|
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | there is an open house in N. Wisconsin in September at Premier Powersports where you can meet the owner/builder of Recon boats and not just meet the pro's but go out and run their boats with them and go through them in detail. you would learn anything you would want to know by doing this and maybe get a little time on the water to boot. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 410
Location: With my son on the water | IMO When Ranger stopped making the 690 & 680/618 they stopped making a boat for muskie fishermen. So that is why I got a Tuffy. If Ranger would make the current 618 hull in a console model with long rod storage they may have something, but I have talked to them several times and it doesn't sound like that will happen. My uncapped G model Tuffy has way more room than a Recon.
Enjoy your day.
Brad |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32798
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | It may be a surprise to some, but the OP was not asking about a Ranger. And, he was looking a a 17' class boat, which may be why. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | yah cuz Ranger threads never have ppl chiming in about Tuffy boats. lol. sure. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i thought it was a Recon thread ... |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | looks like from the title it's both... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | yah, that's what i meant ... comparing Recon to Tuffy ... but, you would have to understand that Ranger, Skeeter and maybe Champion would come into the discussion. i agree with that totally. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32798
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | BNelson - 8/7/2017 1:25 PM
yah cuz Ranger threads never have ppl chiming in about Tuffy boats. lol. sure.
'but, you would have to understand that Ranger, Skeeter and maybe Champion would come into the discussion'
OBVIOUSLY not what I was speaking to. Arguing over Ranger on this thread where the question was about a boat Ranger no longer makes to the point of insulting each other and forcing a moderator to babysit the thread was; you 2 knew that or have been into the liquor cabinet again. Fine to insult each other in the basement. I can arrange it so neither of you has any choice if you like.  |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | lol, It's all good... I like my Tuffy as much as my Ranger...  they both catch fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32798
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I think you would probably catch them from a paddle powered bath tub |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | loved my esox magnum and if i didn't fish big water it is the perfect boat ... one of a kind. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 555
Location: Tennessee | I'd vote Tuffy out of the choices for build quaility if nothing else. Tough as hell boats. I just wish they had a southern foothold and especially with the Esox models I don't know why not. I was kinda wanting an X-170 back when boat shopping but there wasn't any dealers remotely close unfortunately. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 135
| Serious question:
What makes the Tuffy "tough as hell" build quality functionally different from other fiberglass boats? I get that they might use a different process with kevlar developed for non-boat applications. And, how does this matter in a "it makes the boat better" kind of a way? It's not like Recons or Rangers or Skeeters or Champions (or whatever) are out there breaking their hulls or transoms...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32798
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Actually, some are.
The main construction difference between Tuffy and many other FRP boats is the uni-body lamination process Tuffy uses completely laminating the deck, floor, and splashwell to the hull, and a 13 layer hull laminate. The kevlar strengthens and keeps the boat keel from wearing through easily if no keel guard is applied. Tuffy also adds more laminate to the side walls than many, especially above the center line.
A capped Tuffy is just that, a 'cap' installed on the boat body primarily for cosmetic and free-board purposes, and that is why Tuffy can build open gunnel models the others will not, many use a one piece deck liner that is fastened to the boat primarily with mechanical fasteners and perhaps some fiberglass stitching, so there's 2 parts to the boat, the hull and the liner. Some use a hull, liner, and inner-liner.
Consoles are bolted in (Tuffy was the first in walleye/muskie boats to do that, no crazing in radius as there are none), the slashwell will support 600 pounds easily and is many times the thickness of most, plus one can walk around in that area and actually use it. That's why it is coated with a walkable surface. Tuffy's transom is from edge to edge top to bottom, what you see from the rear of the boat is all as thick as the motor mount and is one piece carbon fiber.
Tuffy use the same resins and gel coats as the big boys.
Champion had not built anything but bass boats for years after a couple years building Deep V models, and I believe Jacobs shut her down. Too bad, I loved that boat. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Champion suffered by poor ownership and back in the day (mid 80's) pushed Ranger hard with the offset Elite and it out handled and out-performed Ranger moving many, many serious bass anglers over. I lived and fished in Memphis, TN at that time and the two most innovative and high-performance games started to really show that the leader better keep their eyes open ... in glass it was Champion and in Aluminum it was XPress. Bass Cat ... well, if you don't know about bass cat on big deck boats then do some research or go try to take a ride. Similar to Tuffy in the south is BassCat in the north ... relatively unknown, but wow what a boat!!
there was another boat back then that brought a lot to the market for a very low price ... one went away for not being "enough" albeit at a low price point (Sprint) while the other had to improve to keep up (Tracker) including a higher price point.
the Champion of the south expanded to deep V just before what i believe was an embezzlement case with the owner (Steve??) if i remember correctly so while they made a crazy good product, the company was struggling. i'd buy a FishHunter in a second!!
i have my own opinion where to place Recon ... but, it's up to the person to decide what is the best product for them. Sprint sold a lot a lot a lot of boats to neighbors of mine down there who wanted a glass boat but couldn't afford a Ranger, Cat or Champion so although not a "bad" boat ... not in the class of the former 3 ...
in the mix always down there were Stratos, Javelin and Skeeter blending in the gap ...
love boat talk. while in Memphis i had a late 80's Champion Elite and it was an outstanding boat!! then i had kids ... and moved north and got a boston whaler LOL |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32798
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Yes, the owner of Champion had turned to company over to his son who had serious social...issues. I had an interview with with them at the time and did a factory tour through the labyrinth that was the facility, very interesting and one hell of a well built bass boat. The Fishunter was a great V, but developed serious crazing to cracking in the transom/splashwell radius areas on the boats that were run real hard. I'd buy one gently used in a minute.
When I was with Skeeter from '89 to '92 running the Midwest, Sprint was on the radar, as was Cajun. Jacobs bought and closed Cajun too, really a shame. Success back then was measured in boats built per day, and champ was second to third with Skeeter back and forth. I was working for Kenny Burroughs (the only boss man I have ever been truly intimidated by, one hell of a presence) when I quit, he was a boat man coming from two generations of aluminum and glass. He and another gent owned Terry bass boats, remember those rides? Still see a few around.
Bass Cat is built in the same town just down the road from my Dad's place. Always wanted a Panterra. They own Yar Craft now, and sell a few, expensive ride but extremely well built, our buddy and long time MuskieFIRST guy 'Ranger' bought one last year and had it up at the Fall Outing at Spring Bay resort. Kingfisher was out there too, even made a run at the North with a walleye boat. That's where Tuffy bought the 1700 hull tooling, those were built in an old chicken farm in Texas, and a fellow named Tiny ran the place. I think Jacobs bought them out too, and just left the tooling there in a field with the copperheads.
Good regional boat. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | my youth was spent in a terry outfitted with an 85 hp Suzuki ... we were the schist in that thing!! now it would fit inside of a small boat!! i remember some memorable smallie fishing trips to Vermillion running some big water. the goal was to stay in the boat and have your kidneys still attached.
we are old!
hydrosport was the upgrade my dad made from the Terry ... ouch!!
Edited by jonnysled 8/8/2017 1:20 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32798
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Remember the Hydrosport Hooker muskie boat? Dang thing was a sheet of plywood doing 60. I sold them some K-Dee trailers for awhile. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 555
Location: Tennessee | Glaucus_ - 8/8/2017 10:39 AM
Serious question:
What makes the Tuffy "tough as hell" build quality functionally different from other fiberglass boats? I get that they might use a different process with kevlar developed for non-boat applications. And, how does this matter in a "it makes the boat better" kind of a way? It's not like Recons or Rangers or Skeeters or Champions (or whatever) are out there breaking their hulls or transoms...
Steve answered much better than I could from a technical/engineering perspective. But I've spent a whole lot of time in an Esox LTD that's used/abused and keeps on ticking. By that I mean it's been ran in shallow rivers and nailed many many floating and submerged objects, nailed docks, beached on rocks to the point there's quite a sizable hole in the keel yet it still floats, we've been swamped by pleasure boats to the point the water was literally up to the decks and floating the fuel tank, the top cap/rail is missing pieces, the corner caps are busted, its never had a transom saver used, and it's always stored outside and he usually leaves the drain plug in perpetually so it stays full of water. Yet despite all the years of abuse it can still outrun anything short of a bassboat and outfishes any other muskie boats I know. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 983
| btfish - 8/7/2017 12:23 PM
IMO When Ranger stopped making the 690 & 680/618 they stopped making a boat for muskie fishermen. So that is why I got a Tuffy. If Ranger would make the current 618 hull in a console model with long rod storage they may have something, but I have talked to them several times and it doesn't sound like that will happen. My uncapped G model Tuffy has way more room than a Recon.
Enjoy your day.
Brad
What dont you like about the 620 or 621 for Muskie Fishing?? Very interested because I wanna upgrade boats again this spring and really leaning toward a 620 or 621...would also look at tuffy but dont see many in my area I should have bought one for sale here last spring it was a 2015 Tuffy 19ft fiberglass with 225 optimax and powerpoles and electronics for 27k think that was a pretty solid number just didnt have that type of cash at the time and really wanted 20ft min but ended up with a 19'6" anyways...live and learn but interested to hear back |
|
| |
|
Posts: 228
Location: Tinley Park, IL | I can tell you that I was interested in getting a used 618 but not a 620 or 621. Those boats would have been difficult to get in my garage, it was 600 lbs or so heavier and I have a Tacoma, would have needed a dual axle trailer, and it was quite a bit more money. If Ranger still made a 618 I might have bought that instead of my X-190. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 135
| By that I mean it's been ran in shallow rivers and nailed many many floating and submerged objects, nailed docks, beached on rocks to the point there's quite a sizable hole in the keel yet it still floats, we've been swamped by pleasure boats to the point the water was literally up to the decks and floating the fuel tank, the top cap/rail is missing pieces, the corner caps are busted, its never had a transom saver used, and it's always stored outside and he usually leaves the drain plug in perpetually so it stays full of water. Yet despite all the years of abuse it can still outrun anything short of a bassboat and outfishes any other muskie boats I know.
Cotton on the roadside, cotton in the ditch
We all picked the cotton but we never got rich
Daddy was a veteran, a southern democrat
They oughta get a rich man to vote like that
Actually, some are.
Could you share your evidence for this? (That Recons, Rangers, Skeeters, or whatever are breaking their hulls/transoms at a higher rate than Tuffys.) All brands have some issues, it's most often a small percentage that get over-generalized; considering how they get used, it's actually amazing that there aren't more problems. The question for the end-user is: does the "tough as hell" Tuffy experience this less often?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 7010
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | Glaucus_ - 8/9/2017 9:07 AM
By that I mean it's been ran in shallow rivers and nailed many many floating and submerged objects, nailed docks, beached on rocks to the point there's quite a sizable hole in the keel yet it still floats, we've been swamped by pleasure boats to the point the water was literally up to the decks and floating the fuel tank, the top cap/rail is missing pieces, the corner caps are busted, its never had a transom saver used, and it's always stored outside and he usually leaves the drain plug in perpetually so it stays full of water. Yet despite all the years of abuse it can still outrun anything short of a bassboat and outfishes any other muskie boats I know.
Cotton on the roadside, cotton in the ditch
We all picked the cotton but we never got rich
Daddy was a veteran, a southern democrat
They oughta get a rich man to vote like that
Actually, some are.
Could you share your evidence for this? (That Recons, Rangers, Skeeters, or whatever are breaking their hulls/transoms at a higher rate than Tuffys. ) All brands have some issues, it's most often a small percentage that get over-generalized; considering how they get used, it's actually amazing that there aren't more problems. The question for the end-user is: does the "tough as hell" Tuffy experience this less often?
Not that I care that much, because I'm pretty sure why you're going here but...whats the point of your questioning. People give you their thoughts, a guy pretty intimately aware of Tuffy products and their construction gave his thoughts....
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 228
Location: Tinley Park, IL | Glaucus_ - 8/9/2017 9:07 AM
Could you share your evidence for this? (That Recons, Rangers, Skeeters, or whatever are breaking their hulls/transoms at a higher rate than Tuffys.) All brands have some issues, it's most often a small percentage that get over-generalized; considering how they get used, it's actually amazing that there aren't more problems. The question for the end-user is: does the "tough as hell" Tuffy experience this less often?
Are you talking about QC issues or strength of hull? Either way, I highly doubt you will get the data you are looking for.
My opinion of the "tough as hell" Tuffy hull is based on what I have seen with a couple different Tuffys versus incidents I have read about with other boat brands. Yes, it is all anecdotal but this is how I formed my opinion.
Edited by Paul S 8/9/2017 9:35 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 135
| Slamr - 8/9/2017 9:13 AM
Not that I care that much, because I'm pretty sure why you're going here but...whats the point of your questioning. People give you their thoughts, a guy pretty intimately aware of Tuffy products and their construction gave his thoughts....
There's no secret motivation to my questions. When talking boats, I think getting factual information on the points of comparison is helpful. Posts that essentially say, "The one I bought is the best because it's the one I bought" don't do anyone any good. King Kong smash Godzilla.
A couple people in this thread have stated a reason to buy a Tuffy is because it is tougher/stronger than other brands. They undoubtedly perceive this to be true; in my experience there isn't any difference. Steve provided some factual info about the build process by Tuffy that indicates quality and toughness. However, Tuffy hulls being strong doesn't mean the others are not strong. Steve alluded to the idea (but didn't substantiate it) that some other brands experience hull or transom issues more frequently than Tuffy. That's extremely interesting and relevant information and I'm interested in hearing the evidence...as it's the kind of thing that shapes purchase decisions.
Boats take a huge amount of pounding. Imagine if we asked our trucks to bounce and bang that much! I think all of the boat brands being discussed are really tough - they have to be. Imho, fit and finish are about the same in a Tuffy and a Recon; they're a step up in a Skeeter, and better than that in a Ranger. In my judgment, more realistic purchase reasons than "toughness" are how well the layout matches your fishing style, the details of fit and finish, and cost/value.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1767
Location: Lake Country, Wisconsin | Wellllllll said on all fronts Glaucus. Couldn't have summed it up better |
|
| |
|
Posts: 555
Location: Tennessee | I can't provide photographic evidence just off the top of my head but my father has been an outboard mechanic since he was a kid and his father since there have been outboards. I've been in and worked on hundreds and hundreds of boats since I was a kid. I've also saw plenty of boats that have collided with other boats, rocks, logs, boats stored in the poorest conditions imaginable,speared waves hard enough to seperate the hull, etc. I also am a Ranger fan as I do like the features they incorporate like lids, cleats, snap in carpet, etc so I'm not slamming them. But for what it's been through I'll say the Tuffy has held up to abuse better than 90% of the glass boats I've saw that have had similar treatments. Many boats treated similar I feel wouldn't be nearly as serviceable if at all. It's not scientific data but it's just real world observations. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 228
Location: Tinley Park, IL | Glaucus_ - 8/9/2017 10:30 AM
In my judgment, more realistic purchase reasons than "toughness" are how well the layout matches your fishing style, the details of fit and finish, and cost/value.
I agree. I only bought a Tuffy since the X-190 had the best combination of a bass boat deck with the ability to handle rougher water that I could easily put a kicker on. So fitting my needs was the main reason I bought a Tuffy. It wasn't until I owned the boat and operated it that I began to subscribe to the idea of "tough as hell" hull. I didn't really think much about the Kevlar in the hull but I have changed my tune on that after some firsthand experiences.
In terms of evidence and data, I just don't think you're going to find that. I have read so much about boats and motors over the last few years and you just don't see many, if any, comprehensive, comparison reviews on boats. There are no Consumer Reports that you can look at for customer satisfaction and reliability data. I would love if they had the resources for boats and motors that they do for automobiles. We mostly rely on personal experiences and hearsay to form our opinions. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 135
| There are no Consumer Reports that you can look at for customer satisfaction and reliability data. I would love if they had the resources for boats and motors that they do for automobiles. We mostly rely on personal experiences and hearsay to form our opinions.
Recreational boating sales will approaching $9 billion this year. Information on things such as quality/problem frequency and customer satisfaction data is absolutely available to those within the marine industry.
At the same time, consumer access to this information is almost nonexistent. Consumer Reports makes ratings and recommendations on anything from Guacamole (Sabra Classic) to a new truck (Toyota Tundra), but not boats. If it was easier to get, we might shop boats and motors a little bit more rationally and argue a little less emotionally. But for now...King Kong smash Data.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32798
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Glaucus_ - 8/9/2017 10:30 AM
Slamr - 8/9/2017 9:13 AM
Not that I care that much, because I'm pretty sure why you're going here but...whats the point of your questioning. People give you their thoughts, a guy pretty intimately aware of Tuffy products and their construction gave his thoughts....
There's no secret motivation to my questions. When talking boats, I think getting factual information on the points of comparison is helpful. Posts that essentially say, "The one I bought is the best because it's the one I bought" don't do anyone any good. King Kong smash Godzilla.
A couple people in this thread have stated a reason to buy a Tuffy is because it is tougher/stronger than other brands. They undoubtedly perceive this to be true; in my experience there isn't any difference. Steve provided some factual info about the build process by Tuffy that indicates quality and toughness. However, Tuffy hulls being strong doesn't mean the others are not strong. Steve alluded to the idea (but didn't substantiate it ) that some other brands experience hull or transom issues more frequently than Tuffy. That's extremely interesting and relevant information and I'm interested in hearing the evidence...as it's the kind of thing that shapes purchase decisions.
Boats take a huge amount of pounding. Imagine if we asked our trucks to bounce and bang that much! I think all of the boat brands being discussed are really tough - they have to be. Imho, fit and finish are about the same in a Tuffy and a Recon; they're a step up in a Skeeter, and better than that in a Ranger. In my judgment, more realistic purchase reasons than "toughness" are how well the layout matches your fishing style, the details of fit and finish, and cost/value.
We ( OutdoorsFIRST Media) see more rigs in severe use in a year than most folks will in a lifetime, and see how they wear over a couple years true abuse. I worked for a couple other brands in one capacity or another and still do, in fact. I've been in the marine industry for 45 years and as a result am aware of the lamination schedule of many of the boats out there, what that means, and where the 'short cuts' are in many of the brands. I also talk with boat dealers (every brand mentioned here) regularly, and hear the complaints about quality and service all the time, things that are not talked about when the consumer's ear is within hearing distance. Also deal with a TON of consumers on social media where the commentary is unfiltered.
Any builder out there could build the most durable hull on the water; it's a choice, plain and simple, based upon how much material costs they can get rid of and still keep the incidence of warranty at an acceptable level at a price the consumer will pay. One brand mentioned here has more advertising and marketing cost in their boat than combining a few others, and they have done an excellent job. Do they have warranty issues? Sure they ALL do, boats are made in factories by people....it's how the warranty is handled that matters, and all of them end up with some folks who are unhappy no matter what is done or because they expect more than the warranty and service offers. ALL brands....
The boat builders don't expect you to know about the resin/glass ratios, types of resins used, laminates used, or the schedule, and most consumers don't, because what one can actually see is the exterior and bling.
I never said Tuffy was 'tougher than (insert brand here)', but could and be correct, we just don't (and won't) do that sort of comparison here. What I will say is I am not aware of a heavier lamination schedule, and that those boys know frp.
And....any and all builders can and do build boats that will need warranty work. That cost is also built into your price and that's why each has a warranty. In the end, one selects the brand they want, buy it, and if the product earns confidence, that's, for that buyer, the 'best' boat out there.
Also, the cost/value is definitely there in a Tuffy, Ranger, Warrior, Lund, Skeeter, Nitro...pick a brand, and many loyal fans own one of them (OFM works with five of those brands in one way or another today and owns two). Paying $94000.00 for a 21' boat rigged out and ready to roll is beyond the means of many. $61000.00? Not as bad. Can't expect to get the same bling for the dollar, but one should expect both will hold up under the use/abuse intended, especially if it's a 'walleye boat'. Both do. That's why both are healthy companies.
I own a Toyota Tundra pickup. Wish it was a Denali, but it isn't. I still really like my truck and am not worried too much if someone else who OWNS a Denali looks down his nose at it.
|
|
| |
