![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
FYI: The Topaz rep said it was the South Jersey Tower Power shop, same as the Silver Hawk. He also mentioned that a Jack Shaft diesel would be the next model...IF they pursue it. I'm sure the AC show (Feb. 2-6)will have a better showing...also the new Luhrs 28' a very impressive express for the same dollars as a fully rigged Reg. 26' is worth a look.
__________________
http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/c...9/IMG_0476.jpg |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi, new to the forum. No I dont own a Seacraft, but they sure are great boats.
Here's a link to the bulider currently producing the "original" Topaz. http://www.biminimarine.com/
__________________
TOPAZ '24 Captiva '24 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dorado… Welcome to the site... Nice looking boat you have there
Jeff ... Quote:
I hope this is wrong but FYI He also said the Topaz (or at least that boat) would not be in AC !!! [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] Which makes no sense to me being its neighbor!! That’s why he ended up going into the NY show. IMHO They have to get rid of that I/O configuration …. That motor box kills that cockpit !!! the older Potter Outboards have more room behind the leaning post !!! All I can think of is being on a fish as he turns and leaves you on the wrong side of the cockpit ...not fish friendly I think it would help the line if they got the O/B back in there |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
http://forum.classicseacraft.com/sho...BB1&Number=201 The pictures are no longer available, unless John R has a copy in his ever growing stash of Seacraft Porn... [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]
__________________
Cape Marine Supply |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
When I was involved with Silverhawk, I did engineer and build two straight inboard boats. These were the only two. Both were gas power, one with a 6.2/320 and the second with a 5.7/300. I may still have some pix if someone was interested.
Mike. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
MP ... that seems like a lot of change to the hull design for just two boats ?!? I would think Engine mounting , gas tank re-location, I'm assuming a pocket for the wheel, rudder mounting etc etc.. would cause some challenges?? Were they prototypes?? What happened ??? That must have been a great riding hull!!! |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yeh,
I think I remember the mint green one, It had the same tunnel as the 23 Seacraft. Rodney |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Heres a small pic.
http://www.nauticexpo.it/soc/jersey/...%26Affiche%3D1 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Scott,
I guess you could call them prototypes. They were finished and rigged to the same standards as any others I built. The first one (light green) was a little heavier than normal because the stringers were reworked from standard I/O layout, but thats why the larger motor. You need to understand we were a tiny semi-custom opperation. I had a total of five guys building these boats start to finish. The boats were all built to order, either to a specific dealers specs or to customer wants/needs. We had two dealers interested in trying a jackshaft or inboard configuration. The re-engineering is nearly the same for both. I started with the idea of a jackshaft first. the problem was the shaft. I wanted to keep the motor under the console, not under the seat area. No one (merc, volvo, etc) could supply us with a long enough shaft so we would have had to have it custom built. We decided to do the inboard. I built an insert for the tunnel in the hull. It was almost two inches deeper than Seacraft I had for a guide and about 10 inches longer total. I moved the console on the Silverhawk back about 7" and reworked the console door and deck area. The motor sits 12"-16" further forward from the transom than in a Seacraft because I wanted a larger cockpit. The shaft angle was figured at 8* and actually worked out to around 7*-7.5*. The boats ran great. The Silverhawks were considerably heavier than the Seacraft but obviously a little longer too. The average deadrise at the stern is slightly less as a result of lengthening the hull and the Silverhawk has more flat at the outer chine. I never spent enough time on both boats on the same day to say if one was better/faster but if I had to guess I would imagine a Seacraft inboard with identical power to be slightly faster and the Silverhawk to ride slightly better. They had some tunnel rumble that could have beeen helped with a 4 blade prop instead of the three. If I had built more, I would have changed the tunnel shape slightly to improve water flow but nothing major. I understand the beef some people have with the motor box, but believe me, the gas I/O model was the best combo for all around speed, ride, handeling, and fuel economy. Yes, the outboarads are faster and the diesels got fantastic fuel economy but the gas I/O was a sweet running package. Thats why we built what ever someone asked for. (Did you ever see the pod drive?!) You are right about it being a huge investment of time and effort for two boats. It was still easier than building an entire new deck and interior liner mold for the cuddy/express model of which I only ever built one. The problems revolved around being under funded and not having the resorces for proper advertising, boat shows, etc. The owners I worked for (and the dealers I worked with) were great people but in the end I guess they got an offer they couldn't refuse. Mike. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|