My father-in-law and I are considering the purchase of a 1982 Sea Ray 260
Sundancer. I'm wondering about the build quality of Sea Rays from this time
frame (pre Brunswick) but have not had much success finding any information.
I'd like to know some general history of Sea Ray boats from this era before
we spend the money on a survey. Why waste the money on a survey if the
general consensus is the boats from this time are not worth the effort? Are
there any specific websites that could address this, or do the posters here
have any general comments?

Thanks in advance,
Scott Collins
Newcastle, WA

My father-in-law and I are considering the purchase of a 1982 Sea Ray 260
Sundancer. I'm wondering about the build quality of Sea Rays from this time
frame (pre Brunswick) but have not had much success finding any information.
I'd like to know some general history of Sea Ray boats from this era before
we spend the money on a survey. Why waste the money on a survey if the
general consensus is the boats from this time are not worth the effort? Are
there any specific websites that could address this, or do the posters here
have any general comments?

Thanks in advance,
Scott Collins
Newcastle, WA

In 1982, Sea Ray was the second largest builder of pleasure boats. Right behind
Bayliner. The company was owned by the original founder, Connie Ray, until
1986.

I can't find any record of a 260 Sundancer from 1982. There was a 270 built
from 82-88. If the boat has a ten foot beam, it's a 270. Any boats in the 260
series have 8'6" beams.

Sea Ray introduced the mid-cabin configuration about 1982, and that is
technically what separates a "Sundancer"
from an express cruiser.

Sea Ray has always built a decent boat.
Some contemporary detractors will moan,
"They don't build 'em like they used to....."
but by 1982 Sea Ray had been building boats for a little over two decades and
had earned a solid reputation.

That said, a 20 year old boat of *any* brand can be junk, or in good shape.
Depends a lot on how its been maintained.
Your 1982 Sea Ray started off as a pretty good boat, but only a thorough survey
will reveal if it's still worth owning.

Thanks Chuck. On NADA's website, they listed a "SRV 260 Sundancer" with an
8' beam, but the seller's ad says 8'6" beam. Also, NADA shows 2 engines for
this model, and this boat has only one. Weird. I have seen some '82 260
Sundancers for sale on Boattrader.com also. I'm inclined to believe it is a
"Weekender" as opposed to a "Sundancer" but it does have the mid cabin.
I've been out to look at it yet, so I'm just going off the information from
the ad and from my father-in-law. Anyway, it sounds like it it worth
pursuing with inspections, sea trials, survey, etc.

Thanks!
Scott Collins
Newcastle, WA

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
My father-in-law and I are considering the purchase of a 1982 Sea Ray 260
Sundancer. I'm wondering about the build quality of Sea Rays from this
time
frame (pre Brunswick) but have not had much success finding any
information.
I'd like to know some general history of Sea Ray boats from this era
before
we spend the money on a survey. Why waste the money on a survey if the
general consensus is the boats from this time are not worth the effort?
Are
there any specific websites that could address this, or do the posters
here
have any general comments?

Thanks in advance,
Scott Collins
Newcastle, WA

In 1982, Sea Ray was the second largest builder of pleasure boats. Right
behind
Bayliner. The company was owned by the original founder, Connie Ray, until
1986.

I can't find any record of a 260 Sundancer from 1982. There was a 270
built
from 82-88. If the boat has a ten foot beam, it's a 270. Any boats in the
260
series have 8'6" beams.

Sea Ray introduced the mid-cabin configuration about 1982, and that is
technically what separates a "Sundancer"
from an express cruiser.

Sea Ray has always built a decent boat.
Some contemporary detractors will moan,
"They don't build 'em like they used to....."
but by 1982 Sea Ray had been building boats for a little over two decades
and
had earned a solid reputation.

That said, a 20 year old boat of *any* brand can be junk, or in good
shape.
Depends a lot on how its been maintained.
Your 1982 Sea Ray started off as a pretty good boat, but only a thorough
survey
will reveal if it's still worth owning.

I have an1983 srv270 sundancer the boats made in that era was built very
good, hand laid fiberglass, no machine to cut cost, everything is fiberglass
sides of boat at least 3/4 to one inch thick and the bottom is even thicker,
no wood in sides or bottom to rot like today's boats . The floor is wood but
laid in fiberglass on all sides, very well built boat , Can handle 10 ft
seas very well .
There is a website of searay classic boats at www.captainrononline.com He
can answer any questions of that type of boat.
Good Luck
Pat




"Scott Collins" wrote in message
news:WDD%a.162621$o%2.68394@sccrnsc02...
My father-in-law and I are considering the purchase of a 1982 Sea Ray 260
Sundancer. I'm wondering about the build quality of Sea Rays from this
time
frame (pre Brunswick) but have not had much success finding any
information.
I'd like to know some general history of Sea Ray boats from this era
before
we spend the money on a survey. Why waste the money on a survey if the
general consensus is the boats from this time are not worth the effort?
Are
there any specific websites that could address this, or do the posters
here
have any general comments?

Thanks in advance,
Scott Collins
Newcastle, WA

Dealer Gould's hype aside, most all the new boats are built just like
you see in the pictures, now. Overpriced pieces of crap designed to
maximize manufacturer and dealer profits at the expense of value,

Good grief, Larry. Your first mistake is this: I'm not a boat dealer.

Your second mistake is that David Pascoe actually speaks fairly highly of new
Sea Rays, (at least as highly as he speaks about any boat)

From his website, the summary of a "review" of a 250 Sea Ray;

*****************
Summing up: On the outside, the overall quality is pretty good. Not much
chintzy hardware, and the basic structures are holding up well. With care, it
still looks good. The rub rails aren't all loose, dented and falling off, and
stress cracking is minimal. As a used boat, it offers excellent value. As a new
boat, they're still hard to beat quality wise, but the quality margin over the
competition can be a pretty thin line at times.

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

How long will you keep throwing up Pascoe's site to trash Sea Ray when he
states they're "hard to beat quality wise"?

On 18 Aug 2003 04:09:37 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Dealer Gould's hype aside, most all the new boats are built just like
you see in the pictures, now. Overpriced pieces of crap designed to
maximize manufacturer and dealer profits at the expense of value,

Good grief, Larry. Your first mistake is this: I'm not a boat dealer.

Coulda fooled me. I thought you were a Sea Ray dealer from your
staunch defense of the brand name.

Your second mistake is that David Pascoe actually speaks fairly highly of new
Sea Rays, (at least as highly as he speaks about any boat)

From his website, the summary of a "review" of a 250 Sea Ray;

*****************
Summing up: On the outside, the overall quality is pretty good. Not much
chintzy hardware, and the basic structures are holding up well. With care, it
still looks good. The rub rails aren't all loose, dented and falling off, and
stress cracking is minimal. As a used boat, it offers excellent value. As a new
boat, they're still hard to beat quality wise, but the quality margin over the
competition can be a pretty thin line at times.

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

How long will you keep throwing up Pascoe's site to trash Sea Ray when he
states they're "hard to beat quality wise"?

As long as boats are made like the pictures clearly show. It's a
piece of crap, just like most of the rest of them....



Larry W4CSC

Maybe we could get the power grid fixed if every politician
regulating the power companies wasn't on their payrolls.

As long as boats are made like the pictures clearly show. It's a
piece of crap, just like most of the rest of them....



An opinon to which you are certainly entitled. Your error is to constantly
advance David Pasco as an expert who shares it.

By the way, that white goo is *still* a lousy repair. :-)