - and when he sees one, he spears it with his three-pronger,
right onto the sandy bottom. Well, it was weird the first time I saw it.
He looks kinda like a Gorgon of the Deep in his wetsuit...this happens
in February and March, I believe, when the water temp is chilly.
Aaron
comes to boating. I'm looking into buying a 170 Montauk for my very
first boat purchase.
But...I have 2 friends with boats. One has a 26' BW CC, and the other
has a 26" Proline CC. There is a huge difference in the way the two ride
in semi-choppy water out in the Gulf. The Proline hits really hard when
it comes down on the water, while the BW glides thru the waves almost
effortlessly. Again, I don't have the make or model numbers for either
(I think the BW might be an outrage), but from my limited knowlegde, it
was pretty noticable to me.
Aaron
NOYB
Whaler's ride rough, haven't ridden in anything besides the smaller and
older twin-sponson designs. That 1989 22' Revenge was one of the best
riding/handling boats I've ever been on...and it didn't have the new
Accutrak hull.
"Aaron" <amh...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:3D4732D6...@attglobal.net...
David Pendleton
Since when is an 'invitation to discuss' a 'confrontation'? I don't recall
anything suggesting he claimed hurricane damage was due to poor workmanship.
Only that the damage allowed him to see design and construction details that
would have otherwise been impossible to determine without dissecting the
hull.
After following this thread for a few days, I learned something I did not
know before. DP did 'review' the Bayliner 2655, and subsequently removed it
from his site. I remember it now. It was removed sometime in April of 1999.
That's too bad. Good, bad or otherwise, he should have stood by his review.
I don't care what kind of boat it was.
If anyone is interested, I have the entire text of DP's Bayliner 2655
review. I will not post it here because it does not belong to me
(copyright). Contact me via email and I will send it to you.
--
ROT13 my email address to reply
"Skipper" <fair...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3D461716...@cox.net...
> David Pendleton wrote:
>
> > Oh, come on Skipper. I've been reading Pascoe's site for years, and I've
> > never heard of this 'confrontation'.
>
> > When did this 'confrontation' take place? What manufacturers were
> > mentioned in this illustration of poor workmanship?
>
> You will find the invitations to discuss well documented in Google.
> Do a Google on Pascoe and Hurricane. Here's one:
>
> From: Gould 0738 (goul...@aol.comspamkill)
> Subject: Re: David Pascoe Sold Out
> Date: 1999/06/28
>
> Rich Stern wrote:
>
> > I'm personally disappointed to learn that I will no longer see his
> > unfiltered opinion in his reviews. Boaters everywhere lost when he
> > pulled his controversial reviews.
>
> David Pascoe is a good resource for technical information.
>
> His "reviews" have been critiqued by many people as being highly
> subjective. They are, and he admits they are. He even states in his
> introduction that he is offering them to try to "balance" what he
> considers to be overly sunny reviews in the major boating magazines.
>
> The following rumors have developed about some of the boats Mr. Pascoe
> "reviewed".
>
> 1. One of the boats was dropped several feet by a forklift onto a
> concrete
> slab. Mr. Pascoe was inspecting the boat for the insurance company.
>
> 2. More than one of the boats reviewed by Mr. Pascoe were damaged in
> hurricanes.(Mr. Pascoe does state in his site that he does a lot of post
> hurricane work for insurance companies)
>
> 3. At least one boat reviewed was vandalized by the people who stole
> it.(This is vaguely referred to in the review).
>
> The tough part about Mr. Pascoe's review process was that instead of
> putting up the information and saying: "The construction of brand X is
> such that when subjected to an extreme stress (such as being dropped
> from a forklift or blown 3 blocks from the beach by a hurricane) the
> following sturctural members fail"....many of the reviews were written
> in such a manner that
> an individual looking for information on a boat could easily conclude
> that if he purchased Brand X, Brand Y, or Brand Z his boat was going to
> literally break apart beneath his feet at this first sign of 4 foot
> seas.
>
> I commend David Pascoe for making his excellent site even better. Once
> the
> sensationalistic stuff is eliminated, the criticisms that remain will
> certainly have greater credibility.
>
> It might well be that when Mr Pascoe first assembled his site, he didn't
> expect it to become such a resource. Maybe in response to the vast
> number of hits his site is getting he decided to put on a little more
> objective face? That would be a natural tendency in a good surveyor,
> objectivity.
>
> --
> Skipper
Harry Krause
> Since when is an 'invitation to discuss' a 'confrontation'? I don't recall
> anything suggesting he claimed hurricane damage was due to poor workmanship.
> Only that the damage allowed him to see design and construction details that
> would have otherwise been impossible to determine without dissecting the
> hull.
>
> After following this thread for a few days, I learned something I did not
> know before. DP did 'review' the Bayliner 2655, and subsequently removed it
> from his site. I remember it now. It was removed sometime in April of 1999.
>
> That's too bad. Good, bad or otherwise, he should have stood by his review.
> I don't care what kind of boat it was.
Sigh. He stood by his review. He removed it from his site because idiots
like Skipper began bombarding his email address with crank letters and
there were attempts made to make some mischief on his web site. As he
depends on both to generate leads for part of his living, he simply
removed the Bayliner material. It's not as if he changed his mind about
what he found...he simply got weary of contending with idiots like Skipper.
Why do I know this? Because I exchanged a few emails with Pascoe and he
told me so. I have no reason to doubt him. Besides, anyone who reads the
material on his site knows Pascoe doesn't hold back or mince his words,
and he has some pretty strong things to say about many brands of boats.
So, if you want to know why you no longer can find the Bayliner material
on Pascoe's site, you can blame Skipper and ignorant idiots like him,
who cannot stand the fact that people in the know have demonstrated that
their holy grail line of boats are poorly designed and built.
Skipper
> Sigh. He stood by his review. He removed it from his site because idiots
> like Skipper began bombarding his email address with crank letters and
> there were attempts made to make some mischief on his web site.
> As he depends on both to generate leads for part of his living, he simply
> removed the Bayliner material. It's not as if he changed his mind about
> what he found...he simply got weary of contending with idiots like
> Skipper.
That's an intentional lie, Krause, or at best, a carefully worded
misstatement. You know I didn't send him email. He pulled those
outrageous comments for fear of legal action.
> Why do I know this? Because I exchanged a few emails with Pascoe and he
> told me so. I have no reason to doubt him. Besides, anyone who reads the
> material on his site knows Pascoe doesn't hold back or mince his words,
> and he has some pretty strong things to say about many brands of boats.
He doesn't hold back or mince words? The reality is he didn't show the
courage of his convictions when he ducked an open forum discussion of
his claims. Bushwacking from behind a rock is the demonstrated Pascoe's
style.
> So, if you want to know why you no longer can find the Bayliner material
> on Pascoe's site, you can blame Skipper and ignorant idiots like him,
> who cannot stand the fact that people in the know have demonstrated that
> their holy grail line of boats are poorly designed and built.
On July 11, 1997 Tom Fournier wrote:
The Bayliner bashing is a form of entertainment by a minority rec.boats
subscribers.
Ron M. wrote
Bull! The Bayliner criticisms have been objective and factual.
Tom responded:
Not really, most of the facts seem to be opinions from people who do not
enjoy the water as much as they enjoy bashing products in this news
group.
Ron M. wrote:
Testimonials are worthless. They are individual, isolated anecotes.
Tom responded:
Testimonials from real people who enjoy real products are a real tribute
to the products they endorse. This is from marketing 101. Don't be
suprised if some of these testimonials end up in some real life
advertising.
Ron M. wrote:
Define "high value". Yeah Bayliners float, you get a hull and motor too.
Tom responded:
Bayliner uses Mercruisers exclusively for their I/O's. The same
propulsion system that: Cobalt, Chris Craft, Wellcraft, Albermarle,
Crownline, Mariah, Cigarette, Fountain, Glastron, Regal, Century,
Formula/Thunderbird, Mach 1, Baja, Baha, V.I.P., Donzi, Doral, S2,
Chaparrel, Stingray, etc., etc. etc.(80% of the market) uses.
Ron M. wrote:
Bayliner is part of a hugh conglomerate. My Robaldo is built by U.S.
Marine but that means nothing. My Robaldo is the best boat afloat.
Tom responded:
There have been literally scores of manufacturers who have gone out of
business over the last year or so. Would you rather own a "my boat is
better than yours but they are now out of business boat" or a "best
value for the money boat backed by a profitable company who stands
behind their warranty". I noticed that the Coast Guard recalls reduced
significantly after Robalo was bought by U.S. Marine.
Ron M. wrote:
I am rather distressed that a biased attitude such as yours is
influential in the "Blue Book " business.
Tom responded:
I price over 200,000 boats each year from over 1000 different
manufacturers. I attend all the major boat shows in the country each
year and look at literally hundreds of new product. I am invited to and
attend manufacturers dealer meetings each year to test product. The Blue
Book is impartial and objectively prices the products within its covers.
We take no advertising and when a manufacturer tries to influence the
resale values in the Blue Book I politely decline any and all offers. My
evaluation of resale values and retention of value is based on factual
information based on 45 years of tracking the same. The food on my table
and the shoes on my children are derived from my doing an equitable job
of providing the customers of the Blue Book a reliable source of used
evaluation information. I only occaisionally enter into this news group
to provide factual information. I have over 50 years of boating
information in my files that I gladly share with interested boaters.
Since I derive my income from the boating industry I find it impossible
to be merely be a spectator to the many bashers of product (Bayliner)
that obviously fills many peoples need for recreation. I realize that
bashing is merely a form of entertainment and I am also very amused by
the tit for tat between Harry and Skipper and the Harry and Skipper
wannabees, but I prefer to state facts.
Ron,
How do you find the time to log on to this newsgroup in the middle of
the summer? Wouldn't you rather be fishing? Or, do you fish on the
weekends and this is your source of entertainment during the week?
Tom Fournier
ABOS Marine Blue Book
--
Skipper
BillS
20/25 knots or greater and 4 footers or more. Anything less, there's no
noticable difference between them wetness wise.
BillS
Beach Bum wrote:
> Never had this problem with my G-W.
>
> On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 19:17:27 GMT, "NOYB" <no...@noyb.com> wrote:
>
BillS
Harry Krause wrote:
>
> I have a giant of a friend in Jax, he's about 6'8", and he uses a
> trident-like spear to catch flounder on some walkable flats just north
> of an inlet in the St. Augustine area. He walks along the flats - waist
> deep on him - and when he sees one, he spears it with his three-pronger,
> right onto the sandy bottom. Well, it was weird the first time I saw it.
> He looks kinda like a Gorgon of the Deep in his wetsuit...this happens
> in February and March, I believe, when the water temp is chilly.
This is a common technique down on the TX gulf to catch Flounder by gigging.
You walk the ankle to knew deep flats with your trusty Coleman lantern and try
to stick 'em before they see you and swim away. A more productive method is to
use a custom Floundering boat. People customize flatbottom aluminum John boats
just for this purpose. They install an elevated "A"-frame platform over the
outboard. On this platform is mounted an "airmotor". An airmotor is usually
a Honda or Briggs and Stratton engine in the 10-20 HP range sitting on a
turntable swivel and driving a small wooden propeller. The turntable is
hooked to a steering stick via a push-pull cable. The motor also has a belt
driven alternator. The front of the boat will have a platform with a waist
high railing around the front. Mounted to this railing are anywhere from 4-8
flood lights pointing down at the water. The steering stick is mounted here as
well. This rig allows two people to stand on the platform, gigs in hand while
crossing the shallow flats where the flounder lie. They use the airmotor to
navigate the shallow waters at a fast walking pace. The lights let you see the
flounder, and the alternator keeps the lights running. You control the speed
by two chains hanging at the rear corners of the boat. The more chain out, the
slower you go. The glitz and glamouer rigs have Motor and Gigging platforms
fabricated with polished tubing a-la custom "T"-Top and use Honda V-Twin
motors, and Carbon Fiber props with adjustable pitch blades. They'll use 4 or
six locomotive headlight bulbs in fixtures mounted to the front. The home
built ones use an old Briggs and Stratton, wooden prop, and home welded steel
tubing for rails and platforms with automotive fog lights.
They are a lot of fun, and very productive for Flounder and crabs back up in
the shallows. It is a trip to run one of these boats up a dead ended narrow
slough or tidal creek. When you get to the end, everything you "herded" in
front of you makes a run for it to get around the boat and back out the creek.
The last time I did this, we had a herded a huge school of rat redfish up the
creek. When they made their break, the water was literally bronze and gold
with fish on all sides of the boat for a good minute while they all swam by.
BillS
Aaron wrote:
> Don't take this comment too seriously, cause I am a total newbie when it
> comes to boating. I'm looking into buying a 170 Montauk for my very
> first boat purchase.
>
<SNIP>\
Aaron,
Check out the Boston Whaler Forums at "www.continuouswave.com" Lot's of good
input there and a couple of articles about the new "Montauk 17". Those that
have received theirs are very satisfied. I think it would be a great choice
for a first boat.
BillS
BillS
Harry Krause wrote:
>
> Gradys are good top-middle of the line boats, as are the Whaler
> "recreational" boats. There are better production boats out there, and
> there are a lot worse production boats out there. I think both Gradys
> and Whalers are overpriced when new by about 20 per cent. I'm sort of in
> the market for a 21'-23' trailerable CC fishing boat, and neither Grady
> nor Whaler are on my list. In fact, at the moment Contender is at the
> top of my list and Parker is in second place. Parker is a notch below
> Grady and Whaler in quality, but it is more than good enough.
No Regulators or Pursuits? I gotta admit the Contender would make my cut
for a center console boat as well. I am not to impressed with the new
Whaler Center Consoles. They seem more designed for mass market appeal
versus fishability. One of the most practical center consoles IMHO for the
fishing I do would be a Contender 27' with the Coffin Box up front, a
"T"-top w/spray wings, and a pair of 200-225 OBs on the back. For anchored
up or tied off to a platform bottom and drift line fishing, the coffin box
makes a nice spot for 2-3 people to fish the front of the boat, while
another 2-3 fish the rear cockpit. I really like the way they do the
recessed hand rail up front and flush deck gunwales. I just wonder how that
narrow beam would do offshore while tied off or drifting. They need to come
up with factory installed Flopper Stoppers.
BillS
NOYB
Whaler. There was always a speed where I could run dry.
"Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
news:86meku4uu1ge40fu1...@4ax.com...
> Try slowing down? Sure, I can blast into waves and make some pretty
> impressive spray, but what is the point? I've had water come over the
> bow at anchor. No boat is truly dry.
NOYB
newsgroup. Must be the Prozac. ;)
"BillS" <Bi...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3D47ECA6...@austin.rr.com...
Harry Krause
> Harry Krause wrote:
>
>> Sigh. He stood by his review. He removed it from his site because idiots
>> like Skipper began bombarding his email address with crank letters and
>> there were attempts made to make some mischief on his web site.
>> As he depends on both to generate leads for part of his living, he simply
>> removed the Bayliner material. It's not as if he changed his mind about
>> what he found...he simply got weary of contending with idiots like
>> Skipper.
>
> That's an intentional lie, Krause, or at best, a carefully worded
> misstatement. You know I didn't send him email. He pulled those
> outrageous comments for fear of legal action.
It's the absolute truth, Skippy, and it isn't my problem you can't deal
with it. And how would *I* know you didn't send Pascoe email, as you
claim? Why would I take your word for that...or anything else? Not only
do you lie a lot, make up posts, change the posts of others and so
forth, you even admit to it.
Fear of legal action? From who? You? His commentary on Bayliners was
right on the money, and when he said they were built like eggshells, he
had the photographic proof.
> On July 11, 1997 Tom Fournier wrote:
>
No one cares what Fournier wrote. He's no expert on boat construction.
Pascoe is. Pascoe's report was on the lack of quality of Bayliners.
Fournier has no professional credentials in that area.
Harry Krause
Holy Batman! Gigging is a science...
Harry Krause
Regulators and Pursuits are top of the line in my book, too, but the
Contenders are lighter. And the Parkers are cheaper. I love the 23' and
25' Contenders, but I think my needs will be met nicely by the Parker, too.
I've fished in a Contender well offshore and it was stable enough for
me. No upchucking of industrial-grade puke.
Harry Krause
> Some times there is *no* dry speed on my Grady...never had that with the
> Whaler. There was always a speed where I could run dry.
>
>
> "Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
> news:86meku4uu1ge40fu1...@4ax.com...
>> Try slowing down? Sure, I can blast into waves and make some pretty
>> impressive spray, but what is the point? I've had water come over the
>> bow at anchor. No boat is truly dry.
>>
Skippy the newsgroup idiot comments from time to time that the boats of
certain posters are "wet." Well, hell, under some conditions one is
going to get wet in a boat. If you spend most of your boat time fishing,
as I do, you get wet, you get covered in bait, fish crud, spilled beers,
pieces of "sangwitches" and who knows what else. If I'm going offshore
in a smaller boat, I expect to get wet. I also expect to get wet
occasionally in my larger boat. Part of the fun, eh?
Skipper
> Skipper wrote:
>> Harry Krause wrote:
>>> Sigh. He stood by his review. He removed it from his site because idiots
>>> like Skipper began bombarding his email address with crank letters and
>>> there were attempts made to make some mischief on his web site. ...he
>>> simply got weary of contending with idiots like Skipper.
>> That's an intentional lie, Krause, or at best, a carefully worded
>> misstatement. You know I didn't send him email. He pulled those
>> outrageous comments for fear of legal action.
> It's the absolute truth, Skippy...
No, it's the big lie.
> Fear of legal action? From who? You? His commentary on Bayliners was
> right on the money, and when he said they were built like eggshells, he
> had the photographic proof.
Perhaps someday you'll have your own boat and not be limited to
discussing the boats of others, but whatever...
You might find the following post by Chuck Gould interesting:
"Mr. Pascoe's technical comments on many aspects of boat construction
and
maintenance are excellent. I have printed some of his technical pieces
off and
filed them for future ref. When "reviewing" boats however, it would be
more
useful if he posted the circumstances behind the inspection in question.
Some
of his reviews are on vessels which have been hurricane damaged, are
theft
recoveries, and other insurance losses. (He does acknowledge this in
some of
his reviews). These boats are hardly exhibiting the usual wear and tear
associated with normal careful ownership."
"(During the recent Jeopardy thread I almost posted an answer: "reputed
to have dropped by a forklift at a dry storage facility."), but didn't."
"A good surveyor reports information that can be objectively verified,
rather
than states a lot of subjective conjecture. It remains important to
realize
that Mr. Pascoe differentiates between his "reviews" and actual
surveys."
"Mr. Pascoe has stirred a lot of controversy over at Yachtworld.com; a
recent
thread that ran there was titled "Pascoe, Asscoe." It makes for some
interesting reading, indeed."
>> On July 11, 1997 Tom Fournier wrote:
>> The Bayliner bashing is a form of entertainment by a minority rec.boats
>> subscribers. ...
> No one cares what Fournier wrote.
Tom is editor of the ABOS Marine Blue Book. I suspect you are wrong.
--
Skipper
Harry Krause
> Harry Krause wrote:
>
>> Skipper wrote:
>>> Harry Krause wrote:
>
>>>> Sigh. He stood by his review. He removed it from his site because idiots
>>>> like Skipper began bombarding his email address with crank letters and
>>>> there were attempts made to make some mischief on his web site. ...he
>>>> simply got weary of contending with idiots like Skipper.
>
>>> That's an intentional lie, Krause, or at best, a carefully worded
>>> misstatement. You know I didn't send him email. He pulled those
>>> outrageous comments for fear of legal action.
>
>> It's the absolute truth, Skippy...
>
> No, it's the big lie.
Oh, come on, Skippy. You're the self-admitted liar around here. You're
the Ken Lay of usenet, but without the money. Or smarts.
>> Fear of legal action? From who? You? His commentary on Bayliners was
>> right on the money, and when he said they were built like eggshells, he
>> had the photographic proof.
>
> Perhaps someday you'll have your own boat and not be limited to
> discussing the boats of others, but whatever...
Who did you say threatened Pascoe with a lawsuit, Snippy?
>
> You might find the following post by Chuck Gould interesting:
>
> "Mr. Pascoe's technical comments on many aspects of boat construction
> and
> maintenance are excellent.
I've seen it before. Not relevant to what Pascoe posted.
Everyone knows your game, Snippy. You might yet convince another
simple-minded soul here of something, but there aren't *that* many of
those who read this newsgroup regularly.
NOYB
"Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
news:3mjgkus48p48h9m5k...@4ax.com...
>
> Man, what a dog, I'd sell the POS.
NOYB
about my Grady, too. I like the higher freeboard, the larger (alot) beam,
the closed transom, the stable fishing platform, the well-though-out
cockpit, and the bulit-like-a-tank feel. It just doesn't ride as well as the
22' Whaler Revenge that was stolen...and the damn rear cabin bulkhead wall
is rotted away. Why would Grady use non-marinegrade stuff as recently as my
1991? I e-mailed them to ask, and they said they're using marine grade
since 1998. It's hard to imagine they've built such a great name doing dumb
things like that.
"Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
news:e9bikucteen5tnjii...@4ax.com...
> I don't need two 23' G-Ws, one is dry enough!
NOYB
"Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
> Personal opinion is that it is mega-stoopid, but I guess the bean
> counters had their way. A bulkhead shouldn't have to be marine grade,
> since it is above the water line. Nothing water-loggable should be
> below the water line, foam, balsa, space age whatsit... nothing.
> However, that assumes that you have an IQ greater than your number of
> fingers
>
> I think my email would be along the lines.... "since you didn't
> encapsulate this thing, when shall I bring it in for warranty repair?"
> For what a Grady costs, you should expect no flagrant errors in
> judgment or engineering.
>
> OTOH, I would be a bit concerned as to the origin of the water causing
> the rot. Unless the hull is trailered and stored tongue low, there
> should be no water in that area unless you've take a greenie or two.
> Your forward bilge pump should be just so much baggage.
I bought it used, but I'm pretty sure it was stored on an outside rack
storage. Grady's have a natural hook to the bottom causing the water to run
forward against the front bulkhead when sitting on a cradle that isn't
pitched properly.
Ron M.
> NOYB,
> Thanks, I'd hold a high priority on a boat running dry. I only like to get
> wet when that is my intention.
> Paul
You need to understand that ANY boat will get you wet, although some
will be slightly better than others. It just depends on which way
you're moving relative to the wind, the waves, etc. You can get
soaked to the bone standing at the helm of a 48-foot Hatteras. If you
"only like to get wet when that is your intention," you have no
business being offshore.
Ron M.
Ron M.
> comes to boating. I'm looking into buying a 170 Montauk for my very
> first boat purchase.
>
> But...I have 2 friends with boats. One has a 26' BW CC, and the other
> has a 26" Proline CC. There is a huge difference in the way the two ride
> in semi-choppy water out in the Gulf. The Proline hits really hard when
> it comes down on the water, while the BW glides thru the waves almost
> effortlessly.
There are variables which you might not have noticed. Sometimes the
speed makes a huge difference, as well as the engine trim angle. Also
consider the period (frequency) of the waves and their steepness.
What might have happened here is that on the "smooth" ride, he was
going *with* the waves instead of against them. Almost any boat will
have a smooth ride going with the waves, while it may pound like a
hammer going into them.
Ron M.
Skipper
>> NOYB, Thanks, I'd hold a high priority on a boat running dry. I only like
>> to get wet when that is my intention.
>> Paul
> You need to understand that ANY boat will get you wet, although some
> will be slightly better than others. It just depends on which way
> you're moving relative to the wind, the waves, etc. You can get
> soaked to the bone standing at the helm of a 48-foot Hatteras. If you
> "only like to get wet when that is your intention," you have no
> business being offshore.
"Slightly"? You really should take a closer look at the boats used in
the Pacific Northwest, Ron. I've got a news flash for you, some boats
*are* much drier and better riding than others. Get a clue...
--
Skipper
Ron M.
> rather
> than states a lot of subjective conjecture.
Of course, but most of Pascoe's reviews *are* objective. Most of his
comments are about how a boat is designed, not "hurricane damage."
Anybody can read his reviews and see that this guy REALLY knows boats,
and if you're considering buying your first boat, you can get a great
education from reading them. For example, he criticizes a Hatteras
(one of the best boats in the world) for:
"putting a self-contained AC unit under the dinette seat where,
predictably, water sloshes out of the poorly drained condensation pan
to begin ruining the wood work."
Or his comments on another much-praised boat, a Boston Whaler
Montauk's "bird's nest" of wires and hoses:
"...systems are installed below the deck. Helter-skelter plumbing and
wiring makes for poor reliability and difficult service.
....you've got all your electrics back there, batteries, cables,
pumps, oil injection system and whatnot, but the design is utterly
devoid of any consideration for access maintenance or ever adding any
kind of new equipment. You can get at the batteries okay, but these
two are under a hatch (non latching) on the platform deck. Yeah, right
where waves will crash over..."
Another popular "top line" boat, the 26' Mako:
"Console front seat has open gap at top which allows water inside of
console; battery boxes were full of water and batteries dead. Only
one bilge pump with no space to add another. Transom is marginally
reinforced for tremendous leverage created by the motor bracket. The
transom laminate immediately below the bracket was delaminated."
Wouldn't you like to read things like this before you spent megabucks
on one of these boats? I sure would.
> "Mr. Pascoe has stirred a lot of controversy over at Yachtworld.com
I'm sure he has. Yachtworld is a used boat dealership, and Pascoe has
no doubt cost them some hefty sales by posting spine-chilling, but
honest, information about some of their inventory.
Ron M.
NOYB
Whaler I had.
"Ron M." <rmor...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:d7fc3008.02080...@posting.google.com...
Gould 0738
"Yachtworld is a used boat dealership?"
Quick. Go down to the corner, turn right, proceed two blocks to the clue store.
Get one, please.
Then do something that most folks who think Pascoe is the second coming fail to
do: Read, in his own words, what the intention of his site is supposed to be.
He does not claim to be objective. He sees his role as the "equalizer," and
attempts to counterbalance what he believes are overly positive reviews in
boating magazines.
In virtually all of Pacoe's reviews, (and these are *not* surveys), there is a
short leap from the observed specific to the very broad theoretical conclusion.
There is no doubt that he knows boats, and very well. His material is useful,
but deserves to be interpreted in the same light that Pascoe discloses it is
presented in. Failing to do so is a misuse of good information.
Skipper
Chuck Gould wrote:
>> "A good surveyor reports information that can be objectively verified,
>> rather than states a lot of subjective conjecture.
> Of course, but most of Pascoe's reviews *are* objective.
Most of Pascoe's "reviews" are subjective and very opinionated. He is
cowardly and will not subject his outrageous claims to open discussion.
He prefers to ambush from behind a rock. His tactic of posting photos of
hurricane damaged boats and representing them as "typical" of a builders
workmanship tells up far more about Pascoe than the subject of the
pictures.
>> "Mr. Pascoe has stirred a lot of controversy over at Yachtworld.com
> I'm sure he has. Yachtworld is a used boat dealership, and Pascoe has
> no doubt cost them some hefty sales by posting spine-chilling, but
> honest, information about some of their inventory.
I would contend that Mr. Gould, his publications, and Yachtworld.com are
for more helpful to recreational boaters then that sniveling Pascoe
character with his effusive and pernicious website.
BTW, Yachtworld.com is not a boat dealership and your wish for Pascoe to
do them harm tells us quite a bit about you.
--
Skipper
NOYB
great solid, wide, and well-thought-out boat...but it pounds and is wet into
a head sea (small 2-3 foot seas). I, too, wonder if the newer hull rides
any better.
"Beach Bum" <No...@NoWhere.net> wrote in message
news:8n9tkuc4fkicd8mc5...@4ax.com...
> Which hull do you have? The new or old style. Mine is the old one, I
> wonder if that makes a difference? Ease of ride vs. some water?
Skipper
> I notice your Tom Fornier will not post here ... will his daddy not let him
> use the computer?
Comments like yours have a lot to do with why we no longer benefit from
his participation. His advice and information now goes to the industry
professionals who pay for it.
> I, for one, am sick of reading namby-pamby reports in boating magazines that
> rarely find ANY boat less than splendiferous. At least Pascoe is not so
> overrun by political correctness that he won't call a fault a fault,
> regardless of manufacturer.
Pascoe is as "namby-pamby" as they come. I'd like to see Pascoe engage
in an open discussion of his stable blind views on this forum. The
Gould/Pascoe interchange would be interesting. Alas, we won't as Pascoe
is a coward. He also knows his posit is indefensible.
> If you believe that he did not disclose that the boats were hurricane
> damaged, how about posting the ENTIRE article for all to see. I remember
> that he represented the damage as hurricane damage…
He did not. His Bayliner bashing was a complete misrepresentation. He
had to pull those photos after the truth was known.
--
Skipper
BillS
Skipper wrote:
> "Ron M." wrote:
>
> Chuck Gould wrote:
>
> >> "A good surveyor reports information that can be objectively verified,
> >> rather than states a lot of subjective conjecture.
>
> > Of course, but most of Pascoe's reviews *are* objective.
>
> Most of Pascoe's "reviews" are subjective and very opinionated. He is
> cowardly and will not subject his outrageous claims to open discussion.
> He prefers to ambush from behind a rock. His tactic of posting photos of
> hurricane damaged boats and representing them as "typical" of a builders
> workmanship tells up far more about Pascoe than the subject of the
> pictures.
>
> >>
The internet has a lot in common wth TV. You can choose to disagree with
what you see or what you read, and then change the channel if you so desire.
(Isn't technology great?) Do you disagree with hosts or commentators of
television and news shows? I do all the time. But, I sure don't harangue
them until they meet me in public for an open debate. Do you....?
BillS
BillS
"Ron M." wrote:
> <SNIP>
>
> Or his comments on another much-praised boat, a Boston Whaler
> Montauk's "bird's nest" of wires and hoses:
>
> "...systems are installed below the deck. Helter-skelter plumbing and
> wiring makes for poor reliability and difficult service.
>
Montauks don't have a deck, never did. Old or new models have a wide open
hull, above deck tanks, batteries, etc. They do have a bilge pump in a
small grate covered well molded into cockpit floor. New models put the
battery in the console. I have witnessed first hand the original OEM wiring
of both old and new model Montauks, and niether is a rats nest. Pasco also
posted the picture upside down...look at the remote oil tanks hanging from
the deck.
BillS
Skipper
>> Comments like yours have a lot to do with why we no longer benefit from his
>> participation. His advice and information now goes to the industry
>> professionals who pay for it.
> No, No... skippy, how short our memory has become! My response was aimed
> DIRECTLY at you assertion that Fournier no longer posts here because his BOSS
> TOLD HIM NOT TO. That is pretty hard to take.
Multitasking is obviously not one of your strong suits, is it?
>> Pascoe is as "namby-pamby" as they come. I'd like to see Pascoe engage in an
>> open discussion of his stable blind views on this forum. The Gould/Pascoe
>> interchange would be interesting. Alas, we won't as Pascoe is a coward. He
>> also knows his posit is indefensible.
> Ok, you have made a statement ...
Sure did.
> Exactly WHAT is indefensible.
That's the beauty of an open forum. Even Bums with noticeable
comprehension problems can participate freely.
> You say Harry is a bad guy, but although I don't agree with him politically,
> I CAN have a intelligent debate with him.
Harry never engages in back and forth discussion of an issue. He just
obfuscates.
--
Skipper
Skipper
> Tom Fornier said.....
> Bayliner is the cheapest.....
> Bayliner will go ANYWHERE......
> Pascoe is a pinko.....
> Gould said Fournier said....
> Fournier said skippy said.....
> skippy said Gould said.....
> (I said, they need a pivot man...)
> Bayliner has the highest resale.....
> You can trailer a Bayliner......
> Lots of boats are made with foam.......
> My Bayliner has FLOTATION.......
> Bayliners have really great interior layouts.....
Ah, Phoenix, you have had so many resurrections.
--
Skipper
Harry Krause
>
> Pascoe is as "namby-pamby" as they come. I'd like to see Pascoe engage
> in an open discussion of his stable blind views on this forum. The
> Gould/Pascoe interchange would be interesting.
Engage in an open discussion with who? No one who poats on this forum
has Pascoe's knowledge or expertise. And while Gould is a stand-up
fellow, *his* expertise is in the selling of used boats. Gould is no
expert on boat construction or, more important, boat destruction.
Alas, we won't as Pascoe
> is a coward. He also knows his posit is indefensible.
That's *your* opinion and you know less about boats than most of those
who post here. So, what does it matter?
>
>> If you believe that he did not disclose that the boats were hurricane
>> damaged, how about posting the ENTIRE article for all to see. I remember
>> that he represented the damage as hurricane damage…
>
> He did not. His Bayliner bashing was a complete misrepresentation. He
> had to pull those photos after the truth was known.
He pulled the Bayliner post because idiots like you were bombarding his
email box and website. Pascoe told me that directly. If you think
otherwise, *prove* it or shut up.
Harry Krause
> "Ron M." wrote:
>
> Chuck Gould wrote:
>
>>> "A good surveyor reports information that can be objectively verified,
>>> rather than states a lot of subjective conjecture.
>
>> Of course, but most of Pascoe's reviews *are* objective.
>
> Most of Pascoe's "reviews" are subjective and very opinionated.
You don't have the expertise to make that judgment.
He is
> cowardly and will not subject his outrageous claims to open discussion.
To open discussion with an idiot like you?
> He prefers to ambush from behind a rock. His tactic of posting photos of
> hurricane damaged boats and representing them as "typical" of a builders
> workmanship tells up far more about Pascoe than the subject of the
> pictures.
You mean, like the photos of the 26' Bayliner with the 1" thick
stringers? That's some workmanship.
Skipper
> He pulled the Bayliner post because idiots like you were bombarding his
> email box and website. Pascoe told me that directly. If you think
> otherwise, *prove* it or shut up.
Did he tell you that *I* sent any email to him or his website?
--
Skipper
Skipper
>> He prefers to ambush from behind a rock. His tactic of posting photos of
>> hurricane damaged boats and representing them as "typical" of a builders
>> workmanship tells up far more about Pascoe than the subject of the
>> pictures.
> You mean, like the photos of the 26' Bayliner with the 1" thick
> stringers? That's some workmanship.
No, it's called spin and the big lie.
--
Skipper
Harry Krause
What he told me was that idiots like you were bombarding his email box
and website. I don't recall his specific words, nor did I save his
email, since I don't save most emails.
You keep claiming Pascoe was "forced" to remove that Bayliner info off
his site. Last week you claimed it was because of a lawsuit threat. Put
up or shut up, Skippy.
Harry Krause
Those photos of that Bayliner-Crappyliner were right on the money.
Crappy materials, crappy lamination schedule, crappy stringers and not
enough of them and crappy design, all there for the eyes to see.
And where do you get off criticizing what Pascoe wrote? You know less
about boats than almost anyone who posts here regularly. You've had
what, one 22' boat for the past 12 years, used mostly in calm inland
waters? Big whoop.