Reply With QuoteOriginally Posted by Fish Guts
G'day
How is a vertical drop onto concrete relevant to the conditions of which you are likely to encounter out at sea? It's a totally different kind of force and direction of force imo.
Dave
what an absolute piss poor hull for such a big boat. id hate so see one of those in some big seas.
i think this should be done more often to these gold coast style boats !!!
G'day
How is a vertical drop onto concrete relevant to the conditions of which you are likely to encounter out at sea? It's a totally different kind of force and direction of force imo.
Dave
I would love to see any boat survive that drop...any small fibreglass boat would just be some shards scattered around...Al. boats would just need Sims to scrape it up. Nothing could survive that drop without major damage.
Ha ha Kerry I can see it now, "well y'all if it cant take the 100ft drop test y'all can be sure it wont be able to take that 2 foot NQ chop, back to the drawing board i guess"Well if it can't handle a simple drop test wouldn't be any point odering one for GBR waters
Cheers and Beers
Scott
"Mystique" Haines Signature 580BR with 175 of Mr Suzuki's finest ponies
Those pictures are painful to look at..... no matter what size she used to be.
I had a look at an options list for these boats, the radar setup on one of these alone cost more than my boat
Dave,
I wasnt suggesting that the hull should of lasted after such a drop. I was drawing the comment from looking at the hull itself in comparission to the superstructure and size of the boat. Completley out of proportion, hence why i think these boats are good for calm water and absolelty shocking for big seas. simple equation
Have to agree with you wessel, never a good sight for any boat.
Luc
[quote=Fish Guts;579620]Dave,
I wasnt suggesting that the hull should of lasted after such a drop. I was drawing the comment from looking at the hull itself in comparission to the superstructure and size of the boat. Completley out of proportion, you'd find some houseboats with better hulls than these !! hence why i think these boats are good for calm water and absolelty shocking for big seas. simple equation..................
What a ridiculus statement.
That particular boat has far more freeboard, far more stability and less windage (also equates somewhat to low CG) than many other "see going" or restricted "sea going vessels such as large sportsfishers etc etc etc.
Not to mention that construction would be along the rules of international classification societies or fully certified as such.
I could go on....
cbs
far more freeboard, far more stability and less windage ?? whatever...there floating palances not boats..if these things dont have a windage problem why has everyone got thrusters on them then ? trust me they look brilliant but in the sea they nose down and shit themselves all over the place. i drove a 65ft dyna for a year up north off and on, and although not a sunseeker, quite similiar in layout, it handled like an absolute pig !!! let alone the wetness of it, i dont know how many wiper blades we went through.
i gurantee this thing alongside a 58 riv or big cresta,the sunskker would be left behind with chardonay and caviar from head to toe.
please go on ..
can someone please drop a Riv or Cresta so we can get compatative results.
im not talking about the drop pinhead im talking about the hull . i explained that if you cared to read above.
I read it..as for thrusters..why do most owners have them on Rivs also ???
Horse for courses..people buy what suits them.
because they cant manouvere a boat properly ! without taking out a whole finger of berths !!
I am pathetic at berthing but so far have not managed to hit anything.
Posting Permissions
