The man of a thousand screen names bitched:

You boat review provided a valuable service, because it highlighted the
need
for boat buyers to take what they read in boat mags with a grain of
salt.

**********************

Yeah, yeah. Yawn. Say, when was the last time you or Hurtwit posted
anything *on* topic?
How much salt is required to deal with a guy who hangs out in a boating
NG and doesn't boat?

wrote:
Chuck, how would you rate the 260 Defiance against a 26' Osprey or a
27' Sea
Sport? (Or the 24' Sea Sport, for that matter.)

****************************

I wouldn't.

To make an accurate comparison you'd need to do a side-by side test on
the same day, under the same conditions, and rigged with similar or
identical engines. The most significant portion of a comparison that is
extremely subjective, (therefore subject to a variety of personal
opinions), is the degree of satisfaction with performance and handling
and the "feel" of the boat underway. Other subjective things are
ergonomics, overall appearance, etc....and reasonable people will come
to different conclusions, (explaining why so many different brands of
boats sell well).

Most of the objective differences will be outlined in the factory
specs.

As far as the subjective impressions and opinions go, consider me like
Faux News, John. I report- you decide. :-)


Be very careful listening to this ex used car salesman, ex used boat
salesman, ex .........person John, I say he's repeatedly over many years
now, has deliberately mis "reported", construction, fuel usage, etc etc
etc :-) Initially I was prepared to put his technical faux pas down to
being a new boater & a bit simple, however given the total lack of his
"errors" ever going against the seller??? Hmmm curiouser & curiouser.

It seems he might just leave out anything he perceives to be a negative
to sales, indeed I'd suggest he just parrots the seller's marketing line:-)

As if there's any doubt about his mental processes??? when given the
choice between admitting he's a boating illiterate or maybe bent he by
default chose both!!!:-)



K



So just in case you harbour even the slightest reservations about how
dangerous this psycho Krause actually is???

Even after he has real life stalked 2 of the female NG contributors
over the years?? if that's not worrying enough then have a look at what
in his lying mind he's actually proud of;


I came home early one day, tapped the garage door opener in the car and
voila! There was a strange car in the garage with an even stranger
couple completing their Christmas shopping by loading up their car with
my wife's jewelry and my electronics.

The burglars saw me, obviously, and as the male ran across the back of
the garage to get into his car, I drove forward with my Ford truck and
pinned him ever so gently between my Ford front bumper and his car's
rear bumper. And then I drove forward a leeeeeeetle bit more and gave
him a leg fracture.

then when people said how crazy this lie was; he doesn't stop he just
lies in a higher gear:-)

I'll modify it, just for you, stunatz:

I've been driving for more than 40 years without causing or receiving an
injury, *except* for the time I deliberately broke a burglar's leg by
crushing
it between the front bumper of my Ford F150 truck and the rear bumper of his
car.

Mo' betta?

On 9 Feb 2005 19:00:03 -0800, wrote:

A shame. And quite juvenile.


Grow up Chucky. OK? ;-)

***************

What name calling?

As for the rest, if you make an outrageous statement you have to be
prepared for an equally outrageous response.

We libs have a saying: "What goes around comes around......" Expect no
less.

(There's no need to repost your entire harangue when I'm only taking
issue with the most asinine line or two.)

Chuck! I'm ashamed. Here you've been calling yourself an 'independent' (as I
am), then a 'progressive' (whatever the hell that is), and now a 'lib'.

Well?

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 9 Feb 2005 16:25:40 -0800, wrote:

Chuck, how would you rate the 260 Defiance against a 26' Osprey or a
27' Sea
Sport? (Or the 24' Sea Sport, for that matter.)

****************************

I wouldn't.

To make an accurate comparison you'd need to do a side-by side test on
the same day, under the same conditions, and rigged with similar or
identical engines. The most significant portion of a comparison that is
extremely subjective, (therefore subject to a variety of personal
opinions), is the degree of satisfaction with performance and handling
and the "feel" of the boat underway. Other subjective things are
ergonomics, overall appearance, etc....and reasonable people will come
to different conclusions, (explaining why so many different brands of
boats sell well).

Most of the objective differences will be outlined in the factory
specs.

As far as the subjective impressions and opinions go, consider me like
Faux News, John. I report- you decide. :-)

Well, luckily, Fox *does* show both sides of most issues with reps from each
position. Of course, if you don't watch Fox, as I suppose you don't, then you
wouldn't notice that.

I simply wanted your impressions of the three boats. The 260 Defiance sounded
great in your write-up, but there was nothing with which to compare it. I was
looking for *your* subjective comparison.

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 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

Gould,
The post you responded to was on topic. Boat reviews in magazines are fluff
pieces for the boat builder, they read like the boat manufacturer gave you
the piece and you just signed your name. Karen calls these posts SPAM, and
they are. I am amazed you actually try to convenience anyone they aren't.

A new boater should understand the boat magazines make money by using their
fluff PR pieces to sell ads and to sell reprints of the articles so the
dealers can give them to everyone interested in the boat.

Your contention that the reviews are always positive because every boat
design is superb and all boat manufactures build quality boats shows you
believe the buyers are gullible. Everyone who has responded to my statement
that boat reviews are fluff PR pieces have agreed with me. NO boater in the
group buys into your BS.


oups.com...
The man of a thousand screen names bitched:

You boat review provided a valuable service, because it highlighted the
need
for boat buyers to take what they read in boat mags with a grain of
salt.

**********************

Yeah, yeah. Yawn. Say, when was the last time you or Hurtwit posted
anything *on* topic?
How much salt is required to deal with a guy who hangs out in a boating
NG and doesn't boat?

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

"Dr. Karen Grear MD, PHD" wrote in message
...
Gould,
The post you responded to was on topic. Boat reviews in magazines are
fluff pieces for the boat builder, they read like the boat manufacturer
gave you the piece and you just signed your name. Karen calls these posts
SPAM, and they are. I am amazed you actually try to convenience anyone
they aren't.

A new boater should understand the boat magazines make money by using
their fluff PR pieces to sell ads and to sell reprints of the articles so
the dealers can give them to everyone interested in the boat.

Your contention that the reviews are always positive because every boat
design is superb and all boat manufactures build quality boats shows you
believe the buyers are gullible. Everyone who has responded to my
statement that boat reviews are fluff PR pieces have agreed with me.

Boating magazine is one of the worse. But, hey, what do you expect? They're
a French-owned company.

Powerboat Reports seems very objective in their reviews, however.

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Dr. Karen Grear MD, PHD" wrote in message
...
Gould,
The post you responded to was on topic. Boat reviews in magazines are
fluff pieces for the boat builder, they read like the boat manufacturer
gave you the piece and you just signed your name. Karen calls these
posts SPAM, and they are. I am amazed you actually try to convenience
anyone they aren't.

A new boater should understand the boat magazines make money by using
their fluff PR pieces to sell ads and to sell reprints of the articles so
the dealers can give them to everyone interested in the boat.

Your contention that the reviews are always positive because every boat
design is superb and all boat manufactures build quality boats shows you
believe the buyers are gullible. Everyone who has responded to my
statement that boat reviews are fluff PR pieces have agreed with me.

Boating magazine is one of the worse.

"worst"