Quote:
Originally Posted by bgreene
For the few that may know, how does the rough water ride compare to these hulls:
SeaCraft 23
Mako 21 -25
Reg 23
Just interested in the history of this rare boat, so posing the question this way may ferrit out some perspective.
|
I can answer some of the above...Mako vs. Seacraft...hands down SC
Regulator...no experience...I am sure some one will chime in.
21 vs. 23 Seacraft....this is from the "Man" himself.
The 21 was a rough, tough boat for off-shore work that can carry a heavy load in high seas with very good speed. The 19& the 20 Center consol and the Cuddy Cabin were designed for coastal and bay work. The 20 was a modified 19 hull with advance design characteristics.
The 23 models were designed after I sold and left the company. They were basically a 21 bottom stretched out and the freeboard lowered. I had a demo ride in rough water a couple of years after the boat hit the market. The sales/demo driver asked me what I thought about the boat. My reply was there are a couple of things I would have done differently. He came back with that may be so, but it is so much better than any thing else on the market.
Funny things happen when you stretch out a hull or change things on the bottom. It can be a gain in some ways and a loss in others. A good big boat can mostly out perform a little boat. Foot for foot, I like the21.