|
|
|
|
#1
12-15-2013, 09:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
I don't have a real answer, just random thoughts on this...Seafari was Moesly's brainstorm. A driver's boat and definitely not for everybody. A very different concept and purpose than the 23.
The 23 was Potter's evolution, and geared to a more popular and competitive class of boat. Marketing the open design of the 23 was much easier, especially in the Florida heat. Smart money was to build on the success of the 20 hull, and and fill that more capable 23' niche. Potter made a nice mark with the 23. Why market the bigger, much more expensive to build boat? Arab oil embargo probably made production even more expensive and the 25 degree dead-rise Seafari 25 even more expensive to run. Potter had 3 concurrent applications for the 23 by altering only the cap. The CC the Tsunami/Sceptre and Savage all from the same hull fitting very different needs. Pretty good business in my mind...
__________________
there's no such thing as normal anymore... 
|
|
#2
12-16-2013, 02:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#3
12-16-2013, 11:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
there's no such thing as normal anymore...
|
|
#4
12-16-2013, 01:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think Gillie's right, in that the 25 was Moesly's last and most advanced design, but built only by Potter starting in 1972, since Moesly was off sailing around the world by 1970, so he wouldn't have had the benefit of Mr. Moesly's coaching that he'd had in building the earlier models. It was designed to have a ballast tank per Moesly's patent for the "Self Stabilizing Boat Hull" http://www.moeslyseacraft.com/upload...st-3503358.pdf, which would have lowered the CG as well as shifting it forward and probably improving stability. Since Potter left out the ballast tank, I suspect that he wasn't 100% comfortable with the reduced stability and unique handling characteristics, so perhaps he didn't market the 25 as aggressively as he did his own more conservative designs (the 23 and 18). Since most SeaCraft customers were primarily fisherman, the Seafari layout was probably less appealing than the CC design, which SeaCraft pioneered in the offshore fishing market with the 20 SF. The demand for a cruiser was probably much less than for the 23 CC which was introduced only a year or two later. As Connor mentioned, most folks focused on cruising are probably more interested in amenities than they are in ride and performance capability in 6' seas, even though that should be a significant consideration for anyone that wants to do any serious cruising to the Bahamas! Although there was definitely a market for a very seaworthy premium quality 25' cruiser (the 25' Bertram was very popular at the time), Potter's 23 sold well, so can't blame him for focusing on his best seller at the expense of a more sophisticated and expensive model that appealed to a much smaller market. These same factors may also partially explain the low production numbers for the Moesly 21, i.e., although it had better rough water performance than the 23, it didn't have the CC layout, and it had fewer amenities than either the Seafari 20 or 25! Sort of begs the question as to why Potter didn't just start out with a CC version of the 21 before launching the 23!
__________________
'72 SeaFari/150E-Tec/Hermco Bracket, owned since 1975. http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z...Part2019-1.jpg
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
