|
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | Thanks for the link, that answered the question for sure.
The other thing I didn't care for was the gas fill design, which I see somebody has already modified. Can this modification be done at the factory ?
Lastly, what kind of speed can be expected with a 75HP properly propped, etc ? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | BY USCG requirements, any overflow from the gas fill MUST end up outside the boat. if it doesn't, your boat is not legal, and if an insurance claim happens or someone is injured, you will be liable.
I think the factory has figured out a way to get the fill moved...if I remember correctly one was built last year. Not sure what they did. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | sworrall - 2/4/2015 9:13 PM
BY USCG requirements, any overflow from the gas fill MUST end up outside the boat. if it doesn't, your boat is not legal, and if an insurance claim happens or someone is injured, you will be liable.
I think the factory has figured out a way to get the fill moved...if I remember correctly one was built last year. Not sure what they did.
Thanks for the reply Steve. If you happen to hear of how/where the gas fill was moved I'd be interested in learning how it was done. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | By the way, my 1760 T powered by a 75ELHPT Merc 4 stroke runs about 31 MPH GPS loaded up. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | sworrall - 2/4/2015 9:44 PM
By the way, my 1760 T powered by a 75ELHPT Merc 4 stroke runs about 31 MPH GPS loaded up.
Thanks again Steve. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 44
| I run a 1760 GT and I will say its an smooth ride. A Great fishing platform and all around awsome boat, couldnt be more happy with it. I have fished out of Rudy's 1760 for a few years and I fish out of the back. I have no issuses with room using the livewell and electronics box for a casting deck. I do agree it would be nice to have a bigger rear casting deck, but then you will run into a reach problem to run your tiller. At one point you will have to turn the motor. Longer tiller/deck = more reach, its at a happy meduim as its built now. Andy Hendrickson has a rear deck extension on his tiller guide boat( ill try to post the pic) you can see with the design how you will have to sit on it.
Not great for leg room.
As for the front seat mount I ordered mine with no seat post and then installed one on the rod locker with an aluminum plate for support, The same as Rudy explained. Now I have lots of foot room. I have no worries of straingth mounting the seat there after running in some of the water we have run in, very soild.
All the boats Ive looked at only one fit for what I wanted, the 1760 GT, as any boat you have to change some stuff while you rig it but thats what makes it YOUR boat.
The performance is awsome wind doesnt cacth you, it sits in the water low enough for my style, and handles rough waterr amazing for its size.
Im in eastern Iowa and would be happy give any one a ride that is looking at this boat.
Ryan
(Justencase3-700x350.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
 Justencase3-700x350.jpg (86KB - 273 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | That does look like it might be a bit of a long reach, especially on big turns as you said. I seem to remember seeing a picture of an 1890 with two of the electronics boxes in back, and I think the seat was mounted on one of them.
That looked like an interesting combo. A little harder to get into the box with the seat mounted perhaps, but also just a little more room. The Tuffys I've been in at the musky show with the Osprey rear deck (livewell), have also had the electronics box, which gives a little extra foot room.
The splash well does seem nice too. It just seems one would need to be a little aware to pick their feet up when they move to make sure they don't trip over the divider between the splashwell and livewell lid.
In their stock form, there is more standing room on the rear deck of a 1760T than there is on my old style Alumacraft Navigator 165 Tiller.
I see Worrall said his boat is getting 31-32 on the GPS. I've heard others say mid 30's on GPS which I usually think of as 34-36. Is that attainable with 1 person and a medium to light load? It's a tiller and I'm not a speed freak so no big deal, but just curious.
Tucker
Edited by curleytail 2/5/2015 12:51 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I don't have the boat propped for speed, so yes it is. To use a rear deck on a tiller, you need to mount the seat flush with the deck module and use a seat slide. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 206
| "If you happen to hear of how/where the gas fill was moved I'd be interested in learning how it was done."
If you go back and do a search for a post from btfish on 6/14/14 he posted a picture of his new 1760 where he said they moved the gas fill. The picture is from the front angle so hard to tell how much it was moved, but it was so he could lay longer rods on the port side. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | smalljaw - 2/5/2015 1:50 PM
"If you happen to hear of how/where the gas fill was moved I'd be interested in learning how it was done."
If you go back and do a search for a post from btfish on 6/14/14 he posted a picture of his new 1760 where he said they moved the gas fill. The picture is from the front angle so hard to tell how much it was moved, but it was so he could lay longer rods on the port side.
I saw that, but if you read Steve's response below, that approach goes against USCG requirements, and there's no way in he!! I'd make that same modification. Steve has also suggested that a gas fill relocation strategy may have been worked out at the factory. I'm staying tuned to see how this was achieved.
sworrall - 2/4/2015 9:13 PM
BY USCG requirements, any overflow from the gas fill MUST end up outside the boat. if it doesn't, your boat is not legal, and if an insurance claim happens or someone is injured, you will be liable.
I think the factory has figured out a way to get the fill moved...if I remember correctly one was built last year. Not sure what they did. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | Cool, thanks Steve. My Navigator tops out at about 32. Fine with me, but on LOTW last year I was thinking that a boat that cruised at about 30-32 without being on the edge of full throttle wouldn't be such a bad thing.
The gas fill is interesting. I think btfish had his gas fill modified at the factory if I remember right. By appearance it would seem to violate the USCG requirements, but they might have done some other mods that aren't visible to make it legal.
I'm not TOO bothered by the fill setup. The rod locker would hold most of the rods I'm not using, and the rest of them should be easy to fit on the deck and/or other side. It would be more of an issue to me if I wanted a console though, as then neither side has a shelf long enough to lay rods down. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 206
| I'm guessing here but I think moving the gas fill might be within USCG rules more than cutting it down flush to the carpet. ??
Edited by smalljaw 2/5/2015 6:27 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | Smalljaw - Yes my bad! I had too many images of Tuffy's in my head. I looked back at the link of Btfish's boat and it looks like that one is just moved further towards the bow. I had the image of the one shortened to the carpet in my mind. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | curleytail - 2/5/2015 7:49 PM
Smalljaw - Yes my bad! I had too many images of Tuffy's in my head. I looked back at the link of Btfish's boat and it looks like that one is just moved further towards the bow. I had the image of the one shortened to the carpet in my mind.
That's the photo I had in mind as well. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 296
| As a 1760GT owner I don't understand the gas fill gripe?? I run 2-4 rods on the port side all the time without issue. I run 9'8" predators and end of the rod butt ends up a few inches short where the compartment doors end on each side of the boat. The tips end up short of the portion that goes to full cap towards the rear. The rods end up sitting on the port side door a bit more but I can still open it easily. The rods end up partially on top of the starboard compartments as well but they open as well. It's a 17'er so anything over 7ft or so isn't fitting completely in the shelves anyways. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| Why is the beam on it not very wide? How stable is it? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | muskyfishing89 - 2/5/2015 11:07 PM
Why is the beam on it not very wide? How stable is it?
Because it's a 17.5' boat? Plenty of fishing room. The hull and interior are designed for big water performance, easy to plane, fast, soft, and reasonably dry ride for a 17.5' boat. Most who have one say it fishes much bigger.
Very stable at rest.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 131
| somebody wanted a picture of silver/white |
|
| |
|
Posts: 131
| front pedestal mod
Attachments
----------------
026.JPG (145KB - 267 downloads)
025.JPG (127KB - 274 downloads)
024.JPG (140KB - 258 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| How big is the front deck is it bigger then the Skeeter MX1825? Can you fish two people off of it? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 633
Location: Madison, WI | The front deck is plenty big to fish 2 people very comfortably. Ive been in both the 1760 and the mx1825 and the 1760 deck is def bigger than a dual console 1825. On a SC they are very similar, but the console on the Tuffy is mounted to the back of the front deck where its molded into the deck slightly on the Skeeter. If the consoles were not molded in the Skeeter, then the MX would win. The cockpit space goes to the Skeeter. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | When comparing 18' boats, 18' boats should be compared.
Look at the Tuffy 1890 to compare with the 1825 Skeeter. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 633
Location: Madison, WI | I was answering the question posted above. Also the Tuffy 1890 is 18'11" witch many would consider a 19' boat. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| Would it be a good river boat? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| Can it draft as shallow as the X-190? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | danmuskyman,
I was talking to 89, not you...thanks.
Both the 18' plus models are 97" wide.
The 1760 is a 17.5' boat and has an 84" beam. Not a reasonable comparison, it's a smaller boat rated for 150. Both the Skeeter and the Tuffy 18' models are rated 200.
Very little difference between the X190 and the 1890 in draft when rigged with the same engines. The 1760 will float in a couple inches less. Completely different hull design. Define 'river boat'. A very shallow river with lots of rapids? No.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| Do you think it's the best do it all hull they make? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Actually, yes. It does everything pretty well and is a safe boat in the big stuff. |
|
| |
|
| sworrall - 2/6/2015 8:20 PM
Look at the Tuffy 1890 to compare with the 1825 Skeeter.
apples to oranges, imho, as the Tuffy 1890 is most similar to the Skeeter WX1910.
Tuffy 1890: 18'11", 96" beam, 25" interior depth, 1600lbs, 200hp
Skeeter WX1910: 19'1", 95.5" beam, 24" interior depth, 2175lbs, 200hp
many customers looking at the 1825 and 1760 are people currently in a 16-18' aluminum boat and are considering a switch to fiberglass. you've really got to get inside these boats to be able to compare them. measurements don't tell you anything about how the space is used and how it fits your fishing style. even better is to get a test drive. thankfully all boats aren't exactly the same...
Skeeter MX1825: 18'4", 97" beam, 21.5" interior depth, 2075lbs, 200hp
Tuffy 1760: 17'6", 84" beam, 26" interior depth, 1400lbs, 150hp
Lund 1850 Impact XS: 18'7", 94" beam, 1440lbs, 150hp
Alumacraft Competitor: 17'8", 95" beam, 1375lbs, 150hp
Lund 1775 Impact: 17'9", 94" beam, 1220lbs, 125hp
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| One of the things I like about it is it doesn't need a big motor. I love the X-190 but people say don't ever under power your boat I don't know if I wan't a 200 Hp on it. |
|
| |
