#1
|
|||
|
|||
Potter vs. non-Potter hulls
I know there is a lot of discussion out there regarding the newer vs. older SC hulls, but what are all the differences (design and/or construction) between the different generations of hulls???
I hear lots of polarized opinions on the boards about the older hulls being so much better than the newer hulls. My boat is a 2002 hull, that apperance wise, looks very much like a lot of the 70's era boats. Ok guys, quelch my curiosity over this.
__________________
The artist formally known as duskydan... Old Yeller 21 Sea Craft-200 Merc Parrish Creek/West River http://www.imagestation.com/picture/...2/fc3ef46d.jpg |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Potter vs. non-Potter hulls
“For me” I first thing hull design and the SeaCraft hull design hasn’t changed from the early 70’s so from that point of view they are all the same. Next comes material used in building the boats which has changed from the 70’s the newer one’s use composite materials in the lamination and the older one’s used balsa and plywood personally I thing the new stuff is better. Then comes cost cutting methods and or less materials in the building of the boat most guys say the older Potter built are better in that regard and then comes workmanship I would say that on a whole the older boats had better workmanship (when they were built) due to the standards that were kept (but those boats are now 25+ yrs old). So for me if I was going to buy a new boat I would seriously look at the SeaCraft and if I was going to buy a older boat and restore it I would definitely choose a SeaCraft it cost me about 45 cense on the $ to rebuild my 23 CC Potter hull to as good or better that buying new.
FellowShip [img]images/icons/cool.gif[/img] |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Potter vs. non-Potter hulls
that 21 looks different and sits higher in the water because it IS different. The 21' is a recent addition to the fleet and it did not exist back in the "Potter" days. Same hull" - nope. Not to the 20' at least. Now take a six pack and a chainsaw to the tail of a 23' and we start to see some striking similarities.
If you want to see something that looks similar to the 21', take a photo of a 23' and lop off 2' - you'll be amazed at the resemblance [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img] |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Potter vs. non-Potter hulls
Is that the same as "It Looks like a BMW but its really a VW Jetta?"
__________________
Ted |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Potter vs. non-Potter hulls
Now that the question has been asked, does anyone really know the difference in the years,mfg,etc.? I have a 1989(identical to 1988) SeaCraft 23 WA with a big Tracker name on the aft sides. Is this a different design or something that was built in between owners? Hull plate says it was built in Tampa, Fl. by Tracker Seacraft. I have a test sheet from Mercury Outboards that says the brand name is Tracker Seacraft, Model 23 WA and mnfg by Tracker Marine Corp. Springfield , Mo., which is where Bass Tracker was based out of. At the time I bought my boat, they were being marketed by BassTracker. When it was registered, it was registered as a BassTracker. Had a heck of a time convincing the Auditor it was a SeaCraft to get the title changed.
Can some enlighten me on my boat history? I've always assumed it was the same boat as is talked about here. [ July 25, 2003, 01:19 AM: Message edited by: Gary ]
__________________
Gary |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Potter vs. non-Potter hulls
I have heard mixed things from "far superior" to "no where near the quality where it counts". I guess if it lasts almost 20 years like mine, its a great boat, right?
Next time you fish the Rips and see me there (84 20 foot MA) stop by to compare boats. Yours seems to be laid out differently, and sit higher in the water, but I have not been on a new 20 or fished it ....hmmm, wanna go fishin? Jason [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] Though mine is not a true Potter boat, it is a Potter hull. And I'm pretty sure both our boats share the same hull. [ July 24, 2003, 01:00 PM: Message edited by: 84 SeaCraft ]
__________________
I support something, but I can't remember what??? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Potter vs. non-Potter hulls
Here is a SeaCraft timeline that I put together some time ago. Seems to be fairly accurate.
(note: Internet browser needs to support frames http://seacraft.snetsol.com/SCTimeli...ine_frames.htm
__________________
Cape Marine Supply |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Potter vs. non-Potter hulls
Gary,
The 23 hull has been the same since Day 1. Your WA was only produced during the "Tracker SeaCraft" days of the late '80s, but your hull is identical in design to a 1970 23. As far as construction goes, there may have been some minor differences between Potter, CSY and Tracker, but for the sake of conversation they are identical. Bottom line - you own a SeaCraft. Now rip those Tracker decals off and put on a set of SeaCraft ones! [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Potter vs. non-Potter hulls
I have a friend in Cape Cod whose father has owned '70s era 23 for a long time. Last year his buddy bought a new 23 and he has spend a fair amount of time on it. He says that in rougher water you can really tell the difference... the older boat is stiffer and quieter, and rides like its heavier, although he thinks they are actually the same weight, at least according to specs.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Potter vs. non-Potter hulls
The mystique lives on [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] !
__________________
Snookerd |
|
|