|
A boat likely to be of interest
Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-)
Warning; the following material describes a new boat being offered for sale, so anybody easily offended by mentions of specific brand names, etc, in the group is invited to click to the next thread. Thanks. Split Personality We spent a glorious August morning out on Lake Union and Lake Washington in Crownline's largest boat, the new 2007 315 SCR Sport Cruiser. Crownline continues to pleasantly surprise the boating industry, and it looks like the company has done it yet again. We had to conclude that Crownline has discovered the secret of putting two entirely different boats onto the same physical keel. The 315 SCR manages to be a well-appointed express cruiser large enough to sleep 4-6 (and "party" several more) in memorable comfort and luxury. It's also a "Yeehaw!" speedboat that handles incredibly well and will reach speeds of over 50 mph with a pair of relatively economical small block V-8's. Like all Crownline boats, the 315 SCR is impressively styled and carefully assembled. Crownline marked its 15th anniversary in 2006, and shipped the 50,000th Crownline boat last April. Examining a bit of the Crownline boat building process helps one appreciate why this independent, family owned company is getting such rave reviews from satisfied owners and is now considered fully competitive with some of the most elite names in the industry. Crownline believes that a perfect fiberglass boat begins with a perfect wooden plug. Many manufacturers have switched to more cheaply and quickly turned out foam plugs, but Crownline continues to use wood. The plugs are covered with tooling gel and polished to a mirror finish before being used to create a master mold. It isn't at all uncommon to drive by a boat factory and see molds sitting out in the weather. Crownline molds are stored indoors, in a climate-controlled "mold maintenance" facility. Each mold represents an enormous investment in engineering and design, and no boat builder can produce a fiberglass hull that is more accurate than the originating mold. Crownline molds are pampered like thoroughbred racehorses, with each mold frequently stripped and rewaxed between uses. Crownline is known for sporting a strong "Wow!" factor. The smooth exterior finishes and eye-popping color schemes result from some deliberate choices and practices in the finish booth. Cook's gelcoat is used for the basic color, and Armorcoat (tm) for accent colors. Each color of gelcoat is applied through its own dedicated spray gun to assure color integrity. Many boat builders apply gelcoat 20-25 mil thick, and this will "dry down" to 15-17 mils. Crownline uses 25-30 mil applications of gelcoat that dry down to 22 mils. All hulls are allowed a minimum of 60 minutes "set-up" time before the lamination process begins, and some receive several hours. Many manufacturers would take the "time is money" approach and not allow the gelcoat as much time to stabilize prior to lamination. When lamination begins, Crownline begins with a vinylester barrier coat, which is applied and allowed to cure for 30 minutes. The vinylester is followed by 100 mils of hand rolled fiberglass and a sprayed on core, with 45 minutes cure time allowed before the bulk of the hull is laid in. Crownline utilizes a pre-assembled wood grid stringer system, crafted to micro tolerances and completely encapsulated in hand-rolled fiberglass. Crownline prefers to use wooden stringers rather than fiberglass based on its research showing that wood provides the best combination of rigidity and flexibility, and avoids an overly stiff hull bottom that could ride more noisily and/or create unneeded stress on joints that could lead to future cracking. The XL treated wood members have a lifetime warranty against rot. Once the stringers are in place, Crownline installs a complete, one-piece, molded fiberglass inner liner to create the floor of the boat (including the lockers and bilge). While it is typical practice for a boat builder to install the engine in a boat and then ship the outdrive to the dealer in a separate box, Crownline boats leave the factory with engines installed and fully aligned, as well as with the outdrive installed. This allows Crownline to be certain that this critical portion of the assembly process will be completed by a certified and competent technician, rather than a possibly under-qualified worker at an individual dealer's rigging shop. All carpeting, upholstery, and canvas used on a Crownline are top quality. Fittings are sturdy and stainless. It would be a shame to finish out such a carefully constructed hull with anything that was in any way substandard, and Crownline carries its commitment to quality through to the smallest details. General Description and Layout: Rick English of Sport Boat Northwest was our host for the morning, and his genuine enthusiasm for the 315 SCR was evident as he showed us through the vessel. We began by checking out the large locker under the sunpad, located immediately forward of the integral swim platform. The locker cover, with the added weight of the sunpad upholstery, was held easily in place by two stainless steel (not plastic) struts. "You could put all of your fenders in here," remarked Rick, "or if you were a diver you could store tanks back here. There is a drain plug in the bottom of the locker, so it could even be filled with ice to keep beverages cold or just a general purpose ice chest." We noted the stereo radio controls on the port side of the boat and Rick commented, "We set this boat up so that this large, open area around the sunpad can be a social center when anchored out." The portable cockpit table and leg are stowed under the locker cover, but the storage area is so large that they seem to almost take up no room at all. We noticed three shorepower fittings recessed into the port gunwale aft of the port side transom door. When we commented that we thought that was a lot of shorepower for a 32-foot boat, we learned that the Sport Cruiser 315 SCR in stock at Sport Boat Northwest is equipped with an optional 110-volt heating and air conditioning system! To keep power available when the boat is underway; Crownline included a 7.3 kW generator. Rick activated a switch at the helm and energized the hydraulic ram that raised the aft section of the cockpit to expose the engine compartment. Our test boat was fit with a pair of Mercruiser 350 MPI Horizon Bravo III's. This pair of engines is rated at 600 HP, and larger engines are available. Choosing either the optional 8.1L Volvo GXI Duo-prop or the optional Mercruiser 496 Magnum would make a total of 750 HP available, (but based on the results we were about to achieve with the 350's, I can't personally imagine what one would do with another 150 HP). Diesel engine enthusiasts can order a new 315 SCR with 4.2L Mercruiser D-Tronic engines. Additional cockpit seating consists of a forward-facing settee at the front of the engine cowl and sunpad, an aft facing settee immediately abaft the double pilot seat, and a lounge seat in the port forequarter of the cockpit. Stowage lockers similar to the area under the sunpad can be found under the forward and aft facing settees. There are swing-away transom doors to both port and starboard, and a jump seat as well as the portable cockpit table can be set in place just inside the starboard transom door to create additional options when entertaining. A beverage bar with sink is situated just forward of the port transom door. The faucet is cleverly designed to fold into the sink, which can then be covered with a Karadon (tm) plug to create a larger countertop area when the sink is not needed. Like most boat builders, Crownline includes a series of carefully placed beverage holders throughout the cockpit. Unlike most builders, Crownline's beverage holders are stainless steel, not plastic. The ergonomically designed helm features two full sets of analog gauges set into a sweeping console. Controls are all well marked and easily reached, and there is a thoughtful armrest just aft of the pair of single lever engine controls. Rick pointed out that the test boat was equipped with the optional wooden steering wheel. The foredeck is easily accessed from the cockpit by closing the companionway door to the areas below deck. The door has a set of steps molded onto the cockpit side, and the center portion of the stainless steel windshield swings away to provide a safe, step-through route to the foredeck. The foredeck has a sporty, low profile stainless safety rail and one of the "grippiest" non-skid surfaces anyone could ever hope to find. We checked out the interior before getting underway. "There's a full six feet of headroom in the head and in the cabin areas where you would stand up rather than sit around the table," remarked Rick. He was absolutely right, as my 5'11" frame had a little breathing room below the headliner. The galley is separated into two work areas aft of a large table in the forward portion of the cabin. "Having two galley areas is a wonderful idea," observed Rick. "A lot of times when you are entertaining aboard, one of the guests will almost insist on helping prepare the food or beverages and if there's only one work area people start to get into the way. Having two separated work stations allows two people to help prepare a meal or a snack." The main seating area around the table in the main cabin will accommodate 6-8 people without crowding, and there is an optional flat screen color TV on the forward bulkhead for entertainment. The table area knocks down quickly to create a sleeping area, but if there is only one couple spending the night aboard there is no need to touch it at all. A huge "midcabin" berth with a privacy curtain is entered just aft of the port side galley area, creating a cozy and comfortable nocturnal retreat. A fully appointed head is situated in the aft starboard quarter of the main cabin. Our test boat was equipped with a radar arch, and a full canvas enclosure that, (combined with the heat and AC system), makes the Crownline 315 SCR an "all-weather" boat here in the Pacific NW. We ran with just the "bimini" portions of the top in place, and managed to look stylish while protecting the upholstery (as well as a magazine writer's bald spot) from the August sunshine. Underway: The Crownline 315 SCR idled patiently through the 7-knot speed zones on Lake Union, Portage Bay, and the Montlake Reach. When we reached Webster Point, Rick told me it was OK to open her up, and we immediately unleashed a zephyr. Crownline uses a proprietary F.A.S.Tab. (tm) (Crownline defines it differently, but the initials could easily stand for "Fun And Safe") hull architecture with a patented design for its strakes and vented chine. The company insists that the hull design helps Crownline get onto plane more efficiently and handle better in the corners, and based on our experience we have to say the F.A.S.Tab hull absolutely works as represented. Without any use of the trim tabs, there was a moment of bow rise as the Crownline 315 stepped over its own bow wave and got up to plane. However, long before we got into even the lower portions of the speed curve the Crownline was so far up on step it was almost like we were hovering above the water. Somewhere between "Oh my gosh!" and "Yeehaw!" I looked back to check our wake and found that it could almost be more accurately described as a major ripple. Even with ¾ of a tank of fuel aboard, we were as airborne as a boat gets without falling into the hydroplane class. Using the speedometer on the dashboard of the Crownline 315, we observed speeds of about 35 mph at an easily sustainable cruise RPM of 3500. "You can go ahead and take her up to WOT, just briefly," said Rick, and he didn't have to suggest that twice. Pushing the throttle levers forward increased our "flight speed" to well over 50 mph before I backed down to the more sedate pace in the mid-30's. I didn't want to run the brand new engines for more than a short burst at WOT, and I think I stopped a couple of hundred RPM short. "I took this boat over to Kirkland to show it to a client," said Rick, and with the tank almost entirely full of fuel I managed to get up to 58 mph." "That 35 mph speed is a very easy cruise speed for this boat," observed Rick English. "To put that into perspective, at 35 mph it's just about two hours from Shilshole Bay to the dock in front of the Empress in Victoria, BC". If we forgot to ask Rick anything, it was probably "Why in the world would anybody put something larger than a pair of 350's in this water rocket?" After the Crownline 315 SCR had proved its mettle running in straight lines, we enjoyed one of the most memorable aspects of the F.A.S.Tab hull; "sports car" handling. We put the 315 into some very hard turns at full cruising speed and above. The Crownline definitely heels over in a high speed turn, and when pushed to its limits in a turn may be a more extreme experience than some boaters are looking for...(and those boaters can slow down and make nice, flat turns at more moderate speeds). What we had to notice was the even when the boat was heeled over in a turn; the hull is designed to allow the boat to heel only so far. Once we had "settled in" to even the tightest circle at the highest speed, the Crownline 315 SCR remained extremely stable. Conclusions: The 2007 Crownline 315 SCR manages to combine "family cruiser" capability with genuinely exhilarating speed and performance. The same boat can tow a skier at a blistering pace, or host a half dozen friends from the yacht club for afternoon refreshments in the shade of the bimini top. Families struggling to find a boat that acceptably compromises comfort and performance will want to take a careful look at the 315 SCR- and when they do they may discover that they don't really need to "compromise" at all. Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price for a new 2007 Crownline 315 SCR with Mercruiser 350 engines is $158,158.33. The boat we tested at Sport Boat Northwest was totally loaded with the 110-volt A/C and Heat system, flat screen TV, generator, "Captain's Call" exhaust system, the "Executive striping" and factory "Convenience" packages, and dozens of additional niceties. The lavishly equipped boat stickered (with freight and prep charges) at $190,227. |
A boat likely to be of interest
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message ps.com... Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-) Like all Crownline boats, the 315 SCR is impressively styled and carefully assembled. =============== You must have forgot to bring you glasses with you when tested the boat Chuck. The forward leaning radar arch is ugly. The cockpit looks like a giant marshmellow and the cockpit layout is poorly designed. http://www.crownline.com/models/cruisers/315scr/aft.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui...5scr/big/3.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui.../main_boat.jpg |
A boat likely to be of interest
" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in message . .. "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ps.com... Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-) Like all Crownline boats, the 315 SCR is impressively styled and carefully assembled. =============== You must have forgot to bring your glasses with you when tested the boat Chuck. The forward leaning radar arch is ugly. The cockpit looks like a giant marshmellow and the cockpit layout is poorly designed. http://www.crownline.com/models/cruisers/315scr/aft.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui...5scr/big/3.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui.../main_boat.jpg |
A boat likely to be of interest
JimH wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ps.com... Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-) Like all Crownline boats, the 315 SCR is impressively styled and carefully assembled. =============== You must have forgot to bring you glasses with you when tested the boat Chuck. The forward leaning radar arch is ugly. The cockpit looks like a giant marshmellow and the cockpit layout is poorly designed. http://www.crownline.com/models/cruisers/315scr/aft.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui...5scr/big/3.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui.../main_boat.jpg Jeez, Jim, do you think that your opinion matter? Let's see, who to believe, someone who tests and writes about boats for a living, or a bipolar ranting fool........ |
A boat likely to be of interest
I don't mind the design of the boat, but it does seem like the radar
arch would look better swept back. The interior is a nice design, but IMO, it looks like they could put more color in it. The Pilsberry Doughboy could become the invisibe man in there. JimH wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ps.com... Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-) Like all Crownline boats, the 315 SCR is impressively styled and carefully assembled. =============== You must have forgot to bring you glasses with you when tested the boat Chuck. The forward leaning radar arch is ugly. The cockpit looks like a giant marshmellow and the cockpit layout is poorly designed. http://www.crownline.com/models/cruisers/315scr/aft.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui...5scr/big/3.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui.../main_boat.jpg |
A boat likely to be of interest
JimH wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ps.com... Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-) Like all Crownline boats, the 315 SCR is impressively styled and carefully assembled. =============== You must have forgot to bring you glasses with you when tested the boat Chuck. The forward leaning radar arch is ugly. The cockpit looks like a giant marshmellow and the cockpit layout is poorly designed. http://www.crownline.com/models/cruisers/315scr/aft.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui...5scr/big/3.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui.../main_boat.jpg Eye of the beholder. I like the radar arch, and don't agree with the marshmallow comparison. It might be that the upholstery makes a different impression in person than it does on a website photo, who knows? (Or, maybe if you actually went aboard one of these models you would still think it looked like a marshmallow- and you'd have every right to your opinion). As far as the cockpit layout goes, I'd like to have you elaboarate on "poorly designed." I noticed two transom doors, one on either side of the sunpad. The main transom door that most people would use is to port, and from there it's a relatively straight shot all the way to the companionway door. One half step to clear the wetbar on the port side and get inboard of the lounge seat. The aft starboard quarter of the cockpit becomes a social area, with table, blocking that transom door when the table is in place and the removable seat is installed. How would you change or improve the cockpit design? Good discussion. :-) |
A boat likely to be of interest
wrote: I don't mind the design of the boat, but it does seem like the radar arch would look better swept back. The interior is a nice design, but IMO, it looks like they could put more color in it. The Pilsberry Doughboy could become the invisibe man in there. I believe there are several different colors of interior upholstery available. The off whites are often displayed in shows, etc, as they are pretty neutral. Women make most of the color decisions aboard most boats, and they often like a somewhat blase' base color and then decorate with colorful throw pillows, galley items, etc. If you want dark red, tan, blue, or what not I'm sure that same fabric is available in those colors. I'd have to study the engineering a bit, but one reason for the forward sweep of the radar arch may be to create a better location from which to stretch canvas fore and aft. Turning the arch around would require a really long front canvas, I think. Besides, I think the forward arch gives the boat a contemporary look. Oh well, that's why they offer boats in various styles- different strokes. |
A boat likely to be of interest
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... JimH wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ps.com... Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-) Like all Crownline boats, the 315 SCR is impressively styled and carefully assembled. =============== You must have forgot to bring you glasses with you when tested the boat Chuck. The forward leaning radar arch is ugly. The cockpit looks like a giant marshmellow and the cockpit layout is poorly designed. http://www.crownline.com/models/cruisers/315scr/aft.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui...5scr/big/3.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui.../main_boat.jpg Eye of the beholder. I like the radar arch, and don't agree with the marshmallow comparison. It might be that the upholstery makes a different impression in person than it does on a website photo, who knows? (Or, maybe if you actually went aboard one of these models you would still think it looked like a marshmallow- and you'd have every right to your opinion). As far as the cockpit layout goes, I'd like to have you elaboarate on "poorly designed." I noticed two transom doors, one on either side of the sunpad. The main transom door that most people would use is to port, and from there it's a relatively straight shot all the way to the companionway door. One half step to clear the wetbar on the port side and get inboard of the lounge seat. The aft starboard quarter of the cockpit becomes a social area, with table, blocking that transom door when the table is in place and the removable seat is installed. How would you change or improve the cockpit design? Good discussion. :-) The cockpit looks small and cramped for a 32 footer and it looks like an obstacle course to move around in. The aft sunpad is a waste of space. They overdid it with the seating in the cockpit. JMO. ;-) |
A boat likely to be of interest
To the extent I agree with JimH. But all we have to go by is the pics.
I will agree it might be a whole different scenerio up front and live. Again, the interior does look puffy, marshmello white, but I'm glad you did mention different color options. I wish that had been explained. I think there is too much white for even the sales pics, . especially when you look at the bigger pic. Like, what kind of stains would be left on that beautiful fabric after being wallowed in sun tan oils. Stuff that actually penetrates the material and left unattended. IMO. It would ahve been nicer if theere had been come color scheme, though. Actually, what should I care? I can't afford it anyhow. I think it IS a nice looking craft, though. JimH wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... JimH wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ps.com... Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-) Like all Crownline boats, the 315 SCR is impressively styled and carefully assembled. =============== You must have forgot to bring you glasses with you when tested the boat Chuck. The forward leaning radar arch is ugly. The cockpit looks like a giant marshmellow and the cockpit layout is poorly designed. http://www.crownline.com/models/cruisers/315scr/aft.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui...5scr/big/3.jpg http://www.crownline.com/models/crui.../main_boat.jpg Eye of the beholder. I like the radar arch, and don't agree with the marshmallow comparison. It might be that the upholstery makes a different impression in person than it does on a website photo, who knows? (Or, maybe if you actually went aboard one of these models you would still think it looked like a marshmallow- and you'd have every right to your opinion). As far as the cockpit layout goes, I'd like to have you elaboarate on "poorly designed." I noticed two transom doors, one on either side of the sunpad. The main transom door that most people would use is to port, and from there it's a relatively straight shot all the way to the companionway door. One half step to clear the wetbar on the port side and get inboard of the lounge seat. The aft starboard quarter of the cockpit becomes a social area, with table, blocking that transom door when the table is in place and the removable seat is installed. How would you change or improve the cockpit design? Good discussion. :-) The cockpit looks small and cramped for a 32 footer and it looks like an obstacle course to move around in. The aft sunpad is a waste of space. They overdid it with the seating in the cockpit. JMO. ;-) |
A boat likely to be of interest
On 19 Aug 2006 08:44:21 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote: Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-) Warning; the following material describes a new boat being offered for sale, so anybody easily offended by mentions of specific brand names, etc, in the group is invited to click to the next thread. Thanks. Split Personality We spent a glorious August morning out on Lake Union and Lake Washington in Crownline's largest boat, the new 2007 315 SCR Sport Cruiser. Crownline continues to pleasantly surprise the boating industry, and it looks like the company has done it yet again. We had to conclude that Crownline has discovered the secret of putting two entirely different boats onto the same physical keel. The 315 SCR manages to be a well-appointed express cruiser large enough to sleep 4-6 (and "party" several more) in memorable comfort and luxury. It's also a "Yeehaw!" speedboat that handles incredibly well and will reach speeds of over 50 mph with a pair of relatively economical small block V-8's. Nice write up, Chuck. It's definitely not a fishing boat, but looks like it could be a fun, albeit expensive, family/party boat. The pictures at: http://www.crownline.com/models/mode...?model=315_scr add a little more detail. I especially like the layout of the cockpit, the upholstery design, and the radar arch mounting. Thanks for the info! -- ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** John |
A boat likely to be of interest
JohnH wrote: On 19 Aug 2006 08:44:21 -0700, "Chuck Gould" wrote: Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-) Warning; the following material describes a new boat being offered for sale, so anybody easily offended by mentions of specific brand names, etc, in the group is invited to click to the next thread. Thanks. Split Personality We spent a glorious August morning out on Lake Union and Lake Washington in Crownline's largest boat, the new 2007 315 SCR Sport Cruiser. Crownline continues to pleasantly surprise the boating industry, and it looks like the company has done it yet again. We had to conclude that Crownline has discovered the secret of putting two entirely different boats onto the same physical keel. The 315 SCR manages to be a well-appointed express cruiser large enough to sleep 4-6 (and "party" several more) in memorable comfort and luxury. It's also a "Yeehaw!" speedboat that handles incredibly well and will reach speeds of over 50 mph with a pair of relatively economical small block V-8's. Nice write up, Chuck. It's definitely not a fishing boat, but looks like it could be a fun, albeit expensive, family/party boat. The pictures at: http://www.crownline.com/models/mode...?model=315_scr add a little more detail. I especially like ....the upholstery design..... -- ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** John White and fluffy. Why am I not surprised? |
A boat likely to be of interest
JohnH wrote: On 19 Aug 2006 08:44:21 -0700, "Chuck Gould" wrote: Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-) Warning; the following material describes a new boat being offered for sale, so anybody easily offended by mentions of specific brand names, etc, in the group is invited to click to the next thread. Thanks. Split Personality We spent a glorious August morning out on Lake Union and Lake Washington in Crownline's largest boat, the new 2007 315 SCR Sport Cruiser. Crownline continues to pleasantly surprise the boating industry, and it looks like the company has done it yet again. We had to conclude that Crownline has discovered the secret of putting two entirely different boats onto the same physical keel. The 315 SCR manages to be a well-appointed express cruiser large enough to sleep 4-6 (and "party" several more) in memorable comfort and luxury. It's also a "Yeehaw!" speedboat that handles incredibly well and will reach speeds of over 50 mph with a pair of relatively economical small block V-8's. Nice write up, Chuck. It's definitely not a fishing boat, but looks like it could be a fun, albeit expensive, family/party boat. The pictures at: http://www.crownline.com/models/mode...?model=315_scr add a little more detail. I especially like the layout of the cockpit, the upholstery design, and the radar arch mounting. Thanks for the info! Damn it, John you know good and well that JimH knows everything about boat design, up and coming trends in boat design, and will never be a forward thinking type of guy. He's the kind of person that would say things like a row worked for me, why would anybody want a motor on a boat~!!!! |
A boat likely to be of interest
There's no such thing as a "perfect" boat, or any other thing, for that
matter. This is fodder for the vulnerable newbie first time buyer who thinks in emotional terms and has expectations centered on wistful thinking. This term should have been omitted entirely from your review. Also, agree with JimH's observations. The cockpit looks extremely cramped for a 31'-er. I always like the'pull-up-to-the-beach-and-ground-it-for-a-piki-nicky type shots. Looks like a salvage job to me...:) JR Chuck Gould wrote: Here's the result of my workday on Friday. :-) Warning; the following material describes a new boat being offered for sale, so anybody easily offended by mentions of specific brand names, etc, in the group is invited to click to the next thread. Thanks. Split Personality We spent a glorious August morning out on Lake Union and Lake Washington in Crownline's largest boat, the new 2007 315 SCR Sport Cruiser. Crownline continues to pleasantly surprise the boating industry, and it looks like the company has done it yet again. We had to conclude that Crownline has discovered the secret of putting two entirely different boats onto the same physical keel. The 315 SCR manages to be a well-appointed express cruiser large enough to sleep 4-6 (and "party" several more) in memorable comfort and luxury. It's also a "Yeehaw!" speedboat that handles incredibly well and will reach speeds of over 50 mph with a pair of relatively economical small block V-8's. Like all Crownline boats, the 315 SCR is impressively styled and carefully assembled. Crownline marked its 15th anniversary in 2006, and shipped the 50,000th Crownline boat last April. Examining a bit of the Crownline boat building process helps one appreciate why this independent, family owned company is getting such rave reviews from satisfied owners and is now considered fully competitive with some of the most elite names in the industry. Crownline believes that a perfect fiberglass boat begins with a perfect wooden plug. Many manufacturers have switched to more cheaply and quickly turned out foam plugs, but Crownline continues to use wood. The plugs are covered with tooling gel and polished to a mirror finish before being used to create a master mold. It isn't at all uncommon to drive by a boat factory and see molds sitting out in the weather. Crownline molds are stored indoors, in a climate-controlled "mold maintenance" facility. Each mold represents an enormous investment in engineering and design, and no boat builder can produce a fiberglass hull that is more accurate than the originating mold. Crownline molds are pampered like thoroughbred racehorses, with each mold frequently stripped and rewaxed between uses. Crownline is known for sporting a strong "Wow!" factor. The smooth exterior finishes and eye-popping color schemes result from some deliberate choices and practices in the finish booth. Cook's gelcoat is used for the basic color, and Armorcoat (tm) for accent colors. Each color of gelcoat is applied through its own dedicated spray gun to assure color integrity. Many boat builders apply gelcoat 20-25 mil thick, and this will "dry down" to 15-17 mils. Crownline uses 25-30 mil applications of gelcoat that dry down to 22 mils. All hulls are allowed a minimum of 60 minutes "set-up" time before the lamination process begins, and some receive several hours. Many manufacturers would take the "time is money" approach and not allow the gelcoat as much time to stabilize prior to lamination. When lamination begins, Crownline begins with a vinylester barrier coat, which is applied and allowed to cure for 30 minutes. The vinylester is followed by 100 mils of hand rolled fiberglass and a sprayed on core, with 45 minutes cure time allowed before the bulk of the hull is laid in. Crownline utilizes a pre-assembled wood grid stringer system, crafted to micro tolerances and completely encapsulated in hand-rolled fiberglass. Crownline prefers to use wooden stringers rather than fiberglass based on its research showing that wood provides the best combination of rigidity and flexibility, and avoids an overly stiff hull bottom that could ride more noisily and/or create unneeded stress on joints that could lead to future cracking. The XL treated wood members have a lifetime warranty against rot. Once the stringers are in place, Crownline installs a complete, one-piece, molded fiberglass inner liner to create the floor of the boat (including the lockers and bilge). While it is typical practice for a boat builder to install the engine in a boat and then ship the outdrive to the dealer in a separate box, Crownline boats leave the factory with engines installed and fully aligned, as well as with the outdrive installed. This allows Crownline to be certain that this critical portion of the assembly process will be completed by a certified and competent technician, rather than a possibly under-qualified worker at an individual dealer's rigging shop. All carpeting, upholstery, and canvas used on a Crownline are top quality. Fittings are sturdy and stainless. It would be a shame to finish out such a carefully constructed hull with anything that was in any way substandard, and Crownline carries its commitment to quality through to the smallest details. General Description and Layout: Rick English of Sport Boat Northwest was our host for the morning, and his genuine enthusiasm for the 315 SCR was evident as he showed us through the vessel. We began by checking out the large locker under the sunpad, located immediately forward of the integral swim platform. The locker cover, with the added weight of the sunpad upholstery, was held easily in place by two stainless steel (not plastic) struts. "You could put all of your fenders in here," remarked Rick, "or if you were a diver you could store tanks back here. There is a drain plug in the bottom of the locker, so it could even be filled with ice to keep beverages cold or just a general purpose ice chest." We noted the stereo radio controls on the port side of the boat and Rick commented, "We set this boat up so that this large, open area around the sunpad can be a social center when anchored out." The portable cockpit table and leg are stowed under the locker cover, but the storage area is so large that they seem to almost take up no room at all. We noticed three shorepower fittings recessed into the port gunwale aft of the port side transom door. When we commented that we thought that was a lot of shorepower for a 32-foot boat, we learned that the Sport Cruiser 315 SCR in stock at Sport Boat Northwest is equipped with an optional 110-volt heating and air conditioning system! To keep power available when the boat is underway; Crownline included a 7.3 kW generator. Rick activated a switch at the helm and energized the hydraulic ram that raised the aft section of the cockpit to expose the engine compartment. Our test boat was fit with a pair of Mercruiser 350 MPI Horizon Bravo III's. This pair of engines is rated at 600 HP, and larger engines are available. Choosing either the optional 8.1L Volvo GXI Duo-prop or the optional Mercruiser 496 Magnum would make a total of 750 HP available, (but based on the results we were about to achieve with the 350's, I can't personally imagine what one would do with another 150 HP). Diesel engine enthusiasts can order a new 315 SCR with 4.2L Mercruiser D-Tronic engines. Additional cockpit seating consists of a forward-facing settee at the front of the engine cowl and sunpad, an aft facing settee immediately abaft the double pilot seat, and a lounge seat in the port forequarter of the cockpit. Stowage lockers similar to the area under the sunpad can be found under the forward and aft facing settees. There are swing-away transom doors to both port and starboard, and a jump seat as well as the portable cockpit table can be set in place just inside the starboard transom door to create additional options when entertaining. A beverage bar with sink is situated just forward of the port transom door. The faucet is cleverly designed to fold into the sink, which can then be covered with a Karadon (tm) plug to create a larger countertop area when the sink is not needed. Like most boat builders, Crownline includes a series of carefully placed beverage holders throughout the cockpit. Unlike most builders, Crownline's beverage holders are stainless steel, not plastic. The ergonomically designed helm features two full sets of analog gauges set into a sweeping console. Controls are all well marked and easily reached, and there is a thoughtful armrest just aft of the pair of single lever engine controls. Rick pointed out that the test boat was equipped with the optional wooden steering wheel. The foredeck is easily accessed from the cockpit by closing the companionway door to the areas below deck. The door has a set of steps molded onto the cockpit side, and the center portion of the stainless steel windshield swings away to provide a safe, step-through route to the foredeck. The foredeck has a sporty, low profile stainless safety rail and one of the "grippiest" non-skid surfaces anyone could ever hope to find. We checked out the interior before getting underway. "There's a full six feet of headroom in the head and in the cabin areas where you would stand up rather than sit around the table," remarked Rick. He was absolutely right, as my 5'11" frame had a little breathing room below the headliner. The galley is separated into two work areas aft of a large table in the forward portion of the cabin. "Having two galley areas is a wonderful idea," observed Rick. "A lot of times when you are entertaining aboard, one of the guests will almost insist on helping prepare the food or beverages and if there's only one work area people start to get into the way. Having two separated work stations allows two people to help prepare a meal or a snack." The main seating area around the table in the main cabin will accommodate 6-8 people without crowding, and there is an optional flat screen color TV on the forward bulkhead for entertainment. The table area knocks down quickly to create a sleeping area, but if there is only one couple spending the night aboard there is no need to touch it at all. A huge "midcabin" berth with a privacy curtain is entered just aft of the port side galley area, creating a cozy and comfortable nocturnal retreat. A fully appointed head is situated in the aft starboard quarter of the main cabin. Our test boat was equipped with a radar arch, and a full canvas enclosure that, (combined with the heat and AC system), makes the Crownline 315 SCR an "all-weather" boat here in the Pacific NW. We ran with just the "bimini" portions of the top in place, and managed to look stylish while protecting the upholstery (as well as a magazine writer's bald spot) from the August sunshine. Underway: The Crownline 315 SCR idled patiently through the 7-knot speed zones on Lake Union, Portage Bay, and the Montlake Reach. When we reached Webster Point, Rick told me it was OK to open her up, and we immediately unleashed a zephyr. Crownline uses a proprietary F.A.S.Tab. (tm) (Crownline defines it differently, but the initials could easily stand for "Fun And Safe") hull architecture with a patented design for its strakes and vented chine. The company insists that the hull design helps Crownline get onto plane more efficiently and handle better in the corners, and based on our experience we have to say the F.A.S.Tab hull absolutely works as represented. Without any use of the trim tabs, there was a moment of bow rise as the Crownline 315 stepped over its own bow wave and got up to plane. However, long before we got into even the lower portions of the speed curve the Crownline was so far up on step it was almost like we were hovering above the water. Somewhere between "Oh my gosh!" and "Yeehaw!" I looked back to check our wake and found that it could almost be more accurately described as a major ripple. Even with ¾ of a tank of fuel aboard, we were as airborne as a boat gets without falling into the hydroplane class. Using the speedometer on the dashboard of the Crownline 315, we observed speeds of about 35 mph at an easily sustainable cruise RPM of 3500. "You can go ahead and take her up to WOT, just briefly," said Rick, and he didn't have to suggest that twice. Pushing the throttle levers forward increased our "flight speed" to well over 50 mph before I backed down to the more sedate pace in the mid-30's. I didn't want to run the brand new engines for more than a short burst at WOT, and I think I stopped a couple of hundred RPM short. "I took this boat over to Kirkland to show it to a client," said Rick, and with the tank almost entirely full of fuel I managed to get up to 58 mph." "That 35 mph speed is a very easy cruise speed for this boat," observed Rick English. "To put that into perspective, at 35 mph it's just about two hours from Shilshole Bay to the dock in front of the Empress in Victoria, BC". If we forgot to ask Rick anything, it was probably "Why in the world would anybody put something larger than a pair of 350's in this water rocket?" After the Crownline 315 SCR had proved its mettle running in straight lines, we enjoyed one of the most memorable aspects of the F.A.S.Tab hull; "sports car" handling. We put the 315 into some very hard turns at full cruising speed and above. The Crownline definitely heels over in a high speed turn, and when pushed to its limits in a turn may be a more extreme experience than some boaters are looking for...(and those boaters can slow down and make nice, flat turns at more moderate speeds). What we had to notice was the even when the boat was heeled over in a turn; the hull is designed to allow the boat to heel only so far. Once we had "settled in" to even the tightest circle at the highest speed, the Crownline 315 SCR remained extremely stable. Conclusions: The 2007 Crownline 315 SCR manages to combine "family cruiser" capability with genuinely exhilarating speed and performance. The same boat can tow a skier at a blistering pace, or host a half dozen friends from the yacht club for afternoon refreshments in the shade of the bimini top. Families struggling to find a boat that acceptably compromises comfort and performance will want to take a careful look at the 315 SCR- and when they do they may discover that they don't really need to "compromise" at all. Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price for a new 2007 Crownline 315 SCR with Mercruiser 350 engines is $158,158.33. The boat we tested at Sport Boat Northwest was totally loaded with the 110-volt A/C and Heat system, flat screen TV, generator, "Captain's Call" exhaust system, the "Executive striping" and factory "Convenience" packages, and dozens of additional niceties. The lavishly equipped boat stickered (with freight and prep charges) at $190,227. -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth |
A boat likely to be of interest
They should shoot that rear shot at the bottom of the page with about a
2 foot following sea. JR Chuck Gould wrote: -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth |
A boat likely to be of interest
What WAS I thinking? Of course, mine is too!
JR Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 18:52:06 -0700, JR North wrote: There's no such thing as a "perfect" boat, or any other thing, for that matter Sez you... All my boats are "perfect" boats. Just ask me. -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth |
A boat likely to be of interest
" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in
http://www.crownline.com/models/crui.../main_boat.jpg I muse at the pic, those two sitting on the beach have some serious wading to do cause they aren't climbing over that humongous bow ! ! ! ron |
A boat likely to be of interest
I still can't get used to that radar arch. Actually, I think it would
look better without it. Don't matter, I still can't afford it.... Ron wrote: " JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in http://www.crownline.com/models/crui.../main_boat.jpg I muse at the pic, those two sitting on the beach have some serious wading to do cause they aren't climbing over that humongous bow ! ! ! ron |
A boat likely to be of interest
JR North wrote: They should shoot that rear shot at the bottom of the page with about a 2 foot following sea. JR If a following sea broke across the swimstep there could be some flooding of the cockpit, but not as much as you might expect. ( There is a huge, recessed deck drain just outside the companionway door). The sunpad and locker substitutes for a traditional transom, and the passages to port and starboard are partially protected with what would be, in effect, "reduced flow" transom doors. If the following sea wasn't breaking, the boat would just ride up and over the top like any other and the increased pressure and effect on steering would all be taking place below the waterline. Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered 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. This boat is in its glory when it can get up and run, and everybody's proceeding at trawler speeds when conditions go to absolute crap. |
A boat likely to be of interest
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... JR North wrote: They should shoot that rear shot at the bottom of the page with about a 2 foot following sea. JR If a following sea broke across the swimstep there could be some flooding of the cockpit, but not as much as you might expect. ( There is a huge, recessed deck drain just outside the companionway door). The sunpad and locker substitutes for a traditional transom, and the passages to port and starboard are partially protected with what would be, in effect, "reduced flow" transom doors. If the following sea wasn't breaking, the boat would just ride up and over the top like any other and the increased pressure and effect on steering would all be taking place below the waterline. Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt winds and 5-foot chop. 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. ;-) |
A boat likely to be of interest
"Harry Krause" wrote in message . .. JimH wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... JR North wrote: They should shoot that rear shot at the bottom of the page with about a 2 foot following sea. JR If a following sea broke across the swimstep there could be some flooding of the cockpit, but not as much as you might expect. ( There is a huge, recessed deck drain just outside the companionway door). The sunpad and locker substitutes for a traditional transom, and the passages to port and starboard are partially protected with what would be, in effect, "reduced flow" transom doors. If the following sea wasn't breaking, the boat would just ride up and over the top like any other and the increased pressure and effect on steering would all be taking place below the waterline. Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt winds and 5-foot chop. 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. ;-) There's only "sheltered water" up there in the balmy Pacific Northwest. I wonder how much water gets into the cabin when the cockpit starts to flood? Lets hope it has some monster bilge pumps. |
A boat likely to be of interest
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........) |
A boat likely to be of interest
"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. ;-) |
A boat likely to be of interest
Harry Krause wrote: There's only "sheltered water" up there in the balmy Pacific Northwest. Generally correct. It's possible to run from the south end of Puget Sound all the way to Alaska while encountering only a couple of stretches of "open ocean" conditions. We have boats running to Alaska that you would never consider taking outside the ICW on the Atlantic Coast- (they simply lay in port waiting for a favorable weather window before tackling the tricky bits), and virtually nobody- regardless of type of boat owned- attempts to make a pleasure cruise to Ketchikan or Glacier Bay in the winter months. I'd estimate that 10% of Puget Sound Boaters won't ever get as far north as the San Juan Islands, 40% won't get north of Nanaimo, and probably 80% won't get north of Campbell River or Desolation Sound. Knowing what I know about our local conditions and after examining this boat, I would personally have no difficulty using it in any of those areas during our typical recreational boating months and (like most of us do anyway) staying in port when it's truly nasty. |
A boat likely to be of interest
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:03:12 -0400, " JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com
wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message roups.com... JR North wrote: They should shoot that rear shot at the bottom of the page with about a 2 foot following sea. JR If a following sea broke across the swimstep there could be some flooding of the cockpit, but not as much as you might expect. ( There is a huge, recessed deck drain just outside the companionway door). The sunpad and locker substitutes for a traditional transom, and the passages to port and starboard are partially protected with what would be, in effect, "reduced flow" transom doors. If the following sea wasn't breaking, the boat would just ride up and over the top like any other and the increased pressure and effect on steering would all be taking place below the waterline. Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt winds and 5-foot chop. 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. ;-) Do you never tire of it? |
A boat likely to be of interest
JimH wrote: I wonder how much water gets into the cabin when the cockpit starts to flood? Lets hope it has some monster bilge pumps. You would need to ship water into the cockpit all the way to the companionway door. Very unlikely scenario. There is a big drain under a grate at the companionway door, designed more for the purpose of preventing water from entering the cabin when hosing down the cockpit. If you are 1) shipping a lot of water from breaking following seas and 2) shipping so much water that you are going to flood the cabin you have no business out in those conditions in a small pleasure boat of any type. Since you seem so fixated on this, how well does your own boat handle following seas breaking over the transom? (If you don't know, that probably says more for your seamanship than if you do). |
A boat likely to be of interest
JimH wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... JR North wrote: They should shoot that rear shot at the bottom of the page with about a 2 foot following sea. JR If a following sea broke across the swimstep there could be some flooding of the cockpit, but not as much as you might expect. ( There is a huge, recessed deck drain just outside the companionway door). The sunpad and locker substitutes for a traditional transom, and the passages to port and starboard are partially protected with what would be, in effect, "reduced flow" transom doors. If the following sea wasn't breaking, the boat would just ride up and over the top like any other and the increased pressure and effect on steering would all be taking place below the waterline. Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt winds and 5-foot chop. 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. ;-) Jim, you don't know a damned thing about the capabilities of that boat! You're just on another of your monthly period bipolar rants. You act like you want harmony in the newgroup and do NOTHING but try and pick petty childish fights. As Gandhi said "you must be the change you wish to see in the world." |
A boat likely to be of interest
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... JimH wrote: I wonder how much water gets into the cabin when the cockpit starts to flood? Lets hope it has some monster bilge pumps. Since you seem so fixated on this, how well does your own boat handle following seas breaking over the transom? I don't know as I don't venture out in those types of seas and keep my eye on the weather so I do not get caught in conditions that would result in following seas crashing over my transom. It is a 20 foot runabout Chuck, not a 32 foot cruiser. ;-) (If you don't know, that probably says more for your seamanship than if you do). Why are you turning this personal Chuck? I thought you wanted a discussion of the boat you reviewed. |
A boat likely to be of interest
"JohnH" wrote in message ... On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:03:12 -0400, " JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message groups.com... JR North wrote: They should shoot that rear shot at the bottom of the page with about a 2 foot following sea. JR If a following sea broke across the swimstep there could be some flooding of the cockpit, but not as much as you might expect. ( There is a huge, recessed deck drain just outside the companionway door). The sunpad and locker substitutes for a traditional transom, and the passages to port and starboard are partially protected with what would be, in effect, "reduced flow" transom doors. If the following sea wasn't breaking, the boat would just ride up and over the top like any other and the increased pressure and effect on steering would all be taking place below the waterline. Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt winds and 5-foot chop. 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. ;-) Do you never tire of it? John, it is truly a shame that your *contribution* to the NG has sunk to Kevin's level. |
A boat likely to be of interest
JimH wrote: 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. ;-) You *completely* distorted my comments, and then crafted an argument based not on my comments but on your own distortion. (You really need to switch to a different type of radio programming). I said: (cut and paste from the post) "Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered 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." You said I said: "You said the boat was built only for calm, sheltered water as the boat will take on water in rough or following seas" Not much point to continue to defend a position that I never stated in the first place, is there? I stand by my original comment quoted above. What that has to do with what you tried to read into it, I'll never know. |
A boat likely to be of interest
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... JimH wrote: 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. ;-) You *completely* distorted my comments, and then crafted an argument based not on my comments but on your own distortion. (You really need to switch to a different type of radio programming). I said: (cut and paste from the post) "Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered 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." Sorry if I distorted things. I did conclude though that it is a shame that this 32 foot boat cannot handle open water or 5 foot seas without the fear of flooding the deck. ;-) Poor engineering. |
A boat likely to be of interest
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. They are articles designed to peak the readers interest in the boat and boating in general. As we have discussed many times previously, all boating and speciality magazines in general, write these kind of articles to promote their hobbies, interest and to increase their readership, so they can increase their ad revenue. When Chuck posts them in rec.boats he encourages boating discussions, but no one should ever assume Chuck's, or any boat magazine boat article, is a critical review of a boat. Most people (probably all people) who buy boating magazines understand the articles are not critical reviews, so when you read Chuck's reprints of those articles in rec.boats you really need to understand he does not pretend they are critical reviews, why do you? |
A boat likely to be of interest
Harry Krause wrote: I wouldn't have felt very safe in that overgrown bubble boat. Then you certainly should never own one. Is that the new universal standard for a good boat? It has to be suitable for Harry Krause's occassional use, whether or not one boats in the same conditions? I personally wouldn't have your Parker up my keister if I had room in there for Barnum and Bailey's entire circus- but that doesn't mean it isn't a good boat nor that people who would be in a position to enjoy and appreciate its characteristics shouldn't own one. |
A boat likely to be of interest
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message . .. 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. |
A boat likely to be of interest
JimH wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message . .. 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. The points you mentioned are ones that worthy of any boating discussion, the fact that you prefered to make it a discussion on his review is a waste of bandwidth. To anyone reading your posts it appears that you are begging for another fight with Chuck. If Chuck tells you "win" can you let this one go. |
A boat likely to be of interest
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:22:41 -0400, " JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com
wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... JimH wrote: I wonder how much water gets into the cabin when the cockpit starts to flood? Lets hope it has some monster bilge pumps. Since you seem so fixated on this, how well does your own boat handle following seas breaking over the transom? I don't know as I don't venture out in those types of seas and keep my eye on the weather so I do not get caught in conditions that would result in following seas crashing over my transom. It is a 20 foot runabout Chuck, not a 32 foot cruiser. ;-) (If you don't know, that probably says more for your seamanship than if you do). Why are you turning this personal Chuck? I thought you wanted a discussion of the boat you reviewed. He gave you a compliment... Try reading for comprehension just one time! |
A boat likely to be of interest
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message . .. JimH wrote: "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message . .. 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. The points you mentioned are ones that worthy of any boating discussion, the fact that you prefered to make it a discussion on his review is a waste of bandwidth. To anyone reading your posts it appears that you are begging for another fight with Chuck. If Chuck tells you "win" can you let this one go. I am not begging for a fight. He asked for a discussion and I took him up on it. If the weaknesses of a boat design cannot be discussed like adults without getting personal or thinking a party is trying to start a fight then that is a problem you will have to work out for yourself. BTW: Like others, I believe Chuck's info-mercials are well written. ;-) |
A boat likely to be of interest
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:38:55 -0400, " JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com
wrote: "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message ... 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. You misread, then misquote, than argue against your misquotes as though they were stated by the OP. Anne Arundel County Schools are also facing a reading comprehension problem. |
A boat likely to be of interest
JimH wrote: "JohnH" wrote in message ... On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:03:12 -0400, " JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message groups.com... JR North wrote: They should shoot that rear shot at the bottom of the page with about a 2 foot following sea. JR If a following sea broke across the swimstep there could be some flooding of the cockpit, but not as much as you might expect. ( There is a huge, recessed deck drain just outside the companionway door). The sunpad and locker substitutes for a traditional transom, and the passages to port and starboard are partially protected with what would be, in effect, "reduced flow" transom doors. If the following sea wasn't breaking, the boat would just ride up and over the top like any other and the increased pressure and effect on steering would all be taking place below the waterline. Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt winds and 5-foot chop. 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. ;-) Do you never tire of it? John, it is truly a shame that your *contribution* to the NG has sunk to Kevin's level. Hey, Jim, I love it how you are such a little ****ing cry baby!!!! Care to wager that I'm not Kevin? Grow up. |
A boat likely to be of interest
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote: JimH wrote: "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message . .. 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. The points you mentioned are ones that worthy of any boating discussion, the fact that you prefered to make it a discussion on his review is a waste of bandwidth. To anyone reading your posts it appears that you are begging for another fight with Chuck. If Chuck tells you "win" can you let this one go. Jim's just on yet another of his monthly period bipolar rants. Same old, same old! |
A boat likely to be of interest
JimH wrote: "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message . .. JimH wrote: "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message . .. 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. The points you mentioned are ones that worthy of any boating discussion, the fact that you prefered to make it a discussion on his review is a waste of bandwidth. To anyone reading your posts it appears that you are begging for another fight with Chuck. If Chuck tells you "win" can you let this one go. I am not begging for a fight. He asked for a discussion and I took him up on it. If the weaknesses of a boat design cannot be discussed like adults without getting personal or thinking a party is trying to start a fight then that is a problem you will have to work out for yourself. BTW: Like others, I believe Chuck's info-mercials are well written. ;-) How do you know ANYTHING about "the weaknesses of the boat's design"? Have you been on one? Have you took it out in the types of seas you are mentioning? Have you even seen one up close? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:48 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com