On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:16:13 -0400, HK wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 10:35:32 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:10:50 -0000, shipmk wrote:

-Special Purpose Vessels: Research Vessel, Training Ship, Floating
Dock, Floating Crane, Pleasure Boat, Hospital Ship, Patrol Boat
Can you build a low transom 21 foot center console?
Why would anyone want to build one of those?

There are some who believe that wet decks and unstable platforms in
stern seas are a plus. It's a kind of "macho" thing.

Not to mention any names of course, but a set of initials might just
look like...

Well, let's just leave it at that.

Plus, based on Gene's story, they make good artificial reefs. :)


Speaking of wet decks, this is a 22' Bay Ranger:

http://tinyurl.com/2rlax5

Specs say it is only 16.5" deep from the cockpit sole to the
gunnels...couple of interesting broadsides, and glug, glug, glug.

Nice boat for the Florida flats or the North Florida ICW...I'd certainly
not take it out in the ocean or a big bay.

Tell you what - let's do a little "test".

I'll bring my Ranger down there when I leave for SC next week and on
my way back, we'll put your Parker up against my Ranger in some heavy
wakes or seas.

Broadside. I guarentee you I will be nice and dry and you will be
soaked. No boots - deck shoes for evidence.

And just for giggles, let's see if your 150 Yamaha can pull the stern
of my Ranger under. Then we'll see if my ETEC can pull the stern of
your Parker under.

How 'bout it? Up for it? :)

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:16:13 -0400, HK wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 10:35:32 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:10:50 -0000, shipmk wrote:

-Special Purpose Vessels: Research Vessel, Training Ship, Floating
Dock, Floating Crane, Pleasure Boat, Hospital Ship, Patrol Boat
Can you build a low transom 21 foot center console?
Why would anyone want to build one of those?
There are some who believe that wet decks and unstable platforms in
stern seas are a plus. It's a kind of "macho" thing.

Not to mention any names of course, but a set of initials might just
look like...

Well, let's just leave it at that.

Plus, based on Gene's story, they make good artificial reefs. :)

Speaking of wet decks, this is a 22' Bay Ranger:

http://tinyurl.com/2rlax5

Specs say it is only 16.5" deep from the cockpit sole to the
gunnels...couple of interesting broadsides, and glug, glug, glug.

Nice boat for the Florida flats or the North Florida ICW...I'd certainly
not take it out in the ocean or a big bay.

Tell you what - let's do a little "test".

I'll bring my Ranger down there when I leave for SC next week and on
my way back, we'll put your Parker up against my Ranger in some heavy
wakes or seas.

Broadside. I guarentee you I will be nice and dry and you will be
soaked. No boots - deck shoes for evidence.

And just for giggles, let's see if your 150 Yamaha can pull the stern
of my Ranger under. Then we'll see if my ETEC can pull the stern of
your Parker under.

How 'bout it? Up for it? :)


Oh the first part makes perfect sense, as my boat, though a foot shorter
than yours (you have a 22' boat, right?), it is about a foot deeper from
the deck to the gunnels, has the typical "Carolina flare," has 21
degrees of deadrise at the transom and probably weighs about 1000 pounds
more. Right. Makes perfect sense, even though what you are saying
violates the laws of physics. Yep, your boat is going to be drier in
heavy seas. Sure it is.

The second part would be fun if we had the same sized engines on the
transom...don't you have a 300 hp deadTec on that wet little boat? :}

I only have a 150.

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:56:05 -0400, HK wrote:



Oh the first part makes perfect sense, as my boat, though a foot shorter
than yours (you have a 22' boat, right?), it is about a foot deeper from
the deck to the gunnels, has the typical "Carolina flare," has 21
degrees of deadrise at the transom and probably weighs about 1000 pounds
more. Right. Makes perfect sense, even though what you are saying
violates the laws of physics. Yep, your boat is going to be drier in
heavy seas. Sure it is.

20' and I can see you are already backing down.

Chicken. :)

The second part would be fun if we had the same sized engines on the
transom...don't you have a 300 hp deadTec on that wet little boat? :}

I only have a 150.

200 HO.

I'll only go half throttle. :)

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:56:05 -0400, HK wrote:


Oh the first part makes perfect sense, as my boat, though a foot shorter
than yours (you have a 22' boat, right?), it is about a foot deeper from
the deck to the gunnels, has the typical "Carolina flare," has 21
degrees of deadrise at the transom and probably weighs about 1000 pounds
more. Right. Makes perfect sense, even though what you are saying
violates the laws of physics. Yep, your boat is going to be drier in
heavy seas. Sure it is.

20' and I can see you are already backing down.

Chicken. :)

The second part would be fun if we had the same sized engines on the
transom...don't you have a 300 hp deadTec on that wet little boat? :}

I only have a 150.

200 HO.

I'll only go half throttle. :)


You have the 20' SmallBayRanger? Ranger must have dropped that model, as
the 20-footer is not rated for 200 horsepower. Unless you are exceeding
the recommended maximum.

Are the dimensions on your boat, but for length, about the same as the
22-footer? If so, you have a very wide, fairly flat-bottomed, modified
vee hull. Hard riding in the chop and wet.

I've seen Ranger bay boats out on nice days. How many Parker 2100CC's
have you seen? Probably none. There are plenty of Parker 21's out there,
but they mostly are the "SE" models. Different boat.

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:21:15 -0400, HK wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:56:05 -0400, HK wrote:


Oh the first part makes perfect sense, as my boat, though a foot shorter
than yours (you have a 22' boat, right?), it is about a foot deeper from
the deck to the gunnels, has the typical "Carolina flare," has 21
degrees of deadrise at the transom and probably weighs about 1000 pounds
more. Right. Makes perfect sense, even though what you are saying
violates the laws of physics. Yep, your boat is going to be drier in
heavy seas. Sure it is.

20' and I can see you are already backing down.

Chicken. :)

The second part would be fun if we had the same sized engines on the
transom...don't you have a 300 hp deadTec on that wet little boat? :}

I only have a 150.

200 HO.

I'll only go half throttle. :)


You have the 20' SmallBayRanger? Ranger must have dropped that model, as
the 20-footer is not rated for 200 horsepower. Unless you are exceeding
the recommended maximum.

Finally figured it out - heh...

Mines rated for 225 and is a completely different boat from the "new"
bay boats.

Are the dimensions on your boat, but for length, about the same as the
22-footer? If so, you have a very wide, fairly flat-bottomed, modified
vee hull. Hard riding in the chop and wet.

Hey - ask Scott. He's been in some crap with me in it.

I've seen Ranger bay boats out on nice days. How many Parker 2100CC's
have you seen? Probably none. There are plenty of Parker 21's out there,
but they mostly are the "SE" models. Different boat.

A few actually - very few, but a few.

However, Parker's aren't that unique in design - they are pretty much
the same old same old when it comes to design - pretty standard boat.

No style, no class. :)

I'm sorry, that wasn't fair.

I apologize.

~~ snerk ~~

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:21:15 -0400, HK wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:56:05 -0400, HK wrote:

Oh the first part makes perfect sense, as my boat, though a foot shorter
than yours (you have a 22' boat, right?), it is about a foot deeper from
the deck to the gunnels, has the typical "Carolina flare," has 21
degrees of deadrise at the transom and probably weighs about 1000 pounds
more. Right. Makes perfect sense, even though what you are saying
violates the laws of physics. Yep, your boat is going to be drier in
heavy seas. Sure it is.
20' and I can see you are already backing down.

Chicken. :)

The second part would be fun if we had the same sized engines on the
transom...don't you have a 300 hp deadTec on that wet little boat? :}

I only have a 150.
200 HO.

I'll only go half throttle. :)

You have the 20' SmallBayRanger? Ranger must have dropped that model, as
the 20-footer is not rated for 200 horsepower. Unless you are exceeding
the recommended maximum.

Finally figured it out - heh...

Mines rated for 225 and is a completely different boat from the "new"
bay boats.

Are the dimensions on your boat, but for length, about the same as the
22-footer? If so, you have a very wide, fairly flat-bottomed, modified
vee hull. Hard riding in the chop and wet.

Hey - ask Scott. He's been in some crap with me in it.

I've seen Ranger bay boats out on nice days. How many Parker 2100CC's
have you seen? Probably none. There are plenty of Parker 21's out there,
but they mostly are the "SE" models. Different boat.

A few actually - very few, but a few.

However, Parker's aren't that unique in design - they are pretty much
the same old same old when it comes to design - pretty standard boat.

No style, no class. :)

I'm sorry, that wasn't fair.

I apologize.

~~ snerk ~~


No glitz on Parkers, for sure. That's what is most endearing to me.
Is your Ranger finished in metalflake?

On Oct 8, 3:49 pm, HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:21:15 -0400, HK wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:56:05 -0400, HK wrote:

Oh the first part makes perfect sense, as my boat, though a foot shorter
than yours (you have a 22' boat, right?), it is about a foot deeper from
the deck to the gunnels, has the typical "Carolina flare," has 21
degrees of deadrise at the transom and probably weighs about 1000 pounds
more. Right. Makes perfect sense, even though what you are saying
violates the laws of physics. Yep, your boat is going to be drier in
heavy seas. Sure it is.
20' and I can see you are already backing down.

Chicken. :)

The second part would be fun if we had the same sized engines on the
transom...don't you have a 300 hp deadTec on that wet little boat? :}

I only have a 150.
200 HO.

I'll only go half throttle. :)

You have the 20' SmallBayRanger? Ranger must have dropped that model, as
the 20-footer is not rated for 200 horsepower. Unless you are exceeding
the recommended maximum.

Finally figured it out - heh...

Mines rated for 225 and is a completely different boat from the "new"
bay boats.

Are the dimensions on your boat, but for length, about the same as the
22-footer? If so, you have a very wide, fairly flat-bottomed, modified
vee hull. Hard riding in the chop and wet.

Hey - ask Scott. He's been in some crap with me in it.

I've seen Ranger bay boats out on nice days. How many Parker 2100CC's
have you seen? Probably none. There are plenty of Parker 21's out there,
but they mostly are the "SE" models. Different boat.

A few actually - very few, but a few.

However, Parker's aren't that unique in design - they are pretty much
the same old same old when it comes to design - pretty standard boat.

No style, no class. :)

I'm sorry, that wasn't fair.

I apologize.

~~ snerk ~~

No glitz on Parkers, for sure. That's what is most endearing to me.
Is your Ranger finished in metalflake?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not on the boat. The custom fitted trailer however does iirc

On Oct 8, 3:42 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:21:15 -0400, HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:56:05 -0400, HK wrote:

Oh the first part makes perfect sense, as my boat, though a foot shorter
than yours (you have a 22' boat, right?), it is about a foot deeper from
the deck to the gunnels, has the typical "Carolina flare," has 21
degrees of deadrise at the transom and probably weighs about 1000 pounds
more. Right. Makes perfect sense, even though what you are saying
violates the laws of physics. Yep, your boat is going to be drier in
heavy seas. Sure it is.

20' and I can see you are already backing down.

Chicken. :)

The second part would be fun if we had the same sized engines on the
transom...don't you have a 300 hp deadTec on that wet little boat? :}

I only have a 150.

200 HO.

I'll only go half throttle. :)

You have the 20' SmallBayRanger? Ranger must have dropped that model, as
the 20-footer is not rated for 200 horsepower. Unless you are exceeding
the recommended maximum.

Finally figured it out - heh...

Mines rated for 225 and is a completely different boat from the "new"
bay boats.

Are the dimensions on your boat, but for length, about the same as the
22-footer? If so, you have a very wide, fairly flat-bottomed, modified
vee hull. Hard riding in the chop and wet.

Hey - ask Scott. He's been in some crap with me in it.

I've seen Ranger bay boats out on nice days. How many Parker 2100CC's
have you seen? Probably none. There are plenty of Parker 21's out there,
but they mostly are the "SE" models. Different boat.

A few actually - very few, but a few.

However, Parker's aren't that unique in design - they are pretty much
the same old same old when it comes to design - pretty standard boat.

No style, no class. :)

I'm sorry, that wasn't fair.

I apologize.

~~ snerk ~~- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

We been out in some snot, and I have not gotten wet yet. And I have
noted to Tom several times how smooth she seems to land. I really
expected a pounding at 45 mph in the slow rollers a couple of weeks
back, but it was not to bad at all. Weather said 5-10 from the south,
we got out and it was 10-20 from the NW.. Great day of fishing

On Oct 8, 9:13?am, Short Wave Sportfishing
I'll only go half throttle. :)

Sounds like a half fast compromise to me. :-)

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Oct 8, 9:13?am, Short Wave Sportfishing
I'll only go half throttle. :)

Sounds like a half fast compromise to me. :-)




On the other hand, experiments and demonstrations that promise to
violate the laws of physics often are interesting. Tom has proposed one.