84 MA
The point is that this is a "Classic SeaCraft" site. You posted a comment on this site that
Quote:
I/my family have also owned an early 70's 23 SeaCraft with twin 165 merc in/out brd and a 84 23 with a 225 outboard and (blasphemy) "I personally like this boat better"
|
I don't think that is appropriate here. If you want to discuss how much you like another boat then comments and boat comparisons can be made on the "The Hull Truth" forum site. You made your comments under the SeaCraft "General Thread" which clearly states:
Quote:
General questions or comments about "classic" SeaCraft boats built from the 1960's to the early 1980's
|
Secondly
Quote:
<font color="brown"> But all I see is that another manufactuer took an unbeatable hull design, stretched it and made it an unbelievably dry boat.
|
I'm not trying to start a pissing contest here but Sailfish didn't stretch anything. Many boat manufactures claim to have the magic hull design, the softest re-entry, more hand laid glass, best features for the money etc etc etc. All in the name of generating more sales. Many have come and gone. Bottom line is how many of these manufactures have a proven track record ? I can't wait to see
www.classicbayliner.com [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]