 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsBoatsPaddle BoatsSailingCruisingBuildingElectronics Related Topics CarsMotorcyclesMore Topics ... |
Boat Forum / Cruising / June 2005Opinions on Sea Ray 215
Hi, I am about to purchase a Sea Ray 215 EC 1997 (I am in the UK) Here is an example: http://tinyurl.com/b2m2f I am interested to know if anyone has any experience with one of these and what you thought of it. Thanks zeebop > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > zeebop Piece of crap. See for yourself what's inside a Sea Ray boat: http://www.yachtsurvey.com/Fiberglass_Boats.htm It's made of "putty"??.... I had the jetboat. Light came through the hull. Seats mildewed because they were made of COTTON-BACKED plastic with cheap furniture foam by some furniture company in Tennesee. The side panel mildewed because the cotton- backed plastic was over a cotton pad all stapled to a piece of packing crate wood. It rotted out twice in 3 years. There was no way to get to the fuel tank INLET or INLET VENT because they were stuffed into the hull before the top was put on with no access hatch. You couldn't even check to see if the fuel tank inlet hoses had a clamp on them because you couldn't see it unless you tore the boat apart. The polyethelene (milk bottle plastic) tank was kept in place with two 1" long plastic angle brackets screwed into the stringer with one sheet metal screw. The two little brackets supported a 25 gallon gas tank! NOT! They were eating into the polyethelene, which is very soft, so I had to build some proper brackets to stop it. The Mercury Sport Jet, considered by CG as an inboard engine, has a 5/16" hose barb for the fuel hose. Sea Ray attached a 3/8" fuel hose because that's what the gas tank fitting had on it. They used two hose clamps to try to squeeze the hose over the smaller barb to keep it from leaking. Didn't work. The fuel hose from the tank to the engine, a 3/8" marine gas line, was supported and held to the engine compartment bulkhead with the same 3" diameter clamps used for the big inlet hose. This meant when the 3/8" hose fell off the 5/16" barb into the bilge, it pulled the hose through these huge clamps far enough the suction of the siphon effect overcame the anti-siphon valve, if it had one, and filled the enclosed up hull with about 6" of GASOLINE! The fumes were strong enough to roughly run the engine sucking its air supply from in the compartment. Why it didn't explode is simply a miracle. I won't admit to where I pumped 10 gallons of gasoline way up a river in the swamp. I was not amused. Sea Ray sent me a lifetime supply of 5/16" gas hose, proving they actually knew what 5/16" hose looked like. I still have a whole roll if you need it. I solved the problem with a proper fuel filter/water separator with 3/8" inlet and 5/16" outlet fittings the damned company should have used in the first place if they hadn't been so damned greedy. Sea Ray of Charleston, a bigshot marine dealer...... I didn't buy my boat from my local dealer because I bought it in Birmingham, Alabama for $3500 less money from a dealer there. OK, so I'm a bad boy getting it for wholesale from an overstocked dealer. I had the boat serviced a couple of times at the local dealer when someone noticed the dealer sticker from Dead Ahead Marine on the back of the boat. I was informed my Sea Ray boat was no longer welcome at my Sea Ray dealer for warranty service as the local dealer didn't sell this boat. I called Sea Ray and was told that was correct. The Sea Ray dealer didn't have to service my Sea Ray boat if he didn't sell it. Isn't that nice?! How supportive of the company.... Nope...no thanks. Sea Ray (or Brunswick's other boat companies) don't have to worry about selling me another boat. I'll pass. Just thought you should know..... England sure has some beautifully made boats. Why buy a piece of American made crap??  SignatureLarry You know you've had a rough night when you wake up and you're outlined in chalk. >> Hi, >> [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > England sure has some beautifully made boats. Why buy a piece of American > made crap?? SeaRay? Are we talking abot the same SeaRay? My dad has had two SeaRays. A 19.5 enclosed front and 24 ft enclosed front with fly bridge. Both are built like tanks. Incredible seaworthiness. Handled 6-10 ft (2-3 meter) short period waves on Lake Powell with no flex, and no water over the bow on more than one occassion. Never had any problems with the hulls. Both are older boats, with I/Os. One is power by a V-8 Ford 302 and the other is power by twin 4 cylinder Chevrolets. We have had to do engine maintenance on them, and the carb on the Ford needs to be dissassembled and reassembled every other year for cleaning, but the boats are rock solid. You are talking about the SeaRays made in Phoenix, Az aren't you? SignatureBob La Londe http://www.YumaBassMan.com Bob, SeaRay was bought by Brunswick around 1989. They make a good bowling ball I'm told. :-) Paul >>>Hi, >>> [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] > every other year for cleaning, but the boats are rock solid. You are > talking about the SeaRays made in Phoenix, Az aren't you? Bob, SeaRay was bought by Brunswick around 1989. They make a good bowling ball I'm told. :-) Paul ********* ........as well as some highly respected boating trademarks. Examples like Hatteras and Boston Whaler come quickly to mind. > older boats Before Brunswick bought the company and turned them into Bayliners.... SignatureLarry You know you've had a rough night when you wake up and you're outlined in chalk. >>Hi, >> [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > England sure has some beautifully made boats. Why buy a piece of American > made crap?? Seems like almost everything you buy, you have high praise for it, then you beat the crap out of it, and then you have buyer's remorse. You used to praise almost everything about your jetboat except for the seats. I remember when you bought a new HP desktop computer, praised it to the skies, and then started telling everyone how awful it was. Then you dumped Windows for LINUX but came back to Windows because the software you wanted to run wasn't available on LINUX. SignatureIf it is Bad for Bush, It is Good for the United States. Larry W4SC wrote: Piece of crap. See for yourself what's inside a Sea Ray boat: http://www.yachtsurvey.com/Fiberglass_Boats.htm It's made of "putty"??.... *************************** If you're going to slam a brand, please try to use information that is up to date. That chunk of Sea Ray hull is probably at least 15 years old, and does not represent the way the boats are currently built. Using that as an example is like telling people to stay away from Ford Motor Company vehicles because the Pinto isn't much of a car. Here's a factual look at the modern manufacturing process used by Sea Ray, rather than one basher quoting another and using a 15-year old hull as evidence. http://www.netcomposites.com/downloads/RTMaut04.pdf Are you going to disclose to the group that your "Sea Ray boat" was a glorified jet ski, offered for only a year or two, (and quite possibly built by some outside company and rebadged as a Sea Ray), or not? While you're at it, are you willing to admit that the shocking photo on David Pascoe's site actually represents a failed repair, and not OEM construction? Every time somebody brings up that David Pascoe link to slam Sea Ray, they fail to point out that there are hull chunks from a wide variety of very "high end" boats. Very few runabout boats are built with a cored hull these days. Larger cruisers often use Divynicell or other cores (hardly putty) but normally only above the waterline. > While you're at it, are you willing to admit that the shocking photo on > David Pascoe's site actually represents a failed repair, and not OEM > construction? Notice how that website is STILL, after all these years, ONLINE? If it were false, Brunswick's lawyer clan would be on David Pascoe so fast his hat would have sailed off. They haven't and it's STILL ONLINE! Being in denial the Sea Ray name isn't the Sea Ray of old isn't going to change the slipshod workmanship and lousy, cheap designs. Yacht standards, my a.s. Sue me. SignatureLarry You know you've had a rough night when you wake up and you're outlined in chalk. >> While you're at it, are you willing to admit that the shocking photo on >> David Pascoe's site actually represents a failed repair, and not OEM [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > standards, > my a.s. Sue me. Chuck just did a fluff review of a SeaRay and found absolutely no problems with it. His final impression was that you need one to "look good and go fast", or something to that effect. He has to defend them.......SeaRay paid him to do so. JimH wrote: Chuck just did a fluff review of a SeaRay and found absolutely no problems with it. His final impression was that you need one to "look good and go fast", or something to that effect. ************************* I've got no problem with somebody who knows their butt from first base expressing a negative opinion about a boat. The operative standard should be, "Brand X boats are crap...BECAUSE (insert factual, current, technical reason here)." What will we hear next? "All Sea Ray owners wear too many gold chains and have small sexual organs!"? (actual quote from a recent "classic" post from a non-boater in this NG) You might ask Larry if he wore a lot of gold chains and needed a double dose of Viagra while he owned his Sea Ray branded glorified jet ski. Wouldn't it be fun to be right about something for a change? As far as this ridiculous claim of yours goes, "He has to defend them.......Sea Ray paid him to do so." I am sure you know that's a lie. I'm also sure you do not care. Why let truth get in the way of a good old-fashioned JimH patented personal attack? My "defense" of Sea Ray involved nothing more than exposing Larry's dubious link to a site with long-ago outdated information about Sea Ray hull construction as the bogus advice it was. It's one thing to say, "I don't like that brand," but it's another to point to some badly outdated information and maliciously insist that it represents current technology. Would it be better to let the lie stand unchallenged? Isn't there some group where you're actually capable of participating without tearing everybody and everything down all the time? That knock, knock, knock, crap is for people who don't have the ability to discuss the subject matter and so turn instead to bithcing about personalities. What a shame. > JimH wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > wear too many gold chains and have small sexual organs!"? (actual > quote from a recent "classic" post from a non-boater in this NG) SeaRay owners wearing too many gold chains??? Imho, after they make the down payment for the boat, they have to give them all up in payment for the their lobotomy. Just observing after cruising in Florida waters. I don't know if it is just arrogance or too much Budweiser, but they tend to be the most inconsiderate folks on the water. Leanne > As far as this ridiculous claim of yours goes, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > truth get in the way of a good old-fashioned JimH patented personal > attack? Why is this not a factual statement? Does SeaRay run ads in your magazine? Does your magazine live and die by the ad revenue generated by boat builders and suppliers? Does the retail price of your magazine cover a tiny faction of the cost to produce your magazine? Does your editor pay you to write fluff pieces "selling the sizzle" of boats and boating? If you insisted on writing unbiased reviews of the boats you discuss, would any of the articles ever get published and would you earn any money? Notice how that website is STILL, after all these years, ONLINE? If it were false, Brunswick's lawyer clan would be on David Pascoe so fast his hat would have sailed off. They haven't and it's STILL ONLINE! ******** That's funny. You're still on line, spreading the Pascoe lie, and Brunswick hasn't sued your hat off. Why is that? Could it be that Brunswick has better things to do than argue with every kook that comes along? If you believe everything simply because its online, you are one confused guy. Do you have any opinion about the material you viewed (assuming you did) on the link I provided, (showing exactly how the hull in question is built) or will you continue to spread the lie that Sea Ray hulls are built up with "putty"? It's too bad your SeaDoo or whatever didn't work out better for you. It's disingenuous to report you experience as typical of a Sea Ray "boat", and you know (or should know if you're going to presume to render an informed opinion) that the hull on the Pascoe site is not representative of current production- yet you respond to a guy asking about a brand new Sea Ray with some dubious information about a long defunct hull standard with "see how they're made......". I've got no problem with somebody who knows their butt from first base expressing a negative opinion about a boat. The operative standard should be, "Brand X boats are crap...BECAUSE (insert factual, current, technical reason here)." What will we hear next? "All Sea Ray owners wear too many gold chains and have small sexual organs!"? (actual quote from a recent "classic" post from a non-boater in this NG) Tell us, Larry, when you owned your Sea Ray, did you wear a lot of gold chains? Do you consider yourself inadequately endowed? Assuming one or both answers are "no", it goes to show that people who don't know kkkrap about boats, or at least a specific boat, can post all kinds of stuff on the internet without having their hats sued off. >>While you're at it, are you willing to admit that the shocking photo on >>David Pascoe's site actually represents a failed repair, and not OEM [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > change the slipshod workmanship and lousy, cheap designs. Yacht standards, > my a.s. Sue me. Hell's bells, Larry, you're still on-line, and there's probably no one in the boating newsgroups more paranoid than you. Why you haven't been institutionalized yet is one of life's great mysteries. SignatureIf it is Bad for Bush, It is Good for the United States. Chuck, Power Boat Reports had a story not too long ago about new, 55 foot Sea Rays. Several of their owners have complained about water intrusion into the coring. Paul > Larry W4SC wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > cored hull these days. Larger cruisers often use Divynicell or other > cores (hardly putty) but normally only above the waterline. Neither David Pascoe's web site or the fluff pieces written by you and other boat magazine accurately represent the quality of SeaRay. At least David Pascoe's web site accurately represents the boat he surveyed. The fluff pieces written by you and others are PR pieces written for the benefit of the builder, the last person they are written for is the prospective boat buyer. Since the boat buyer is not paying you for your fluff piece they are not important. Larry W4SC wrote: Piece of crap. See for yourself what's inside a Sea Ray boat: http://www.yachtsurvey.com/Fiberglass_Boats.htm It's made of "putty"??.... *************************** If you're going to slam a brand, please try to use information that is up to date. That chunk of Sea Ray hull is probably at least 15 years old, and does not represent the way the boats are currently built. Using that as an example is like telling people to stay away from Ford Motor Company vehicles because the Pinto isn't much of a car. Here's a factual look at the modern manufacturing process used by Sea Ray, rather than one basher quoting another and using a 15-year old hull as evidence. http://www.netcomposites.com/downloads/RTMaut04.pdf Are you going to disclose to the group that your "Sea Ray boat" was a glorified jet ski, offered for only a year or two, (and quite possibly built by some outside company and rebadged as a Sea Ray), or not? While you're at it, are you willing to admit that the shocking photo on David Pascoe's site actually represents a failed repair, and not OEM construction? Every time somebody brings up that David Pascoe link to slam Sea Ray, they fail to point out that there are hull chunks from a wide variety of very "high end" boats. Very few runabout boats are built with a cored hull these days. Larger cruisers often use Divynicell or other cores (hardly putty) but normally only above the waterline. Neither David Pascoe's web site or the fluff pieces written by you and other boat magazine accurately represent the quality of SeaRay. At least David Pascoe's web site accurately represents the boat he surveyed. The fluff pieces written by you and others are PR pieces written for the benefit of the builder, the last person they are written for is the prospective boat buyer. Since the boat buyer is not paying you for your fluff piece they are not important. *************** ????????? I never submitted anything I ever wrote as a rebuttal to Larry's insinuation that Sea Ray boats are made from "putty". Do you have a comment on the actual evidence I submitted, (the website showing photos of a Sea Ray layup and a description of the mfg process), or is that also suspect because it appeared in print? And while you're at it, oh wise one, please don't leave us dangling: If you're in a position to dispute Pascoe's site as well as the European article about Sea Ray layup schedules- please do so. Speak right up, no need to keep it a secret. Here's your opportunity to walk the walk, not just talk the talk:_______________ By the way, Pascoe does not claim that his items are "sureys". He admits they are very negatively oriented opinion pieces. He has stated that it is his mission to attemprt to "balance" any and all positive opinion pieces. Try reading the introduction to his site sometime. > Neither David Pascoe's web site or the fluff pieces written by you and > other [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > that it is his mission to attemprt to "balance" any and all positive > opinion pieces. Try reading the introduction to his site sometime. Chuck, I agree completely with your premise that neither Pascoe article, your boating reviews nor Sea Ray's web site accurately reflect the quality of Sea Ray's boats. The putty shown in Pasco's article was not part of SeaRay's lay up schedule, but the putty could have been applied by the builder to correct a problem noticed after the hull was removed from the mold. > Neither David Pascoe's web site or the fluff pieces written by you and > other [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > that it is his mission to attemprt to "balance" any and all positive > opinion pieces. Try reading the introduction to his site sometime. I find it interesting that David Pascoe is just on ONE boat. One boat does not fairly represent the whole line of boats by that manufacturer. So in MY OPINION, I give Pascoe website very little consideration. Now if he had documented cases of several Sea Rays like that, then it might hold some weight. Ed > Neither David Pascoe's web site or the fluff pieces written by you and > other [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > that it is his mission to attemprt to "balance" any and all positive > opinion pieces. Try reading the introduction to his site sometime. >> Hi, >> [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > England sure has some beautifully made boats. Why buy a piece of American > made crap?? Well that sucks. I am looking to buy a new boat in September and SeaRay was on the top of my list. Maxum being second. Thanks, Duke Well that sucks. I am looking to buy a new boat in September and SeaRay was on the top of my list. Maxum being second. Thanks, Duke ********** Avoid buying a late 80's, early 90's Sea Ray, or a discontinued jet-ski model like Larry owned, and it won't suck - at least not in the same way. :-) > Well that sucks. I am looking to buy a new boat in September and > SeaRay was [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > model like Larry owned, and it won't suck - at least not in the same > way. :-) I would bet on there being only minor qualitative differences among boats of this kind competing for the same buyers. I do recall that Four Winns turned out some better than average boats, but it has been many years since I looked closely at most boats of the type under question. SignatureIf it is Bad for Bush, It is Good for the United States. > Well that sucks. I am looking to buy a new boat in September and > SeaRay was [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > model like Larry owned, and it won't suck - at least not in the same > way. :-) And, avoid boat manufacturer that Chuck has reviewed. >>>Hi, >>> [quoted text clipped - 81 lines] > > Duke I wouldn't give Larry's opinions too much credence. He runs hot and then cold on most of his purchases. SignatureIf it is Bad for Bush, It is Good for the United States. Duke, I would not write off Sea Ray from your short list. I would suggest you place very little credence in any articles you read in any of the boating magazines that sell ads from the boat builders. If you read a review of the best built boat and then read an article of the worst built boat, they both will sound like the best thing since sliced bread. Boat magazine publishers and those who write the articles have sold their soul to boat builders and suppliers. The cover price of the magazine do not begin to cover the expense and profit of any of the commercial magazines. They make their money by selling ad space to the very same boat builders they are reviewing. I would recommend you invest in a survey on any boat you buy, either new or used. It is not unheard of for a builder to make a patch (similar to the one shown on Pascoe's web site) to correct a problem found after the hull was pulled from the mold. >>> Hi, >>> [quoted text clipped - 90 lines] > > Duke Newsgroup reader: You have neatly dodged my invitation to explain to the group how Sea Ray hulls are laid up. You agree that Pascoe's site is bogus, and yet you seem to discount the independent web site as equally inaccurate. You offer some vague observation that the truth is somehwere "in between". Layup is a technical issue that can be precisely described. If Pascoe is not accurate and you insist the technical website is not acuurate, would you please enlighten us about the actual layup process and schedule? Failure to do so would leave us all with the impression that you are talking through that hat you bought at West Marine- the one with all the scrambled eggs on the visor and "Captain" stitched into the crown. > Newsgroup reader: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > with all the scrambled eggs on the visor and "Captain" stitched into > the crown. Why the need for a personal attack on him Chuck? And you blame others for doing exactly what *you* do. Amazing. Gould, In the two web sites your provided I learned that Sea Ray use robots to spray chopped strand fiberglass into the molds. I could not find on either of the web sites you provided anything that came close to resembling a technical layout schedule. I did not see anything that discussed the thickness of the gel coat or the thickness of chopped fiberglass strand, including minimum and maximum thickness between the high stress areas and the low stress areas. I did not see anything that discuss how much time they allow for the gel coat to cure or the fiberglass to cure between each step. I did not see anything that discussed the ratio of fiberglass to epoxy nor the relative strength characteristics of this cost saving technique versus the traditional methods of laying fiberglass hulls. I did see two web sites selling the benefits of their products, without providing the technical layout schedule. I did think it was very humorous that you thought the advertisement published by the company who sold SeaRay the robots to "an independent web site". > Newsgroup reader: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > with all the scrambled eggs on the visor and "Captain" stitched into > the crown. Smithers wrote: Gould, In the two web sites your provided I learned that Sea Ray use robots to spray chopped strand fiberglass into the molds. I could not find on either of the web sites you provided anything that came close to resembling a technical layout schedule. I did not see anything that discussed the thickness of the gel coat or the thickness of chopped fiberglass strand, including minimum and maximum thickness between the high stress areas and the low stress areas. I did not see anything that discuss how much time they allow for the gel coat to cure or the fiberglass to cure between each step. I did not see anything that discussed the ratio of fiberglass to epoxy nor the relative strength characteristics of this cost saving technique versus the traditional methods of laying fiberglass hulls. I did see two web sites selling the benefits of their products, without providing the technical layout schedule. ************* Yet you claim sufficient knowledge to be able to dismiss both Larry's malicious slam and the general description of the layup process on the non- Sea Ray site as equally misleading. Once you got past the false notion that I was using one of my own articles to support my argument, you then claimed the truth is "somewhere in between." Once again, why not allow the group the benefit of your detailed and precise knowledge about Sea Ray layup? Just exactly *where*, in between, does the "truth" fall? Surely you must know, or you wouldn't presume to make such a statement. It's amazing that you choose to believe that a company responsible for supplying robotics to Sea Ray wouldn't be able to accurately describe how those robots function and what they do. Oh well. You're entitled to your opinion and conjecture. Chuck, You have absolutely no idea what the technical layout schedule for SeaRay is. You have provided absolutely no information except advertisements from SeaRay and the robot supplier, yet you think you have provided valuable info. Larry's info was based upon personal info, yours is based upon public relations bullshit. I do believe the company who built the robots can describe what they are capable of doing, and they did a good job of doing that. They did not nor did SeaRay discuss any details concerning their technical fiberglass lay-up. The fact that you think either of those web sites did either, places any of your observations in questions.. The one thing everyone who has ever read your boat "reviews" or observations agrees upon is they are well written fluff pieces designed to sell ad space in your magazine. I don't think anyone has ever thought they were anything else. You have become delusional in your thought process. > Smithers wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > how those robots function and what they do. > Oh well. You're entitled to your opinion and conjecture. > Yet you claim sufficient knowledge to be able to dismiss both Larry's > malicious slam and the general description of the layup process on the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > how those robots function and what they do. > Oh well. You're entitled to your opinion and conjecture. Here are the various lamination schedules of Four Winns, a middle of the road production boat: http://www.fourwinns.com/lamination.cfm SeaRay does not offer this information on their website. What is the layup schedule of the SeaRay boat you gave a fluff review on Chuck? You should know after your *detailed* review of the boat and the company. >>Yet you claim sufficient knowledge to be able to dismiss both Larry's >>malicious slam and the general description of the layup process on the [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > SeaRay does not offer this information on their website. What Four Winns offers is not a lamination schedule, though it is more than many manufacturers provide. A true lamination schedule provides a complete list of the individual layers and orientation of the plies used to construct a composite part. Typically, the schedule specifies the ounce weight of the reinforcement and the weave style, and also includes information on the "expoxy" used to form and bind the fabrics and coatings. At one time, I had a lamination schedule for my model of SeaPro boat, which I picked up during a factory visit. I've also seen the lamination schedules for a couple of models of Gradys and Parkers. These were the proper, detailed schedules. Still, the Four Winns info is decent. SignatureIf it is Bad for Bush, It is Good for the United States. JimH, I have not looked at a SeaRay in the last few years, when I did their larger boats were middle of the road boats, their smaller ones were price point boats there were at the bottom of the barrel. I don't believe SeaRay has changed their marketing strategy from trying to be a middle of the road boat builder. The reason for the robots is to save money and hopefully provide consistent middle of the road if quality. Using a fiberglass chop gun has always been a preferred method of low end boat builders, so I would look very closely before buying a SeaRay. The fact that Gould uses the robot manufacturer as his source of technical info concerning the fiberglass lamination schedule amazes me. Especially since the web site does not discuss anything concerning a fiberglass lamination schedule. Gould has become a victim of actually believing his PR pieces. >> Yet you claim sufficient knowledge to be able to dismiss both Larry's >> malicious slam and the general description of the layup process on the [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Chuck? You should know after your *detailed* review of the boat and the > company. The fact that Gould uses the robot > manufacturer as his source of technical info concerning the fiberglass > lamination schedule amazes me. Especially since the web site does not > discuss anything concerning a fiberglass lamination schedule. Wow. Are you ever confused. I *never* said I was providing a detailed layup schedule, only a link to a site that detailed how (as in the general technique) the boats are laid up. Tell us, please, where "in the middle" between Pascoe's assertion that Sea Ray boats aren't really fibergalss at all, but made of "putty" instead and the photos of a Sea Ray hull being constructed from chopped strand doed the "truth" reside? Why do you now concentrte on personal attacks rather than come forward with this information you claim to possess? I guess the answer is obvious, isn't it? Gould, I have not made any person attacks, that seems to be your bailiwick > The fact that Gould uses the robot >> manufacturer as his source of technical info concerning the fiberglass [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > I guess the answer is obvious, isn't it? > The fact that Gould uses the robot >> manufacturer as his source of technical info concerning the fiberglass [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >I guess the answer is obvious, isn't it? So you're saying you have no idea except for some chopper robots, how SeaRay hulls are made. Thank you. >> Yet you claim sufficient knowledge to be able to dismiss both Larry's >> malicious slam and the general description of the layup process on the [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Chuck? You should know after your *detailed* review of the boat and the > company. Silence. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.