Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "JohnH" wrote in message ... On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:38:55 -0400, " JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote: "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message m... JimH wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... JimH wrote: A shame that a 32 footer can handle only sheltered water because the cockpit will flood, especially in following seas. I can't seem to find where you mention that in your review though. ;-) One has nothing to do with the other. Bluewater boaters routinely see water on deck. That's why scuppers are built into bulwarks. This boat is relatively shallow draft, moderate freeboard, and fairly light displacement. Nobody would recommend this boat for offshore use under "small craft warning" weather conditions, certainly including the manufacturer. Wouldn't matter if it had a transom 4 feet high. A following sea would not routinely flood the cockpit. Anybody who would panic if a strong following sea broke across the swim platform and momentarily put a half inch of water into the cockpit would be well advised to choose a heading that doesn't expose the stern directly to a following sea. (I could probably dig up a link to an entire series of racing sailboats built with no transom at all........) No one said anything about open bluewater or offshore use Chuck. You said the boat was built only for calm sheltered water as the boat will take on water in rough or following seas. A shame a 32 footer is not built to take on some moderately rough conditions. And that was my point because in your review you never said anything about these deficiencies. ;-) The post by Chuck Gould was an well written article for a boating magazine. As we have discussed many many times these "info-articles" are not reviews and don't pretend to be critical boating reviews. If he chooses to post the advertisements here then he should be willing to accept criticism on them. And a review of a boat without bringing out it's flaws is nothing more than an advertisement. ;-) The points I brought up are valid and the result of a poorly engineered boat. I cannot imagine a 32 footer not capable of taking on open water and 5 foot seas. Did I miss something? Where did Chuck say the boat couldn't take 5 foot seas? Hell, my 21'er can take 5 foot seas. Yes John you missed something. You misread, then misquote, than argue against your misquotes as though they were stated by the OP. No I didn't. Here is exactly what Chuck wrote: "Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhatsheltered waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt winds and 5-foot chop. You would want to be off the water if you owned this boat- as well as most other boats, when something nasty like that kicks up." Read it twice......make that three times so you fully understand. OK? Anne Arundel County Schools are also facing a reading comprehension problem. Now what is that saying about people in glass houses? ;-) |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
A Recreational Boating Message | General | |||
rec.boats.paddle sea kayaking FAQ | General | |||
rec.boats.paddle sea kayaking FAQ | General | |||
rec.boats.paddle sea kayaking FAQ | General | |||
rec.boats.paddle sea kayaking FAQ | General |