On Mon, 16 May 2005 18:26:34 -0400, "Bert Robbins" wrote:


"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
John H wrote:
On Mon, 16 May 2005 12:48:00 -0400, "Harry.Krause"

wrote:


Capt John wrote:

Your forgetting a few things. That is a hell of a lot of money for a
boat with outboards. I was at the NY boat show where they had one.
Their were lots of people that looked at the price tag and commented
"they can't be serious". And don't think for a minute that boat is
going to hold it's value. Large outboard powered boats drop fast when
the engines start getting hours on them. A thousand to fifteen hundred
hours on outboards is close to, if not the, end of the road, but a
diesel powered boat, their just getting started. By the time you equip
that boat your not that far away from a "real" boat price. Second, that
boat is not going to ride like an inboard powered boat. When the sea's
come up, that throttle is going back. And third, their's just so much
space lost to the outboards as compared to an inboard powered boat. Try
fighting a large, uncooperative fish with those outboards in the way.
Do yourself a favor, wake up, that boat is a bad idea that you'll
regret for a long time.



1. I am not planning on buying one.

2. Boats generally don't hold their value. Gradys do a bit better than
most, though 36' is new territory for the maker.

3. The old adage about diesels just getting "broken in" at 2000 hours may
still be true for the high-displacement, slow turning, naturally
aspirated, relatively low output diesels of the past, but much less so
for most of the modern diesels going into boats today. You'd have to have
two 500 hp diesels to equal the top and cruise speed performance of these
three outboards because of the extra weight of the diesels. And those two
big diesels are going to cost two and a half times as much as these
outboards.

3. With engines and fuel, this GW is going to top 16,000 pounds, I would
guess. More than enough weight for her length, and more than enough to
take on the ocean as well as other boats in her class. I am sure the fuel
tanks are forward.

4. The outboards won't be in the way of fish fighting, unless the fish is
straight down from the transom. If that happens, the captain can spin the
boat so the angler can fight the fish. And since very few sportsmen these
days bring their large sportfish aboard, tag and release can be handled
off the gunwales, as on an inboard boat.

Look, I like inboards myself, but GW is willing to gamble on the market
for its new boat. Based on the several 330s I have seen around, I'd bet
the company sells the few it plans to make each year.


Oh...forgot. With outboards, no diesel smell, no diesel puking.


Nice post, Harry. Informative and not in any way political or full of
name-calling. I would love to have the GW 228. To me it's got just the
right amount of room
for three people to fish and has all the amenities needed for a nice day
with
wife and grandkids. Plus it doesn't cost as much as a nice house in
Solomon's!


Have you looked at the other side of Solomons? Across the bridge? Towards
Point Lookout? I drove out to Point Lookout last year, just to see what
the heck it looked like from the shore. I saw some really nice wooded
neighborhoods with home prices less than what was being sought in Calvert
County. You have to get some few miles past the NAS, though.

You would not believe the prices along the Pax River. They're worse than
the prices for nice houses with land along the ICW in NE Florida. And the
fishing isn't nearly as good.

One problem with property, on the waterfront, in St. Mary's is that if there
is an existing structure you can't tear it down and build one with a bigger
foot print. This is prevent the McMansions from popping up along the
waterfront.


I'm not all that worried about waterfront property. It's a little more than I'd
want to spend anyway. I'd have to be so far up the Pax that I'd never get to the
bay.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."