On 29 Jan 2007 13:00:09 -0800, wrote:

If i was cruising 40 miles off-shore, i
might have a different feeling about what is below the water line!

The real issue with balsa below the water line is long term
durability, and what happens when you hit something. Neither answer
is particularly good.

As to outdrives. Given the cost of the boat you are comtemplating you
should consider changing marinas if the depth of your marina will not
allow
you to use a conventionally propped boat.

Check the thread. It's his own pier on Kent Island.

But regardless of which type of drive, you're going to be hard-pressed to
keep anything over 30' in three feet of water. Jet drive boats like the
Hinckley's being the exception, but prepare for sticker shock.

I think you'll find that a boat
of that size will be very difficult to sell on the used market when the
time
for that inevitably comes.

Diesel in boats over 34' certainly do seem to sell faster on the used
market. I wouldn't go so far as calling it 'difficult' to sell a larger gas
powered boat. But when you get into the 37' and up range you really do
benefit from the torque the diesels have to offer.

BLASPHEMY!!!
JR
wrote:

SeaRay is Caddillac of
Bruswick Boats with Maxum being the Pontiac and BayLiner being the
Chevy.


--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth

On Jan 29, 12:04?pm, Harry Krause wrote:
On Jan 29, 11:03?am, wrote:

There have been some serious evaluations of larger SeaRays showing
significant shortcomings in hull fiberglass builds. If you haven't found
these yourself, I can probably retrieve them.

I hope you're not referring to the bogus nonsense posted by David
Pascoe........

If so, my favorite shot is the one where the failed backyard repair,
(looks like automotive bondo) is represented as typical OEM
construction

On Jan 29, 1:00?pm, wrote:
On Jan 29, 3:04 pm, Harry Krause wrote:

On Jan 29, 11:03?am, wrote:There have been some serious evaluations of larger SeaRays showing
significant shortcomings in hull fiberglass builds. If you haven't found
these yourself, I can probably retrieve them.

Yes, i have seen these. There are also skeptics on the Cruisers as
built w/ Balsa below the water line. Not sure what the answer is. For
my situation, we use the boat in the chesapeak bay and tributaries and
are always w/in sight of land. If i was cruising 40 miles off-shore, i
might have a different feeling about what is below the water line!

If you look at a boat with balsa coring, make sure that there are FRP
fairing blocks for through hulls, etc. Should be. That will minimize a
lot of the problems than can result from a cored hull, and be cautious
about just drilling holes willy nilly in the future. Some multi-
million-dollar mega yachts use balsa coring in the hull, so there are
schools of thought that go beyond "Balsa coring is always bad news".

As far as the oft cited concern: "If you run up onto a rock and punch
a hole in the bottom you are going to get the balsa coring wet",
remember that if you run up onto a rock and punch a hole in the bottom
you are going to be spending some serious do-re-mi, (yours or the
insurance company's) to get things fixed again. Part of a proper fix
would be removing and replacing any coring that was damaged or became
wet as a result of the breach.

On 29 Jan 2007 21:09:22 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

I hope you're not referring to the bogus nonsense posted by David
Pascoe........

If so, my favorite shot is the one where the failed backyard repair,
(looks like automotive bondo) is represented as typical OEM
construction

Pascoe may not be that far off the mark. I've known quite a few
owners of balsa cored boats who have experienced *serious* structural
issues. These are boats that were designed for off shore sailing and
built by reputable folks. Very few of them last more than 10 or 15
years.

On Jan 29, 10:28�pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On 29 Jan 2007 21:09:22 -0800, "Chuck Gould"

wrote:
I hope you're not referring to the bogus nonsense posted by David
Pascoe........

If so, my favorite shot is the one where the failed backyard repair,
(looks like automotive bondo) is represented as typical OEM
construction

Pascoe may not be that far off the mark. *I've known quite a few
owners of balsa cored boats who have experienced *serious* structural
issues. *These are boats that were designed for off shore sailing and
built by reputable folks. *Very few of them last more than 10 or 15
years.

Pascoe claims that most fiberglass boats are built over cores
consisting of junk materials and putty-type fillers. He doesn't
concentrate on balsa.

http://yachtsurvey.com/Fiberglass_Boats.htm


The 3rd and 4th photos on that page obviously show failed repairs. Why
would the builder randomly toss a section of junk putty into the
laminate, and how could you possbily continue the layup of a boat
(from the outside in) and leave trowel marks on the *outside edge* the
bondo?

The Sea Ray that he shows in that item is 16 years out of date.
According to the dates he has written on the scraps in the upper left
photo, it's a 1991.

Chuck Gould wrote:


The Sea Ray that he shows in that item is 16 years out of date.
According to the dates he has written on the scraps in the upper left
photo, it's a 1991.


Most likely the SeaRay in the photo was built in the 80's. As Chuck
eluded to, all mfg'ers have made substantial changes in their mfg'er
process since then. It would not be prudent to make your buying
decisions upon upon 20 yr old data. That being said I would be hesitant
to buy a less expensive boat with balsa core hull below the water line.
If so, I would want to verify that all thru holes and high stress
areas, such as stanchions are solid fiberglass and are reinforced with a
backing plate. Cruiser online sales info, went out of their way to
discuss the metal reinforcing plate on their high stress areas, but did
not mention solid glass around their thru holes. I would contact
Cruisers directly to verify that info.

I did a lot of research before buying my last new boat. SeaRay's were
vastly overpriced, but good boats. It came down to either a Cruisers,
Inc. 3950 aft cabin or a Carver that was about the same size and
configuration. I went around to the shipyards and surveyers in my
area, and hands down, everyone recommended the Cruisers. Very good
construction, well made, "built like a Hatteras" was one of the
comments. I bought it and was very happy with it until sold. They have
a good reputation, and the factory was very helpful when needed. That
all being said, the local dealer was crap, and is now out of business.
If you're buying new, the local dealer is at least as important as the
boat, since they assemble it on site and do all the warranty work.
Check them out as well.

On 30 Jan 2007 14:07:13 -0800, wrote:

On Jan 29, 7:13 pm, "Butch Davis" wrote:
On boatered.com/forum/ there is a thread in the cruisers forum that you may
find interesting. It is not pretty and may not be typical but I recomment
you have a look.

As to outdrives. Given the cost of the boat you are comtemplating you
should consider changing marinas if the depth of your marina will not allow
you to use a conventionally propped boat. I think you'll find that a boat
of that size will be very difficult to sell on the used market when the time
for that inevitably comes.

Butch"JimH" wrote in message

...





wrote in message
roups.com...
I have a 2004 SeaRay 260 w/ AlpahIII out drive and Mercruiser Gas
Engine. Looking to step up in size, 35-37ft. SeaRay is Caddillac of
Bruswick Boats with Maxum being the Pontiac and BayLiner being the
Chevy. Where does Cruisers Yachts Fit in terms of Quality?
I have no real issues w/ SeaRay but I do like the layouts of the
Cruisers a bit more. Also wondering if i should step up to Diesels in
stead of gas.

Thoughts?

Have you also looked at Regal and Maxum (a SeaRay without the *Bling*)?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Jim, my marina is my house!

JimH tends to overlook a lot while reading.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."