First point is minor but oft repeated in the marine press: Boat
speeds for salt water boats should be quoted in knots, not mph.

I agree. However, Dick had his plotter reading in MPH and I also agree that
it's a very minor point. I reported what I saw, which was a GPS reading in MPH.

Second point, it is unrealistic (and misleading) to review the boat
with a specific engine configuration, and then quote a price at the
end of the article with out engines.

Well, we disagree on that point. It *would* be misleading to describe the boat,
quote a price and conveniently forget to mention that the figure doesn't
include engines. However, that isn't how the article reads.
C-Dory recommends Honda engines, but a buyer is free to specify any brand of
engine and C-Dory will rig the boat accordingly. Since there are any number of
engines a buyer *could* choose, the price with engiens will be all over the
map. The perspective is that there are at least two separate shopping
decisions, the boat is one- the engines another- and maybe a trailer for the
third.

I'm guessing that the price as
tested was at least $70,000. That's quite a jump from $49,999 or
whatever. Even the car magazines, which are not exactly a bastion of
impartiality, quote prices "as tested". If they can do it, you can
too.

My statement, "if you bought every single item on the options list the total
would be in the high 50's" (without engines) is absolutely accurate. I think
C-Dory has their price llist on line- check it and see. What is not accurate is
your assumption that the *real* figure must be $70,000. The owner had some
personal gear and electronics aboard that
were custom ad-ons, but except for some canvas, those items weren't included in
the description. (Everybody expects to pay for custom canvas).

Chuck, I enjoy your boat reviews but feel obliged to comment once in a
while in the interest of journalistic accuracy. Sorry if that
offends, but at least you know someone is paying attention. :-)
And believe me, this is not my "worst", not even close.

Nor did I have you in mind when I commented I was half reluctant to post this
item. Your critique is objective, not based on a bunch of wild,
unsubstantiated, acrimonious, personal allegations. That's what a discussion is
about, looking at an idea from several perspectives.