02-29-2016, 05:57 PM
[quote tacklebox]I have a 20ft Luxor offshore that really is about 25 overall because of the offshore bracket. With that being said it will for sure ride better in rough water and plane faster cause the motor is got its own buoyancy and you will have the standing platform to fight fish if that's what your concerned about. I use longer rods (8') so I can work around the motors when fishing for kokes. You have a lot more room in your boat, usally fish boxes and such with a bracket And another benefit is you will have a swim ladder to get in the boat if you ever go overboard. I had a Duckworth without the offshore bracket prior and I prefer the bracket 100%. One other thing to keep in mind is storage if your tight on length in your garage you might not have a choice to get the bracket cause it does add 5ft of length to your boat. There's my pros and cons good luck on your choice.[/quote]
A friend of mine tipped me off to this thread. Thanks, whoever you are. This issue has been extensively discussed on another forum, I've been posting about it for many years. Briefly, extended transoms are an inferior design. They suck. They evolved as bolt-on affairs which provided more interior room at the time. Now, however, they are integral with the hull. As such, they should be seen for what they are, inferior to a full hull if the overall length of the boat is hels constant. If two hulls are 25' long, which design has more flotation at the engine? Which provides more interior room? Which design makes it easier to fish around the engine?
Here is just one thread. You can search my posts if you like. Briefly, you get less boat for about the same money with a bracket than a full hull with a splashwell.:
Edit: Links to competing forums are not allowed on BFT, see the FAQ above for the rules of the site.
[signature]
A friend of mine tipped me off to this thread. Thanks, whoever you are. This issue has been extensively discussed on another forum, I've been posting about it for many years. Briefly, extended transoms are an inferior design. They suck. They evolved as bolt-on affairs which provided more interior room at the time. Now, however, they are integral with the hull. As such, they should be seen for what they are, inferior to a full hull if the overall length of the boat is hels constant. If two hulls are 25' long, which design has more flotation at the engine? Which provides more interior room? Which design makes it easier to fish around the engine?
Here is just one thread. You can search my posts if you like. Briefly, you get less boat for about the same money with a bracket than a full hull with a splashwell.:
Edit: Links to competing forums are not allowed on BFT, see the FAQ above for the rules of the site.
[signature]
Single main, no kicker. 