Topaz 24'

[DORADOsteve]

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/

[Scott]

Dorado… Welcome to the site... Nice looking boat you have there

Jeff ...

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...

I think the biggest word in there is IF... A friend of mine has spent a bit of time pursuing that boat ...he wants a jackshaft boat ( I forget what he told me about getting the bracketed o/b version back in the lineup)... However it sounds as if Topaz will devote more time to the larger boats in the line ... He too was at the NY show and didn’t get the feeling that the jackshaft would happen any time soon. Silverhawk never went Straight I/B nor the Jackshaft ...so I'm thinking they, Topaz, do not want to get into messing around with bilge configuration at this time. Right now he is focusing in on the Albemarle 24 CC with teh Jackshaft ... Those guys know how to build a Jackshafted boat.

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

[Rich]

Silverhawk never went Straight I/B

I'm positive they built at least one Straight I/B, there were pictures up on the site for sometime.

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]

[mpwitte]

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.

[Scott]

I'm positive they built at least one Straight I/B, there were pictures up on the site for sometime.

oops ...my bad [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] Guess I wasn’t paying attention that day [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

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!!!

[SEAFARI]

Yeh,
I think I remember the mint green one, It
had the same tunnel as the 23 Seacraft.

Rodney

[SEAFARI]

Heres a small pic.
http://www.nauticexpo.it/soc/jersey/...%26Affiche%3D1

[mpwitte]

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.

[Scott]

Mike …Thank you for the great reply! … Those boat were, and I see no reason why they will not continue to be head turners …. Just a great looking boat (well I guess we are all somewhat biased here)

Are those boats (I/B) still in the area??

Its too bad they gave up the line …and I hope Topaz does them the justice they deserve …I feel that is the boat for someone looking for a “23 SeaCraft”. I would think that Topaz would rather go the direction of Jackshaft or I/B. I’m personally not a fan of the I/O as mentioned above with the motor box and stern drive (some bad memories of a 25 Bertram that my grandfather had, and sank at the dock ) BUT these newer composite drives with duo props and jackshafts, that fly on the water and give you maneuverability...That does sound good.. It would be neat to see what a boat would do with that configuration. I can only imagine that would be a kick a$$ boat with a single diesel ...that weight up forward and down low ... What a ride!! not to mention Classic looking Cant imagine what a Jackshafted Diesel would go for !!!! I’m sure that’s a big factor.

I’m sure all of us would enjoy pictures if you’ve got them …. Like Rich said above …LOL [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]


Rod ...Where do you find these sites ?? That picture looks like a Manasquan Inlet shot!!

[ScottM]

Mike,
How many of the cuddy model did you make? Bill's Outboard here in Hingham MA still has a black one for sale. I believe they've had it since Sept '03 when it was unveiled at the Boston in-water boat show! [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

You're right, the gas I/O is a tough combo to beat, but that engine box sure is a hindrance. Obviously this isn't an issue with Silverhawks specifically, but all I/O boats in general. My buddy has a '97 with the 300hp MerCruiser Mag MPI and Bravo III drive. Boy is that a nice running boat. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]