jps wrote:

"Mole" wrote in message
. net...
You're telling me this is a 2003 Trophy with major problems and he just
accepts this? Hull cracks (10 year warranty)? Shorts (possble fire
hazard)? Windshield falling off? Won't track (does he KNOW how to trim
it)? Cushions already falling apart (under warranty and easily replaced
if
true)? My 2003 Trophy has more hours on it, has taken a pounding and
hasn't
exhibited ANY of the things you mention. In fact she looks like she
belongs
on the showroom floor. Are you sure you LOOKED at his boat? If it were
mine, I'd have the dealer replace it. Or is this just another old wives
tale about the Bayliner brand? But...a Trophy isn't a Bayliner
anymore...hasn't been in 3 years. A Brunswick group boat, yes, but a
Bayliner? No.

My brother has a 28' Trophy and it's actually a pretty nice boat, certainly
in comparison to the ski boat and the cruiser lines bayliner puts out. He
had plenty of trouble and it took several trips back to the dealer to get
them straightened out.

It has a real head. The only trouble is, because of how it's designed, if
you're more than 5' 9" you can't stand up to take a ****. You've got to
lean with your head cranked sideways against the bulkhead.

Fit and finish is much better than the other bayliner products if witnessed.



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.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

A few weeks ago, I put 250+ miles on one of my boats over a three day
weekend. But I didn't encounter any eight-footers. I check the weather
before I head out, and if eight-footers are predicted, I find something
else to do that day.


Interesting. You put 250+ miles in a three day weekend. Something *I
also Have done* , Just not on a sixteen foot boat.

Harry what difference does it make whether I use miles, nautical miles
or hours? If your such a purist why did you use the term?

I use the term miles because it better implies experience. Anyone could
put 500 hours on an engine trolling, that would far exceed my time on
the boat, but not necessarily my experience. I have no problem standing
by my terminology, and no problem in considering your need to dismiss my
terminology as stupid arrogance.

Going out in eight footers is NOT my first choice for boating, but if
family and work comittments call, and I'm already away from homeport, it
may be considered.

But as I've seen in other posts, you've ignored the point. Choosing
instead to pick apart inconsequencial points of my argument.


Maybe it is because I have no desire to win a Darwin Award.


We only regret that your ancestors didn't feel the same way...

BOB wrote:


A few weeks ago, I put 250+ miles on one of my boats over a three day
weekend. But I didn't encounter any eight-footers. I check the weather
before I head out, and if eight-footers are predicted, I find something
else to do that day.


Interesting. You put 250+ miles in a three day weekend. Something *I
also Have done* , Just not on a sixteen foot boat.

Harry what difference does it make whether I use miles, nautical miles
or hours? If your such a purist why did you use the term?

It makes no difference to me. It just makes you look silly.




I use the term miles because it better implies experience. Anyone could
put 500 hours on an engine trolling, that would far exceed my time on
the boat, but not necessarily my experience.

Really? Miles equals experience? Not necessarily.



I have no problem standing
by my terminology, and no problem in considering your need to dismiss my
terminology as stupid arrogance.

I don't believe your terminology is stupid arrogance. More like stupid
ignorance.



Going out in eight footers is NOT my first choice for boating, but if
family and work comittments call, and I'm already away from homeport, it
may be considered.

As I stated, stupid ignorance. Unless you have to do so, going out in a
small boat on the Great Lakes while eight foot waves are about is stupid
ignorance. It puts you at great risk. And it also puts at great risk
those who might have to go out after you. It's dumb. We're not talking
eight-foot ocean swells here.


Maybe it is because I have no desire to win a Darwin Award.


We only regret that your ancestors didn't feel the same way...


No, they didn't. And they passed along genes to me that make me bright
enough to not want to earn one, either.

Perhaps you feel more comfortable with the Forrest Gump Award: Stupid is
as stupid does.


--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Bob D. wrote:

I have yet to see anyone offer any significant
empirical data, even significant anectdotal evidence, that any boat of a
given brand name is clearly superior or inferior to another brand name,
when factoring in things like initial cost, and care.

Oh? Try going 30 miles offshore in a Bayliner and a boat of similar
sized designed for ocean use.

df--

While Catalina Island is only 26nm from the coast of California, I
suggest you look at the number of Bayliner's moored there.

I believe it's been "tried".

Dionysus Feldman wrote:

Bob D. wrote:

I have yet to see anyone offer any significant
empirical data, even significant anectdotal evidence, that any boat of a
given brand name is clearly superior or inferior to another brand name,
when factoring in things like initial cost, and care.

Oh? Try going 30 miles offshore in a Bayliner and a boat of similar
sized designed for ocean use.

df--

While Catalina Island is only 26nm from the coast of California, I
suggest you look at the number of Bayliner's moored there.

I believe it's been "tried".


I suppose I should qualify my remarks, because there are substantial
differences between the sea state of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans
most of the time.

Typically, the Atlantic is a far tougher body of water to boat and fish
in than the Pacific, along most of the United States coastal areas and,
on the Atlantic, out to where the Gulf Stream is (north of Florida, of
course).

Despite the substantial number of Bayliner sales, you rarely see any out
in the Atlantic, outside of sight of shore, and, in fact, I rarely see
any out in the Atlantic, close to shore. A Bayliner sighting in the
Atlantic was an unusual occurence off the shores of NE Florida, where I
spent hundreds and hundreds of hours boating and fishing.


--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Ooops. Uh,Oh..


In article 2tCfb.496627$cF.175117@rwcrnsc53, "Clams Canino"
wrote:

Hey! I resemble that remark! (I'm left handed)

Not only that, but you risk the ire of the entire left wing of the NG!

-W

"Bob D." wrote in message
news:sailbad_d_sinner-

(paraphrased)

Ya were sounding like a reasonable guy, until that last left-handed
comment.

I don't know much about the pacific, but I would have thought the fetch and
the prevailing winds would have made the pacific rougher than the atlantic.
Why isn't that true?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news
Dionysus Feldman wrote:

Bob D. wrote:

I have yet to see anyone offer any significant
empirical data, even significant anectdotal evidence, that any boat
of a
given brand name is clearly superior or inferior to another brand
name,
when factoring in things like initial cost, and care.

Oh? Try going 30 miles offshore in a Bayliner and a boat of similar
sized designed for ocean use.

df--

While Catalina Island is only 26nm from the coast of California, I
suggest you look at the number of Bayliner's moored there.

I believe it's been "tried".


I suppose I should qualify my remarks, because there are substantial
differences between the sea state of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans
most of the time.

Typically, the Atlantic is a far tougher body of water to boat and fish
in than the Pacific, along most of the United States coastal areas and,
on the Atlantic, out to where the Gulf Stream is (north of Florida, of
course).

Despite the substantial number of Bayliner sales, you rarely see any out
in the Atlantic, outside of sight of shore, and, in fact, I rarely see
any out in the Atlantic, close to shore. A Bayliner sighting in the
Atlantic was an unusual occurence off the shores of NE Florida, where I
spent hundreds and hundreds of hours boating and fishing.


--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

+500 miles along the SE Atlantic coast with boating weather Damn near
365 days a year. When do you Buckeyes start putting your boats into
"hibernation" for the winter? Later this month or, is it already under
way? (BTW, 80F w/a 10kt N wind & scattered showers here tomorrow)

If it's a large area, do you mean to tell me you know EVERY charter
boat in
that area???

Find a six pack, offshore, charter that uses a Bayliner and prove me
wrong.

Oh I see... in a +500 mile strech of coatline you *know* that no one
uses a Bayliner for any Commerical applications. You pull a statement
completely out of you ass and it's up to me to prove it wrong? Yeah,
Scott, I'll go jump on that.

Just for argument, how many of those captains use Chris-Crafts, Jerseys,
Larsons, Wellcrafts, Four Winns, etc... Specifically are there any
other Brands that are absent? If so does that mean those boats are
inferior too? If so how come no one in this miserable group takes the
time to point a finger in those boats' direction? Why? My guess, it's
because a few people in this group are wannabe boating elitest, with
little real knowledge on any given boats capabilities (except hopefiully
their own), so they pick an easy target.

Possible past Bayliner quality control problems, cheaper price, cheaper
fit and finish, and lower power offerings of the base models, along
previous unsubstainted ramblings for other ignorant elitest, conspire to
make Bayline an easy target for people who have this childish need to
pooh pooh a boat that is not their brand but are too intellectually lazy
to put together a reasonable argument. Rather than qualify their
remarks, they simply dribble "Bayliner baaaad", because that brand has
least chance of being disputed, perpetuating ignorance, and setting up
the brand name for future attack.



And even if you do, does this directly means that all Bayliners are
crap???

No, what it "means" is that Bayliners are totally absent amoung
experienced Captains who rely upon their boat for a living.

Don't you wonder why not a single one of these captains have selected
such a "popular" brand of boat to rely upon?


Okay, I'll bite. "I wonder why Bayliners are not popular among this
small contingent of boaters". What's you response "'cuz dey suk!"?
Flawless logic indeed. Why don't you just tell me specifically what you
are trying to convey?

Also can we please try to argue with facts instead of implying something
from a small groupof people? Seriously, I can take a group of perch
fishermen or walleys fishermen on Lake Erie have a sample of more than
170 Boats, just like the referenced website, and have few if any Boston
Whalers present in that sample. What does than mean? Nothing.



Also doe this lacking of Bayliners (specifically Trophys) mean the boat
is
not suitable for the hardcore offshore and inshore fishing, but a 14
foot
aluminium bass boat is?

There were a couple of pictures of "14' aluminium bass boats" which is
more than we can say about Bayliner, isn't it?

Astonishing, given Bayliner's "popularity", don't you think?


So once again you imply a 14 aluminium boat is better equipped for than
a closed bow bayliner Trophy????? Really???? Isn't your ass getting a
little sore from pulling out all those comments?




Some of us, however, are a bit more demanding.

Whoa there.... Scott. Ya started off kinda jerky, but then were
sounding
like a pretty reasonable guy, until that last left-handed comment.

I endeavor to be a jerk all of the time but as you can see, nobody's
perfect.

Keep it up, you getting closer I think you're getting to your goal.

Contrary to what many elitest believe, the boat don't make the skipper.
I've been out in a 16' Bayliner in 6-8's in Lake Erie (And let me tell
you, those are NOT ocean swells).

Wave interval is a much more important factor, right?


Yes it is. And Lake Erie's shallow dept increase the frequency.

Tell you what, tough guy, bring a 16' Bayliner to Ponce or Sebastian
when a strong onshore wind is opposing an outgoing tide and go out
past the formidable "standing men" that form in either inlet. I'll
watch from my Whaler, ready for the inevitable rescue attempt. If you
make it, I'll be so impressed I promise to quit ragging on Bayliners
right here and now.

A final word of advice:

"Let me tell you, those are NOT ocean swells"
--
SJM

Uh.. Yeah, Scott... Once agin I'll jump right on it and am leaving
right now because I really need yto show you.

I have no problems taking your word on your local boating conditions. I
won't presume I can take a 16 foot Bayliner or ANY BOAT into waters that
I have absolutely no experience with. If your comment is that my
boating environment is not demanding, and that is the reason, I am
happy with Bayliners, then it is you who need to take my word that I
have been in Bayliners in demanding conditions, or come up her and see
for yourself. Better yet go to www.boatnerd.com and look for
information on Lake Erie.

I try to be a reasonable person in my original assertion that not all
Bayliners are crappy. I've never asserted that any Bayliner can be
taken anywhere, competing with any other boat in any category.

I don't make absolute statements about a five hundred mile coastline one
cannot possibly be 100% familiar with, then tell people who aren't even
local to the area to "prove me wrong". I don't take a small sample of
people and say there are no Bayliners present so "what does that tell
you", to infer Bayliners are inferior.

What I do assert is that in MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE the Bayliners I have
owned and been and other Brands I have owned and been on, is that
Bayliners seem just as capable in rough boating conditions as a
comparable Wellcraft, Larson, Chris-Craft, Four Winns, etc... This
means that not all Bayliners can be dismissed as crap, and people who
feel the need to single out and dismiss all Bayliners, are behaving in
an ignorant manner.

If you feel the need to keep ragging on all Bayliners, becuase I am
unwilling to drive thousands of miles to prove it to you, well the have
fun with pounding your chest chanting "Bayliner baaaad. My boat
gooood." with Harry, and the lemmings in the Our Gang He Man Bayliner
Hater's Club.


Bob Dimond

BOB wrote:

+500 miles along the SE Atlantic coast with boating weather Damn near
365 days a year. When do you Buckeyes start putting your boats into
"hibernation" for the winter? Later this month or, is it already under
way? (BTW, 80F w/a 10kt N wind & scattered showers here tomorrow)

If it's a large area, do you mean to tell me you know EVERY charter
boat in
that area???

Find a six pack, offshore, charter that uses a Bayliner and prove me
wrong.

Oh I see... in a +500 mile strech of coatline you *know* that no one
uses a Bayliner for any Commerical applications. You pull a statement
completely out of you ass and it's up to me to prove it wrong? Yeah,
Scott, I'll go jump on that.

There was one six pack captain operating out of the area between St.
Mary's, Georgia, and St. Augustine, Florida, who ran a Bayliner Trophy
center console for inshore ocean fishing and on the ICW. He was the only
one I ever encountered in more than five years of fishing those waters
several times a week.

The most popular ICW boats for charter captains were Carolina Skiffs.

Outside the inlets, Whalers, Gradys, Contenders, Makos (lotsa older
Makos) and a dozen other brands were common among the hired captains. No
Tropnies.


Just for argument, how many of those captains use Chris-Crafts, Jerseys,
Larsons, Wellcrafts, Four Winns,

Chris Craft, Larson and Four Winns aren't in the salt water fishing boat
builder category. Bayliner is. Lotsa Wellcrafts were about, especially
the older 20 footers.



Possible past Bayliner quality control problems, cheaper price, cheaper
fit and finish, and lower power offerings of the base models, along
previous unsubstainted ramblings for other ignorant elitest, conspire to
make Bayline an easy target for people who have this childish need to
pooh pooh a boat that is not their brand but are too intellectually lazy
to put together a reasonable argument

There you go. You have your own list of Bayliner shortcomings.





--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

In article ,
wrote:

Bob, with all due respect, you're sounding almost as religious and
fanatical as the anti-Bayliner faction.


I think I see your point, but I don't agree with it. Wayne, if you've
been reading my posts, I don't mind people not liking the brand,
I've never made any inference, or assertion saying how wonerful
Bayliners are. I've simply used personal experience to counter the same
unsubstanciated "all bayliners are crap" comments that the same few
people keep tossing out without any solicitation, or provocation. It's
rude, it belittles fellow boaters in this group, and I'm sick of it.

So how does that make me a zealot? Because I won't go contrary to my
actual experiences and and agree with those who make outragously broad
claims that all Bayliners are inferior, based on little or no experiece?


The facts are that you're
happy with you're Bayliner and it serves you're purposes and the type
of boating you like to do. That's wonderful. I've never owned one
but there is clearly a place for them in the market. It's also a
general truism however that most Bayliners have no business offshore,
especially in salt water. They weren't made for it, and it's not
really debatable except among fanatics or the uninformed.


Why Wayne, is this statement a truism? Why is the 2160 Trophy I've
owned with a deep vee hull and closed cooled system, not suitable for
salt water? While nobody points this out for lets say a Wellcraft with
a mercruiser raw water cooling system? I've never put a Bayliner in
salt water, so I'm not disputing what you say, just looking for the
information supporting the statement.

But that's my problem, Wayne. Too many people spout these negative
"truisms" without any substanciation, and almost exclusively at
Bayliner.

If someone said "I think Bayliners are bad for salt water use because
they do not use stainless steel fittings" I could not only accept the
statement, but learn something from it. But when some old windbag
answers a legitimate question to someone who asks "I just bought a new
bayliner, what other equipment sdo I need" with "A new boat.", than it
does a disservice to bayliner owners as well as the rec.boats community
as a whole. This type of behavior is unfair, it is irresponsible, and
it is bad taste.


Bob Dimond