Should I buy a Parker?

[brunoD]

Hello Everybody

I am in the market for a boat and have narrowed it down to 3 boats. A 94 21 sport fish cc with a 99 150 merc, a 76 mako 256 cc with twin 03' 150 mercs, and a 87 seacraft 20' cc with a 01 225 merc. I am trying to find out from parker owners what the advantages of the Parker is compaired to the other boat. Also do you guys think the 150 is underpowering the Parker? Any advise or oppinions will be greatly appreciated.

 

[Bryan 2530]

Where and how are you going to use the boat??

Personally, I would take the 20 Seacraft over the Parker depending on condition, but thats just me.

 

[brunoD]

I am going to be using it in the Sarasota, FL area. curious why you go with the seacraft?

 

[Bryan 2530]

Better ride, you can't beat Carl Mosely's design.

 

[brunoD]

you dont think that its too much hp for a 20' ? its a 2001 225 optimax

 

[pmeggers]

Sea craft - no brainer - you don't have to use all the power either. I, however, would not buy a boat with a Popti-max on the back of it.

 

[Bryan 2530]

I have a 1973 20' with a 175 on it.

Only concern really is weight if the deck has not been raised for a SC.

 

[hardhead]

I'd go with the mako. Since I wouldnt have a boat without twins!!

 

[brunoD]

bryan what do you mean by if the deck is raised? Far as twins go my only concern with the mako is it needs a floor and a transom eventualy after all its a 76' . I cant believe there is so many votes against the parker on a Parker Pro sight. I have not ruled out the parker yet I like the fact that it has new wiring and a easy to work on carb 150 and a 8.6 foot beam.

 

[pmeggers]

no votes against the parker, just votes for a different boat. you're dealing with all good names. however, given the age of the boats you are looking at, those years were some of the best build-wise for mako and seacraft

 

[brunoD]

so pmeggers what your telling me is the Parkers in the mid 90's were not as quality built as the seacrafts of the 80's and mako of the 70's ?

 

[pmeggers]

I am not going to speak to Parker quality pre-2000, because I do not have first hand knowledge and have not cared to research. I am by no means trying to start a little "situation" by my words coming off as if I am bashing parker. I have had 2 parkers and they were both top-notch. With that being said, I have been on numerous older seacrafts and makos (mostly from the early 80's), and their hulls are top notch. Further, prior to buying my 23SE, I contemplated rehabing an older center console and did extensive research into seacrafts. Parker continues to build a strong boat, seacraft/mako leave that up for debate.

If I had to choose between a 1985 seacraft, parker, and mako - I would rate them in that order (assuming all care for the same / same engines / etc. None of those 3 boats are "bad" boats - they're all great boats.

If you go to the cape, nkt, the vineyard, mtk, or any other north east fishing hole, you will see dozens upon dozens of refurbished seacrafts.

 

[brunoD]

funny you said that pmeggers I grew up in narraganset trolling for strippers, now im in Sarasota Fl. I should say the seacraft has a hydrolic jack plate and 387 hours on the so called "poptimax"

 

[Megabyte]

The 21 Parker you are looking at is an MV hull. The other two are DV hulls (I believe).
Apples to oranges comparison. Again, it depends on where and how you intend to use the boat.

The older Seacraft and Mako hulls have a real following, but they are not immune to having issues.
The Classic Parker site was influenced by the Classic Mako site, and to a lesser extent, the Classic Seacraft site.

All three brands are good boats that are prized by their owners.

 

[pmeggers]

funny you said that pmeggers I grew up in narraganset trolling for strippers, now im in Sarasota Fl. I should say the seacraft has a hydrolic jack plate and 387 hours on the so called "poptimax"

I know both areas pretty well. I am of the school that you should have a DV. The gulf picks up quickly. And yes, I did purchase a MV 23 SE just about 4 years ago... As for the opti-maxes, I have seen 2 blow on friends boats, and I worked at a marina growing up for 7 years. Maybe I am just bias'd towards yamaha, I don't know. I would imagine the mako/seacraft is going to far more storage compartments and probably some form of a insulate fish box. The parker will not. However, you can probably get a newer parker for a similar price. All things to consider.

 

[jacksdad]

Love my 8'6" beam and will never go to a narrower boat. But if a guy who knows the areas you fish says go DV then you should give that good consideration.

In any event I would want to be sure the one you buy isn't too ass heavy and has a dry transom.

 

[gw204]

Like Megabyte said...apples to oranges.

The Seacraft is (if I'm not mistaken) 19'6", the Parker is a full 21' and the Mako is 25'7". I'm not sure about the weight differences. Each will have a distincive hull shape as well. The Seacraft with it's variable deadrise will give you a good blend of ride quality and stability, the Parker will most likely be the most stable and the Mako with it's deep vee hull will run circles around most boats in it's class when things are rough.

So, I would decide what size you are looking for first, then figure out what running/drifting characteristics are important. Lastly, figure out how much work you want to put into it... My gut is that the Parker probably needs the least amount of blood, sweat and tears.

The Merc 150 is a solid, fairly efficient engine. I had an '02 on my old Grady. Early OPTIs seem to be hit or miss...from what I've read. I've never owned one.




Don't be afraid of an old Mako. The build quality of my 1981 17'er is pretty good. Sure, there were some bad decisions here and there (like unsealed limber holes in the stringers), but overall it's a solid boat. LOTS of glass in that old thing.