Attention: Have 2 pages to see today

Author Topic: Optimal Year(s) of 22'2" Construction  (Read 2307 times)

March 16, 2005, 08:50:55 PM
Read 2307 times

Anonymous

  • Guest
Optimal Year(s) of 22'2" Construction
« on: March 16, 2005, 08:50:55 PM »
As I begin my search for the boat I will eventually rebuild, I'd like to get as much feedback as possible about the construction of the 22'2" over the years.  I'm leaning toward the newer style (not flat back) so that puts me from 1975 through...?  What year(s) if any, were considered the bad ones as far as structural construction goes?

March 16, 2005, 08:54:39 PM
Reply #1

Anonymous

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #1 on: March 16, 2005, 08:54:39 PM »
Also, I'm not so concerned with draft as I am width (interior comfort/space) and ride - should I discount the flatback completely with these in mind?

March 17, 2005, 07:38:30 AM
Reply #2

Wilson

  • Information Offline
  • Posts: 209
(No subject)
« Reply #2 on: March 17, 2005, 07:38:30 AM »
I think that the quality in construction was always there.  It will likely come down to design, which did change through the years.
Wilson Ayala
Tampa, FL

March 17, 2005, 09:35:47 AM
Reply #3

Radioshop

  • Information Offline
  • Posts: 167
(No subject)
« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2005, 09:35:47 AM »
I have a '73 and it's the newer style hull.  You can expand your horizons by two years.  Mine is pretty well built too.
1973 22.2 Osprey - Sand Bar II
Miamuh, Florida

May 24, 2005, 09:18:55 AM
Reply #4

Poon-Time

  • Information Offline
  • Posts: 24
(No subject)
« Reply #4 on: May 24, 2005, 09:18:55 AM »
I second radioshop.  I also have a '73 222 and it is also the newer style.  It has the 12' deadrise and is 7'11" wide.  So you can look from '73 on.

May 24, 2005, 02:53:12 PM
Reply #5

scott_gunn

  • Information Offline
  • Posts: 186
(No subject)
« Reply #5 on: May 24, 2005, 02:53:12 PM »
If you're not concerned about draft but you are concerned with comfort and ride, you should look at a different hull, in my opinion.

It's not the best riding, driest hull around.  It is, however, a very shallow running boat that can handle bigger seas if it must.

May 24, 2005, 05:44:45 PM
Reply #6

Captain

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 73
(No subject)
« Reply #6 on: May 24, 2005, 05:44:45 PM »
Some folks, like captflatback and Tommy over at Hammerhead Boat Works swear by the flat back. Tommy says it rides better than the 12 degree boats. Go figure.
Tampa - 1976 Aquasport 222

ClassicAquasport.com Co-Founder

Attorney-at-Law

May 25, 2005, 05:11:24 AM
Reply #7

steved

  • Information Offline
  • Posts: 141
(No subject)
« Reply #7 on: May 25, 2005, 05:11:24 AM »
Basically, the 22-2s were well-built throughout Aquasport's first lifetime (before Genmar) - lots of hand-laid fiberglass.  The only possible problem is with boats built during the last couple of years (87,88,89)  when Aquasport was having financial problems with its suppliers.  However, we have not yet had any definite evidence of people with problems on boats from those years, so I would not rule them out automatically. I would just chek carefully.  Assuming you are looking for an open, center console (Aquasport built the 22 in a variety of models including walkthrough windscreens and cuddys), you might want to look for a 22-2 CCP.  These are the deep vee version and they are a little (but not a lot) drier.  I have a 1982 22-2 CCP and am very happy with it.
22.2 CCP (1982)

May 25, 2005, 08:37:39 PM
Reply #8

Bill

  • Information Offline
  • Posts: 37
(No subject)
« Reply #8 on: May 25, 2005, 08:37:39 PM »
I've also heard that Aquasport cut production corners toward the end to try to save money. But I have a 1988 22'2" (w/a Express Fisherman) and it shows no signs of any production shortcuts. I would think by now that any serious production problems on a specific boat would be fairly obvious and at least as important is how previous owners maintained them.

Bill
"Shark Shadow"

 


SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal