Sorry, just one more.

Hey Spanky " I'm impartial, and don't just categorically hate Bayliners"
Krause:

Where or how in my four sentences, did I refute your selection criteria?

What I did do was point out what runs contrary to what you've repeatedly
try to tell me, that is, to quote you directly:

"I've never implied Bayliners were the only crappy boats."

You've just proven my point about your unfounded bigotry. Brands A-Z
CAN, AND DO the same thing the same way. Radar Arch, Gas Tank,
Interior, and I/O. The shortcommings you address as:

"typical of Bayliner

are in fact typical in the entire marine industry. But only Bayliner
gets maligned by you.

No only do you miss the point in trying to comprehend my posts. It's
obvious you don't even comprehend what YOU POST.

If you did, you would not dispute what I've been saying ALL THIS TIME
that you unfairly single out bayliners, for you derrogatory comments.

(shaking his head) WOW...





BOB wrote:

Yeah Harry. Typical. Only bayliner uses an I/O, Radar Arch, and "RV
decorated interior" on a 28 foot boat.

It's typical alright. Typical Harry Krause.




Bayliner has a 28' cruiser, the 288 model, that isn't a bad-looking
boat, and, in fact, I took a look at one a couple of years ago.
But...typical of Bayliner, it had some serious shortcomings, starting
with a much-too-small fuel tank and an I/O drive instead of an
inboard
or at least a vee-drive. And the interior was decorated like an RV.
Without the idiotic radar arch, though, it is an attractive,
traditional
cruiser, suitable for the Bay or the ICW. But it is a bit overpriced
for
what it is.


Well, Bob, I use my criteria in selection boats, not yours. I don't like
I/O drives, especially in salt water environments; I don't like ugly
radar arches, and I don't like boats decorated so that they look like
RVs. I also like believe a 28' boat should have a larger fuel tank than
what Bayliner offers on that model.

Obviously, your tastes are different.