[flyingfrizzle]

Just a few of the Pros and cons:

Tracker Pros: The 25" transom, longer 20.4 vs 19.8 length, The higher decks, drains out the back.
Cons: The ply wood decks vs balsa, some had less or poor glass lay up, foamed in gas tanks, Not being able to call your boat a "potter built"

Older Potter/Moesly Pros: Better thicker layups, balsa core, more quality controlled era, no foam on the tanks, no foam in the quad stringer hulls to dig out if wet, having a classic "potter hull" resale on restored hulls seem to bring more $ if sold.
Cons: Low decks on the pre 74 hulls, Lower 20" transoms, outboard weight seems to effect the older hulls more. Scuppers out the bottom of the hull,

Me I wouldn't be afraid of either, The newer hull may be in better shape due to less age, the ply wood may be rotten where the older balsa is still fine 40 years latter. Comes down to what you are wanting. If you are going to do a full restore I would be more apt to find an older hull. If I wanted to find a stock unrestored hull to ride with minimum effort I would look for a late 80's hull and find one that was tooken care of. I have seen pre 70's that looked like crap due to a hard life from blisters and lack of care and I have seen post 80's hull look like crap. There are also some fine examples of both being nice, Some of these full restored older ones and some barn finds that are good as the day they left the factory. My slacker friend seem to have a nice example of a late model hull that was well built and serves the purpose well. Like said before.... The magic is in the bottom