68 20 cc

[sktenor]

Can someone tell me if a 68' Mosley Seacraft is built as well as a potter hull 70's on.
I may be purchasing one in FLA..
What some of the structural differences if any.. Besides the low bow rail. Fuel tank etc..

Thanks

SK

[TomParis]

I cannot answer the question, be patient there are people on the board who can, but I can provide a website that might be helpful.

http://www.moeslyseacraft.com/

[JohnC]

From what I have read on this forum the Moesly built boats are as good or better than the Potter built. If you do some reading about Moesly you find that he took quality control in the manufacturing process very seriously; he was a race boat designer and builder more than a production boat builder. I wouldn't suggest that Potter was in any way less interested in quality, just that his focus was on successful boat manufacturing rather than making race boats. There are some members here that have Moesly boats that have original wood cored transom & deck but I really don't know if that is because of construction quality or luck of the draw. Most of these old boats need re-coring to be 100%, 40-50 years will do that to a boat.
The Moesly built and the early Potter build boats have 4 stringers instead of 2 box stringers - that's one difference. Some here have said that the 4 stringer is a better design - I'm not sure how much difference it makes but there are some purty smart engineering types here that like it.
Potter raised the deck height somewhere around the mid-70's, that's another difference. I think the higher deck is an improvement since you can't buy 300# motors anymore - the lower deck with a heavy motor means your boat may not be self bailing at rest. In general, if you plan to repower, buy the lightest motor you can find. Opinions may vary!
I am rebuilding a 77 Potter and the one gripe I have about the design is the through-the-bottom deck and box drains; I believe that was part of the Moesly built boats as well but I am not sure. That is the only thing I don't like about these boats; everything else seems to be designed exceedingly well no matter who built it.

[wattaway2]

haven't owned one but from previous post I remember they used a different stringer layout (4) insted of the type Potter used . many think theearlier grid system was at least as good or better . If I remember the fuel tank is in the cc rather than under the floor --I like the tank under the floor myself but??

[Bushwacker]

I believe the change Potter made from Moesly's original 4 stringer design to the 2 box stringers was primarily a cost reduction because it would require less glass and resin, and the change occurred in '73-74 after the first Arab oil embargo when the price of oil, gas and resin went up by 2-3X!. There is no way it can be as stiff as the 4-stringer design, but the fact that it works simply indicates how overbuilt the original Moesly design is! Moesly started out by building the old 21 as light as he thought possible and then raced it to intentionally beat the hell out of it to find any weak spots. Not only did his boats finish races in weather so severe that it destroyed the boats of many competitors, the 21 dominated the outboard classes, so I don't think there were any weak spots! Moesly knew from his racing experience what worked and what didn't. Potter had no boat building experience before he bought the company from Moesly, so whatever he knew he learned from Moesly during a couple of years of working with him before taking over the company. Although I've never heard of a structural problem on a Moesly boat, there have been some rare quality control problems documented on here on a couple of Potter boats - a loose stringer on a 23 and some hull cracks on a 25 Seafari in an area that wasn't built with the ballast tank the way Moesly had designed it.

I believe the scuppers on the Moesly 20's run out the transom instead of down through the bottom, and he may have crossed the drain lines under the deck so port scupper drains out stbd side, etc.

[flyingfrizzle]

Originally Posted by sktenor

Can someone tell me if a 68' Mosley Seacraft is built as well as a potter hull 70's on.
I may be purchasing one in FLA..
What some of the structural differences if any.. Besides the low bow rail. Fuel tank etc..

Thanks

SK

Most are postives. The stronger four stringer system, the drains out the back vs threw the floor, the consoles are smaller (many don't like the wide ones) The fuel tank may be under the console tho and not under the deck. The bow rail lay out is a little different if I remember correctly. The ply wood used seemed to be better. I guy here did a 67 bow rider and it still had solid ply wood in it after all these years. Seems like it had Columba or some odd county name stamped on it. Not sure if it was a better grade ply or if they just took more time soaking it with thinned resin before glassing it. The mosely hulls had a smaller pattern non skid where the potters have the plank deck looking nonskid pattern. One negative thing is that the deck height is lower buy 2" than the latter 74 up hulls so you may want to raise the deck. To me the older the better and better built. One thing to watch for on the older ones is the crazing in the jel coat. If you are luck it will still have the pot metal badges on the sides...

[Terry England]

I located the 4 stringers in my 67 Moesly Bowrider and cut 8 or 10 trapezoid inspection holes in the floor to see what had broken loose in the last 30 years. To my astonishment everything was still stuck together perfectly including the plywood subfloor except for one 12" X 12" spot. I poured some foam in the outer stringer spaces, glued the floor inspection ports back down, and laid a couple of thin matts down on the floor before gelcoating the no-skid in place. That was back in '99. It's still as solid as a bowling alley.
Press on Brother, you're better off with a 69 Moesly that a 2008 Proline, Bayliner, Wellcraft, Aquasport,_________fill in the blanks.

[sktenor]

Thank you all for the insight! I will go forward with confidence now.
This is one amazing forum!
Sktenor
17 mako 1983
21 Seacraft cc 1983
23 2001 contender
24 2007 regulator
2010 divorce no more boats!
2016 back on the block i hope...lol

[Terry England]

Originally Posted by sktenor

Thank you all for the insight! I will go forward with confidence now.
This is one amazing forum!
Sktenor

There are varying opinions about our amazingness! It seems to have a lot to do with introductions and first impressions. Fr. Frank's presence keeps us from using construction site adjectives on some who've earned them!

[gofastsandman]

Originally Posted by sktenor

Thank you all for the insight! I will go forward with confidence now.
This is one amazing forum!
Sktenor
17 mako 1983
21 Seacraft cc 1983
23 2001 contender
24 2007 regulator
2010 divorce no more boats!
2016 back on the block i hope...lol

Confidence can be a double edged sword.

If you are anything like me, check your confidence at the door.
I was the Yankee barney surfboard ding fixer in my youth.

Ask questions before you get closed out surfing the day after `Cane David while the Ron Jons sat watching.

Since you have not yet received your decoder ring, I will explain and
I never do this.

Imagineer to your hearts content, but ask every silly question you can about
layup, glass types, and anything you plan to do before you make the same mistakes
of those of us who have walked before you, and yes, this place rocks.

Many of us have become friends here.
Welcome,
GFS

PS it is spelled Moesly and please visit moeslyseacraft.com