|
|
Posts: 246
| Ok guys this is where I,m at. Tuffy vs Ranger. My options are as follows for the Ranger with 150 E-Tec and E-Tec 9.9 Remote kicker, Hamby's keel protector, remote drain plug, remote oil fill, kicker control box, kicker bracket, Humminbird 788 console, 788 bow, stereo, trolling motor batteries, Terrova 80 I pilot link, deluxe cover and boat buckle tie downs.The Ranger is 45 K. Waiting on Tuffy quote mano a mano. I prefer the Single Console Model and I like the Tuffy's larger casting front deck and rod storage .The only add on not in the 45 K Ranger price is the rear deck extension. Thoughs from all would be appreciated.I like Tuffy for 55 MPH vs.50 MPH from Ranger as it's heavier.All input or advice on ride,fishability and personal experience would be appreciated. I fish Big water alot an this will be my final boat purchase i believe.Thanks a bunch .
GManny |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32935
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | You are comparing a Ranger that would be more comparable to a Tuffy 1890.
The X190 is a great boat, handles well in rough water, fishes and performs well, and it is a deep V, but has less freeboard. It's a hybrid designed for multi-species use for all waters.
What do you consider big water? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 243
Location: South Central Wisconsin | I'm a Ranger 1860 owner so my pick doesn't really count. Both great, but different boats. Whichever you decide on, and you can't make the wrong choice, add a auto bilge to your list. Maybe front rails as well. In wisconsin if anyone wants to ride up front, they have to have something to hang on to.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 246
| Hey Steve, Most of my time is on Big V, LOTW, Green Bay, LSC ,Eagle and M lacs. I,m trying not to go over 40 K but most likely will.I chose the X-190 over the 1890 to save some cash. I currently have a 17.5 deep v aluminum so i know i got a major upgrade coming ?I do like the tadem trailer with the Tuffy as well. Thanks for the imput.
Gmanny |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32935
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | You'd be fine on that water. Every day use on the Great Lakes I would recommend an 1890 or 2100. That boat is fun to drive, too. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 243
Location: South Central Wisconsin | Steve's right. The bay can be nasty. There are days I wish I had a bigger rig out there. What about a used 620, 621, 2100? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 246
| Thanks guys.The Bay is usually once a year as is LSC for a weekend and I've done for years it with my Aluminum 17 footer so I know to play is safe.I think the Tuffy is more 3 fisherman friendly than the Ranger ? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32935
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I'd agree with that for certain. The water you will be on will fish great with an X190. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 218
| I just ordered an 1880, and was told by Ranger that there is no back deck that can be ordered. |
|
| |
|
Location: Grinnell, Iowa | I had a post awhile back about the Angler so if you dig that post up you may find some additional information. I am still un-decided if I am going to pull the trigger on an Angler or not. I've gone and looked at one but have never been in one. My question for folks who have been in both the Angler (1860 or new 1880) and a Ranger 618 or 619 is; how does the Angler sit in the water compared to the 618 or 619? Is it higher, lower, about the same? Particularly more interseted in how high the bow sits. Sorry for attaching my question to your thread but didn't think we need 2 threads going about the same boat! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 222
Location: Hartland, WI | I've fished out of both. Both are VERY nice boats. The tuffy is probably better for three guys.
Other thing to consider is finish and the small things inside the boat interior. Ranger is probably more high end...but both are good. Kind of like comparing a BMW (Ranger) to an Acura or Infiniti (Tuffy).
Can't go wrong either way.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 218
| I ran 4 different Tuffy boats between 1978 and 2005; they were all outstanding. The performance, fit and finish, resale value and factory support were second to none. Since then I have run 3 different Rangers, and again they were great for all the same reasons. I would flip a coin if I had to rate the two boat lines and how they performed for me.
To me, the 1880 is a crossover boat, and not a pure fishing boat. It will fish well, but it is not designed to be a pure fishing boat. The dry storage and rod lockers are small, but they will work. Front deck space is crowded for a 2nd angler, and the back deck is small with no stock extension available. While there is a nice step up to the front deck, it is a mighty big step to the back deck. I am still convinced the 1880 will suit my needs while fishing south western bass and LOTW muskies, but so would several Tuffy boats. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 24
| "The dry storage and rod lockers are small"
I believe the 1880 has side rode storage that would fit 10ft rods along with the bow storage that fits up to 7.5 ft rods. I sold a 1890 turfy last year and bought a ranger 1860. The angler is a very nice boat to fish out of. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 218
| One can put a long rod in the side pocket holder. However there is no cover and if there is more than one rod in the holder, the rods and the reels will take beating. As I said I believe the boat will fish well, but it does have some minor drawbacks.
I will be keeping the boat docked at a marina and would like some more locker and rod space that can be locked. As stated these are very minor issues. |
|
| |
Ranger 1880 Angler vs Tuffy X-190