Seacraft to Conch rebuilds

DonV · #1 09-21-2011, 11:14 AM

And a triple ditto!! It's not my money and the gentleman can do as he wants and I wish him well, however seems to me a 23' SeaCraft would be the way to go if you are going to spend that kind of moola!

Tarpun · #2 09-21-2011, 04:12 PM

Multiple Dittos. I agree it would have made alot more sense to start with a 23' hull. I also think lowering the gunnels on a boat used offshore is a mistake, particularly if the raised the deck any. I feel more secure offshore in my MA than in No Bones' SF. Those gunnels look like they are at mid calf. But he will have what he wants.

workinpr0gress · #3 09-21-2011, 04:52 PM

http://www.classicseacraft.com/forum...t=1&PHPSESSID=

Ryan · #4 09-21-2011, 07:25 PM

Well its cool to see someone running with the design and putting some new ideas onto our favorite hulls. I am pretty interested to see what they do with the 23. I always thought that the 20 with a closed transom and a jack plate would be an ideal set up for a bay boat

strick · #5 09-21-2011, 08:10 PM

Cutting the shear line on a SeaCraft is like trying to touch up the smile on the Mona Lisa. They ruined a beautiful boat IMHO. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say.

strick

BigLew · #6 09-21-2011, 10:29 PM

Regarding this "mod,"....and the point is??????

I guess most of my experience in 'bays' is that they tend to be choppy and my experience is a little more freeboard is a nice thing to have. JMHO.

SOS · #7 09-23-2011, 10:08 PM

I think it's a pretty sweet rebuild and its quality work without a doubt. I do think it should remain a SeaCraft but I can't hate on it seeing as though Conch is doing so much work and transition to the topsides.

I congratulate the owner for putting this much money and effort into making sure the classic SeaCraft hull lives to see another day or decade!

Much respect to the CSC but I'd be proud to fish that boat!
SOS

shine · #8 09-26-2011, 12:28 PM

I applaud RR for their craftsmanship, and I would not begrudge anyone for taking the work, but....

Form a practical boat design standpoint this is a stupid thing to do. The boat is hardley more useful in inshore applications with a slightly lower free board and some casting decks.

Its a hull designed for offshore use, with an huge engine and 160 gallon of fuel, so why the heck do you cut it down and make it even more wet and less useful offshore? I guess it will need a trolling motor? How much of a trolling motor (and batteries) do you need to move a most like that around the flats or around a dock? - Measure the cost of those in terms of weight added and dollars

hes is going to spend a ton of money and get a boat that cannot do anything one thing very well. Rough or windy offshore, then he is going to get soaked (or worse). Too windy to fish offshore? then he gets blown all over the place with the windage of that hull. With all that weight the boat will draft too much to be a good inshore boat. Cutting down the freeboard is going to make this boat EXTRA wet, it will remove a lot of the flair. A boat that is design from the start to be a "bay" boat has more volume up in that area (bow) so you can have a lower sheer line. When I "or worse", there is a the increase risk of broaching or stuffing the bow

For about the same $ you could have a really nice 23/25 seacraft AND a skiff. Maybe its purpose is not just to catch fish, as I see the first thing on the accessory list, after the engine, is the sound system/speakers

I do like their 20' SC bay boat conversion though - you can get a good layout without good fishing room cutting down the hull.