Quote:
but they think an awful lot of that bracket ($$$). It is still an option though.
|
John ...I understand your thinking however I would guess to design and fabricate an integral bracket would be a lot more $$$$$ ... Not to mention you need to find someone capable of that work that you can trust to engineer such a design. At least with the potter bracket you can get an idea of how your boat will perform by some of the guys that have already put one on the boat. Yours will be one of a kind and you will not know how it performs or handles till the day its back in the water. Unless cost is not a factor I cant see that being the more economical way to go.
Quote:
I happen to think that the Seamark or any other well built bracket when bolted and glued with 5200 to the back of a structurally sound boat functions as one unit with the boat.
|
I agree … something like a Gil Bracket is another story.
That bracket bolted along the platform and throughout the float chamber , then sealed with calking becomes part of the hull. I would guess (and I have only seen pictures of one mounted to a boat ….. and Chris’s bracket which isn’t on the boat ) that by adding that particular bracket you have about 75-80% ?? of what an extended hull would give you below the water line. Chris and I have even talked about tabbing his bracket to the hull with fiberglass.
Are there other reasons why you would rather the integral bracket over an add on?? Have you talked to any glass guys about what you want to do …cost ??