"Potter Built" Hull

3rdday · #1 11-21-2007, 05:19 PM

I tried researching this , what is the good/bad/ difference with potter built/ non potter built hulls, I know this fella was part of seacraft for some time, for someone who dosen't know, what does this mean to some one looking at seacraft boats?

JohnB · #2 11-21-2007, 05:55 PM

Most of the SeaCraft legend revolves around the theory that the Potter boats were the best built, which for the most part is considered true. As they got newer, they got cheaper, especially after about 1990. IMHO, the Mosely boats were good too, and some of the later 80's ones weren't bad, they just cheapened the rigging.

I don't think Potter personally layed the glass in them. The hulls on most are the same all the way to today, the caps have had a few tweaks here and there through the years, but they are pretty dated (infloor live wells, open transoms, etc). The materials were pretty much the same through the years. Once you got into the late 80's and forward, they tended to cheapen some of the rigging (hatches, wiring, lighting, etc).

IMHO, without starting a war with the Potter era folks, I will say I have not seen a bad Mosely boat, but there are so few and the ones that are remaining are usually cherished. There really isn't a design, materials, or construction issue from the 60's all the way to 88 or so. I really haven't looked at the newer boats, but there have been quite a few "stories" on the web about problems with them.

Age and maintenance really trump most of the differences in these boats. Most over 20 years have wet transoms, tired engines, soggy coaring in hatches, bad wiring, leaky steering, tired rigging, and faded gel coat, but we still love them, and they still are one of the best riding 23's every popped from a mold.

Modifications and abuse done to the boats after they were made seem to be on of the major problems people run into.

This is just my opinion, but I like the late 80's Sceptres and Walkarounds.

3rdday · #3 11-21-2007, 06:17 PM

Thanks John, for the insight. Do you know much about the Key Largo and Palm Beach Copies of the 23'?

JohnB · #4 11-21-2007, 07:14 PM

Unless there is a particular boat from these 2 your looking at, in general, I would look at a Sailfish. IMHO, alot of boat for the money, and they are just about a dead knockoff of a SeaCraft. Quality isn't bad either. IMHO, they are probably one of the best mid-tear boats in the 21-23' range out there.

3rdday · #5 11-21-2007, 07:54 PM

I zero'd in on the Palm beach 235 and Key largo 236 because at a boat show yrs ago i was told this was the same hull. The KL and PB are the same boat just diff decals . When you look at this hull you will see it appears almost identical in Mosely's design/pattent. I have looked at the sailfish and indeed they are quality. all composite top tier construction materials. I am very interested in the Palm Beach 235 Hull none of the other PB or KL hulls are this design only the 23' 236 & 235.
Please see this link & look at photo 1 closely http://www.yachtworld.com/core/listi..._id=68151&url=

JohnB · #6 11-21-2007, 08:17 PM

It's hard to tell, it looks similar. I didn't see a transom shot, to see if its a VDR design. I know the SailFish are.

It's and open transom boat, and I am not a big fan of those any more. I have had water over my ankles offshore in SeaCrafts and Makos, and I doubt I would ever own another open transom boat. That's just my opinion/experience. If the floor is high enough, and it drains overboard correctly, and you don't overload them, I guess their ok

. Supposedly, you get a 7-12% gain in fuel economy with the motors set back, and with oil at 100 a barrel, every bit helps.

TUGBOAT · #7 11-22-2007, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Most of the SeaCraft legend revolves around the theory that the Potter boats were the best built, which for the most part is considered true. As they got newer, they got cheaper, especially after about 1990,some of the later 80's ones weren't bad, they just cheapened the rigging.

The Change & Cheaper Rigging & laying came when SeaCraft / Plant was moved to Tampa.Change of Crew,etc.Lil' of the Luv was gone. It was Just another Boat company from there.They were Still producing one of the finest Boats built.Somewhere in the 80's.

Happy ThanksGiving! [img]/forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

3rdday · #8 11-30-2007, 11:31 PM

Thanks all. Capt. Brad., I am right down from road from you in St. Cloud, FL always looking for additional fishing buddies, go out of Sebastian and ft. pierce almost everyweekend, weather permitting, won't be much of a factor soon with a seacraft!

Finster · #9 12-01-2007, 12:08 AM

I'll chime in here briefly, not to kick a dead horse in the azz for the hundredth time but....
With the Potter era boats you always know what you have, where it is, and or where it's supposed to be. Consistency was for the most part constant. After that its basically anyone guess depending who built it.
Yes, there countless knock-off's. Some good, most bad. But IMOP anything after '80 their all knock-off's, but that's just me.

Hey if you want a great knock-off check out the new Silverhawks. I'd buy one in a heartbeat if I had the money.

Cheers.

65Bowrider · #10 12-01-2007, 07:37 AM

Hey,hey,hey...let's not forget the Moesly Built!!!!
Especially since I own 3!
After all, they were the boats that were raced in the ocean, 10-12 foot seas for hours, to and from the Bahamas, and NEVER broke apart!
There's not as many today because there weren't that many originally built...That's why the few are 'cherished'.

My 2 cents, just joining in with everybody elses.