Scout expanded their manufacturing facility in Summerville, SC to start building this boat and a couple of 30 something footers as well. Wow, what a boat!

http://www.scoutboats.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/420LXF-flyer-FINAL-update.pdf

Very nice boats. Way pricy but very very nice boats!

On 12/23/14 10:44 AM, Tim wrote:
Very nice boats. Way pricy but very very nice boats!



Scout has always made some interesting fishing boats, but the idea of a
boat that size and weight with four 300+ gasoline outboards on it can
only make the oil companies smile.

I'd think though that if you can afford the boat then you can afford the fuel. At least for the moment.

On 12/24/14 12:03 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:05:00 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/23/14 10:44 AM, Tim wrote:
Very nice boats. Way pricy but very very nice boats!



Scout has always made some interesting fishing boats, but the idea of a
boat that size and weight with four 300+ gasoline outboards on it can
only make the oil companies smile.

That is why they make the 7 Marine ;-)
Two of them would make this a pretty fast boat.
Three would make it really fast.

Like Tim says, if money is an issue, you would not be buying this.



Well, i think the decision regarding the fuel burn should involved more
than "can I afford the gasoline."

On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 12:15:50 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/24/14 12:03 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:05:00 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/23/14 10:44 AM, Tim wrote:
Very nice boats. Way pricy but very very nice boats!



Scout has always made some interesting fishing boats, but the idea of a
boat that size and weight with four 300+ gasoline outboards on it can
only make the oil companies smile.

That is why they make the 7 Marine ;-)
Two of them would make this a pretty fast boat.
Three would make it really fast.

Like Tim says, if money is an issue, you would not be buying this.



Well, i think the decision regarding the fuel burn should involved more
than "can I afford the gasoline."

===

We agree on something: I think the decision should involved more
also.

On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 00:16:36 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 12:15:50 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/24/14 12:03 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:05:00 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/23/14 10:44 AM, Tim wrote:
Very nice boats. Way pricy but very very nice boats!



Scout has always made some interesting fishing boats, but the idea of a
boat that size and weight with four 300+ gasoline outboards on it can
only make the oil companies smile.

That is why they make the 7 Marine ;-)
Two of them would make this a pretty fast boat.
Three would make it really fast.

Like Tim says, if money is an issue, you would not be buying this.



Well, i think the decision regarding the fuel burn should involved more
than "can I afford the gasoline."

Most of the people who buy boats like this, do not have the time to
actually use them much so I don't see the issue.

I bet they burned far more fuel in their Gulf Stream, just getting to
the boat.

===

Absolutely right. If you want to start limiting conspicuous
consumption of fossil fuels, start with the private jets. Boats are
almost efficient by comparison.

I wonder how much energy we could save by shutting down the internet
in Maryland?

On 12/23/14 1:35 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 00:16:36 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 12:15:50 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/24/14 12:03 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:05:00 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/23/14 10:44 AM, Tim wrote:
Very nice boats. Way pricy but very very nice boats!



Scout has always made some interesting fishing boats, but the idea of a
boat that size and weight with four 300+ gasoline outboards on it can
only make the oil companies smile.

That is why they make the 7 Marine ;-)
Two of them would make this a pretty fast boat.
Three would make it really fast.

Like Tim says, if money is an issue, you would not be buying this.



Well, i think the decision regarding the fuel burn should involved more
than "can I afford the gasoline."

Most of the people who buy boats like this, do not have the time to
actually use them much so I don't see the issue.

I bet they burned far more fuel in their Gulf Stream, just getting to
the boat.

===

Absolutely right. If you want to start limiting conspicuous
consumption of fossil fuels, start with the private jets. Boats are
almost efficient by comparison.

I wonder how much energy we could save by shutting down the internet
in Maryland?



I did not state or imply there should be limitations on consumption of
fossil fuels. I said the decision should involve more than "can I afford
the gasoline." As for what private planes consume, well, that's probably
a good issue for a private plane newsgroup.

Your snarky remark ignored, Wayne.

As always, have nice day.

wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:05:00 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/23/14 10:44 AM, Tim wrote:
Very nice boats. Way pricy but very very nice boats!


Scout has always made some interesting fishing boats, but the idea of a
boat that size and weight with four 300+ gasoline outboards on it can
only make the oil companies smile.
That is why they make the 7 Marine ;-)
Two of them would make this a pretty fast boat.
Three would make it really fast.

Like Tim says, if money is an issue, you would not be buying this.

If I didn't pay my income taxes I could afford one.

On Thu, 25 Dec 2014 07:57:15 -0500, BAR wrote:

Doesn't the world
owe you a high standard of living just because you exist.

===

Only if you're "special". Then the normal rules don't apply.