On 9 Feb 2005 18:12:15 -0800, wrote:

Nonsense.

To do a truly objective test, you not only need to run the compared
boats on the same day under the same conditions, you need to do like
Consumer Reports does and actually buy the products, anonymously, at
retail, from a dealer. Otherwise, how can you be certain that somebody
hasn't "tweaked" something just a bit? In Herring's example, we would
spend what, a quarter million bucks? To make sure we got undoctored
boats for a single article?

I know this is a hard concept for many of you to understand, and the
posts of some here certainly support my observations, but it is
possible to comment on Thing A without running down Thing B or Thing C
at the same time.

Most of the items a shopper will consider are subjective, and subject
to individual preference.

You guys seem to expect an objective comparison between top sirloin,
lamb, and lobster and some definitive answer about which meal is
"best". When you read a restaurant review, do you fault the reviewer
for failing to comment on every other Chinese joint in town?

How about movie critics? Can a critic say anything useful about "Lord
of the Rings" without discussing "Ray", "The Titanic", and "Glory"?

Boat reviews point out the highlights, and any glaring deficiencies in
a boat. You don't read that many with glaring deficiencies because by
the time a builder gets to major mfg status, the market weeds out the
guys building true crap.

I've never seen a major mfg. boat that is totally unsuited for safe and
appropriate use by somebody, under the right conditions. Two equally
knowledgeable boaters will evaluate the same boat, and one might rule
it out immediately and go on to buy something else, while the other
likes it so much he writes a check on the spot. Which one was "right"?
(Hint: most likely both, they simply prioritized different needs).

I really didn't expect an objective, million-dollar test. I just wanted your
subjective opinion of how the three boats compared in your experience.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 08:15:53 -0500, John H
wrote:

On 9 Feb 2005 18:12:15 -0800, wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

I've never seen a major mfg. boat that is totally unsuited for safe and
appropriate use by somebody, under the right conditions. Two equally
knowledgeable boaters will evaluate the same boat, and one might rule
it out immediately and go on to buy something else, while the other
likes it so much he writes a check on the spot. Which one was "right"?
(Hint: most likely both, they simply prioritized different needs).

I really didn't expect an objective, million-dollar test. I just wanted your
subjective opinion of how the three boats compared in your experience.

Any boat looks, rides and feels good first time around - it takes time
to find the little things that annoy or fail. I really like my Ranger
and would hate to part with it, but over the four years I've owned it,
there are things that I notice that annoy the hell out of me - the
worst being the placement of the forward seat post.

That's why I have a thing about Bluefin boats. They aren't the
prettiest nor are they cosmetically perfect, but the damn things ride
like a dream in all weather, are very nicely fit out for fishing and
tough as hell.

Another boat that I have been consistently impressed with are the
Polar series boats. They are good looking, form/fit/function are damn
close to perfect and they are very nicely laid out from an ergonomic
standpoint.

We've had this magazine "pro/con" debate before. For my money, if you
want a truly objective report, ask owners about the boat, not the
dealer. A lot of negative boat reports are related to the dealer, not
the boat. You can get a good idea from the manufacturer's information
and reading "test" reports in the magazines, but you will get closer
to the truth by asking owners.

Later,

Tom

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:38:56 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 08:15:53 -0500, John H
wrote:

On 9 Feb 2005 18:12:15 -0800, wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

I've never seen a major mfg. boat that is totally unsuited for safe and
appropriate use by somebody, under the right conditions. Two equally
knowledgeable boaters will evaluate the same boat, and one might rule
it out immediately and go on to buy something else, while the other
likes it so much he writes a check on the spot. Which one was "right"?
(Hint: most likely both, they simply prioritized different needs).

I really didn't expect an objective, million-dollar test. I just wanted your
subjective opinion of how the three boats compared in your experience.

Any boat looks, rides and feels good first time around - it takes time
to find the little things that annoy or fail. I really like my Ranger
and would hate to part with it, but over the four years I've owned it,
there are things that I notice that annoy the hell out of me - the
worst being the placement of the forward seat post.

That's why I have a thing about Bluefin boats. They aren't the
prettiest nor are they cosmetically perfect, but the damn things ride
like a dream in all weather, are very nicely fit out for fishing and
tough as hell.

Another boat that I have been consistently impressed with are the
Polar series boats. They are good looking, form/fit/function are damn
close to perfect and they are very nicely laid out from an ergonomic
standpoint.

We've had this magazine "pro/con" debate before. For my money, if you
want a truly objective report, ask owners about the boat, not the
dealer. A lot of negative boat reports are related to the dealer, not
the boat. You can get a good idea from the manufacturer's information
and reading "test" reports in the magazines, but you will get closer
to the truth by asking owners.

Later,

Tom

Agree with what you say, although I've found that owners are usually somewhat
biased.

I thought, if Chuck had 'test driven' the three boats he could provide some
feedback on his perceptions.

If he can't, he can't. No big deal.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

John,
Gould will not give you an opinion because he doesn't want to bite the hand
that feeds him. He gets paid to make every boat he reviews seem like the
best thing since sliced bread. If he ever gave an honest review he would be
scared he might loose ad revenue.

Would you believe any movie reviewer who loved every movie he reviewed?



"John H" wrote in message
...
I really didn't expect an objective, million-dollar test. I just wanted
your
subjective opinion of how the three boats compared in your experience.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to
resolve it."
Rene Descartes