Newish Bass Tracker opinions. Lengthy opinionated question

[bcj.jones]

I'm at a cross roads here with my next boat purchase. I'm selling my 1989 tracker tx-17 and getting something newer. I'm mostly doing this for two reasons. One, the boat is narrow and i'd like something a little wider. Two, its a very flat hull design and not a bad ride in calm conditions but a bumpy ride in any kind of chop.

I'm almost set on getting another aluminum hull for cost reasons. Y'all tell me y'alls opinion on this as well, but I can a newer (2004-2014) bass tracker for under 8k. Or I can get an older fiberglass boat (1994-1996) for about the same price. I know the fiberglass will handle chop better, be faster and wider in most cases, but they are also heavier, cost of ownership is higher and the big thing with me is if the motor goes bad (a 150-200 hp) then its very expensive to replace. The aluminum will be lighter, less cost of ownership, and if the motor goes bad (50-75 hp) its much cheaper to replace. But it will be generally slower and not handle chop as well.

The motor going out on an older fiberglass boat is really scary to me. I wouldn't be able to afford to replace it, and i've heard stories of older motors going out shortly after buying a use boat. That's whats pushing me toward a used tracker/aluminum boat.

Second part of the lengthy question is. I have a line on two trackers. A 2004 pro team 175txw special edition with a 50 hp merc on the back. Great shape, great looking boat. It has the "revolutionary ride quality guarantee" hull. The other is a 2014 Pro 170 with a 40 hp merc. Looks to be in great shape as well, but has a smaller motor and doesnt have the "revolutionary" hull design.

For those that own Trackers, new and old. How much of a difference does the "revolutionary hull" have on ride quality? That is going to be the deciding factor in that decision for me. If the ride quality is a lot better on the 175 vs the 170 i dont mind going with the older boat. Plus it has the bigger engine.

Hopefully y'all made it threw all that, and I really appreciate y'alls info and opinions!

 

[southkogs]

Based on your other topic, I'm thinking hull design is going to change your ride more than hull materials. Look at deeper V designs in the aluminum boats like the Tracker Pro-Guide V-175 or Lund Pro-V 1875B. There's plenty others out there like those styles, but you get the idea.

The modified Vs are kinda' bumpy by nature. The more true tournament bass-boats will get on top of the water and scoot, but they don't punch down chop like the deeper V boats do (IMHO).

 

[Scott Danforth]

concur with 'kogs on this one. its the hull style that maters more that what its made of.

assume a 22-24 year old fiberglass boat needs a full restoration (entire summer of work)
assume a 10-14 year old aluminum boat may need a transom board replaced sometime in its future.

 

[BWR1953]

Hey, I want to stick my two cents in here but I'm really short on time. I'll check back in later though.



I will say this much... I have been in your exact situation in the past and can offer a viewpoint.


My 1985 Bass Tracker TX-17.



My 1984 Winner bass n ski. (sorry for the horrible pic, it's the only one I have.)

 

[bcj.jones]

Thank you 'Kogs and Scott. Great input!

Looking forward to your response 1953

 

[Old Ironmaker]

I hope you have had a good experience with your Tracker. Many I have seen have problems with them, including those in the showroom a BPS, the fit and finish on many of them is terrible, maybe not the older models. I saw one sitting outside a BPS on display and every hold had water in it including the bilge. They aren't all Crackers, a pal has had his for 25 years. Any deeper V tinny's like the StarCrafts and Lunds will certainly give you more stability and smoother ride.The same goes for a glass boat of a similar size as a tinny because of weight alone I can't comment on the new "revolutionary" Tracker hull. What are the specs on that hull?

I found this.

https://www.trackerboats.com/about/s...-guarantee.cfm

The 1st pic of the boat on the top right of the page shows a lot of boat still in the water if it's supposed to be on plane.

 

[BWR1953]

...Looking forward to your response 1953

No need to be formal. We're all friendly here.

Call me BWR. ound:

Okay, back to the boats.

I bought my Bass Tracker brand new in 1985 and kept it for eight years. Great boat. But I outgrew it and wanted something faster and more stable in rougher water. I'd gotten caught out in some tough weather and didn't enjoy that at all.

That's when I upgraded to the Winner. It was a year older than the Tracker but it was definitely a better boat. It could get as shallow as the BT but could get to fishing spots a whole lot quicker! With just me in the boat it would easily run 70-72MPH with a 150HP on the back. And it was a far more comfortable ride. Being able to get under the convertible top and behind the windshield on cold or rainy days was a big plus too.

One of the negatives with the BT was that it was so under-powered. With just me onboard, the 50HP on the back could barely get me to 30MPH. Usually about 28MPH. That made for some long runs sometimes. I recall one spring when a buddy and I went fishing on John Kerr reservoir (also called Buggs Island Lake) on the VA and NC line. The only campground open was more than 25 miles from the area we wanted to fish, back in the creeks on the northern end of the lake. Making an hour + run to and from the fish was a waste and not a pleasant ride out in the open either. And I did put a whale tail on the back after my portly cousin and I couldn't even get it on plane. The tail fixed that though. Top speed with him and me in the boat was 25MPH max. :lol:

The boats you've been talking about seem like they'd be under-powered too. Big time. A 17.5' boat with a 40 would be way under-powered IMHO.

I am not familiar with the Revolution ride thingy. But my BT rode great on flat water, as did yours. And like yours, it sucked on tougher water. I remember getting into a situation on a lake in California when I was there. Lots of boats around, a small curving feeding river with rough water. I got on top but the water was so rough that the BT kept trying to fall off and when it did, it was not fun. Felt like I might lose a kid overboard.

The scariest time though was when I went on vacation to Cedar Point in Sandusky, OH. Stayed at the campground there, right on Lake Erie. Got up at oh-dark-early and launched the Tracker. Cruised through all the back canals as the day was dawning, catching bass as I went along. Good stuff. Finally got to the actual entrance to the lake and the wind was blowing straight at me. Rollers 4 and 5 feet high were coming in, as were darned near all the other boats! I started to maneuver out but there was just no way that I felt safe trying to get out there any farther. Turned around and went back to the launch ramp, catching more fish along the way. A guy's gotta do...

I never ran into any serious problems that I felt I couldn't handle when I had the Winner. I did get caught up in some serious wind on the Potomac River, south of Washington D.C., which was interesting but never scary. Incoming tide combined with the wind to put whitecaps on the water and spaced them very oddly. It was tough but the Winner handled it beautifully. I think I liked that boat better than all the others that I've owned over the years.

So after all this rambling, based on my own experience, I'm suggesting that you thoroughly check into a high powered glass bass boat. I always wanted a Ranger myself but times changed as my life moved along. Nowadays I'm a certified Starcraft tin-head but I'm open-minded.

 

[roscoe]

Both of those boats are underpowered in my opinion.
Tracker likes to put packages together that have a low price, they do this by putting small motors on them.

 

[Scott Danforth]

Tracker likes to put packages together that have a low price, they do this by putting small motors on them.

Tracker is the bayliner of aluminum boats. they put packages together that the average person can afford. grew up with a tracker, it was an OK boat, that was severely underpowered, however as stated, there are better hulls for rough water.

 

[southkogs]

Okay - so if we're going this far ...

To this day my favorite boat for fishing has been something in the 14' - 16' range with a set of oars and a tiller outboard (10 - 20HP range). They're easy, and here in TN there is isn't much of a place I can't go in a boat like that.

But IF I were to be buying a boat for fishing though, I would probably look at something in the 20 - 24' range. Center console or maybe a walk-around cuddy with a reasonable outboard. Carolina Skiff comes to mind, but I've seen some Grady Whites, Makos and some others that I like too. Deep V and enough bow rake that I can tow it down and use it on the Gulf of Mexico. A boat like that would work for me in most of the waters I would fish.

 

[briangcc]

Well. IF we're going there I would put Tracker below Bayliner. Way below. Fit/Finish/underpowered. One that I looked at in a local BPS had the livewell intake cut off with what appeared to be a hacksaw at a haphazard angle. Wasn't even cleaned up afterwards.

Same size boat comparison - my Bayliner vs my uncle's aluminum Sylvan - my boat road in the rough stuff a lot better. You pound in an aluminum hull. Maybe not so much if you go up in size but I'm comparing 17' boats.

As for cost of ownership...that really comes down to how the previous owner cared for the boat and not the hull material. Motors can be had on Craigslist and even marinas sell used motors so should anything happen on either hull there are options available to you.


In the two listings you mentioned, I agree that they are underpowered. My uncle runs a 75HP Yamaha on his and I think that's underpowered as well.

 

[bcj.jones]

Well thank you all for the great input! Definitely ads some thought to my decision. I think im still stuck on getting one the rougher riding aluminum hulls.

With all the under powered comments I started doing some more looking around. I found a guy selling a ALUMACRAFT riveted hull. 18 foot with a 6.5 foot beam. It has a 2004 90 horse Mercury on it. Its in really good shape but a little older then I was initially thinking plus its a riveted hull. He claims it doesnt leak at all but then again i've heard of plenty Bass Tracker welds leaking also.

Any thoughts on a riveted Alumacraft hull? I've heard they use more rivets then a similar Bass Tracker

 

[Teamster]

Alumacraft makes a very nice boat,..

Rivets vs welds is a personal preference thing and a sure fire way to start a good internet Ford vs Chevy, Glass vs aluminum style fight

That said, in an aluminum boat made in the lighter recreational boats I prefer rivets,...Rivets are easier to replace if need be,..

Welds crack, and on this lighter aluminum it happens too much, And you need to be a pretty good welder to try to fix it,...

If it were a heavy plated aluminum then welded hulls are another story,....

 

[briangcc]

Sorry, only experience is with Sylvan boats which are riveted. Uncle 1 has the aforementioned boat with the 75HP Yamaha hanging off the transom. Uncle 2 has a much newer one with I believe a 70-90 Evinrude E-Tec. Cousin has one between these two in years and I think a 60-75 Evinrude (non-etec). None of these are leaking and I would say the oldest is easily late 80's/early 90's in vintage.

I will say I like the fact the Alumacraft has the larger engine. You can throttle back but its very difficult to add horsepower on the water when you need it the most.

 

[bcj.jones]

I'm going to keep asking questions because im getting great input!

What do y'all think of a modded v hull versus the standard "john boat" style front end? I would think the only time this would make a difference is in choppy water. Other times, on calmer water while on plane, I don't see how it would factor in as much. Since the front of the boat is out of the water anyways.

 

[southkogs]

Typically the modified boats have some kind of keel or chines on them to help with control all down the hull. That's not always the case with the flat bottom jon boats. So, a modified hull should be able to go faster (more controllable at speed, might be the way to say it).

Some people call the rowboat style open fishing boats with a V hull a jon boat. I don't refer to them that way, but if that's the type of hull you're referring to - I would consider them better than the flat bottom style for speed and control.

 

[prlwng]

You may want to keep the bt for smooth water or shallow water fishing. You may find a good larger vhull at a reasonale price for rougher water use.

I made the mistake of thinking a mechanic did his job right when I got my crestliner 4.3. Just got my parts this week from Iboat. It will be done right this time.

The 84 bt 60 merc is alright for some stuff, but the 19 ft crestliner will scoot across the rough stuff.

Total cost when done with big boat and new brakes on trailer will be bout 5 tho. Purchase and parts.

Oh, do check the bt for water logging. Droppng couple hundred into mine this winter to rid it of tail draging.

 

[Scott Danforth]

my current fishing boat is almost 60 years old. its riveted construction. about 30 years ago, dad and I bucked a few of the rivets, may have to buck another as there was a few drops of water in the boat....however it could have been beer.

nothing wrong with a riveted boat.

 

[hvymtl939]

my current fishing boat is almost 60 years old. its riveted construction. about 30 years ago, dad and I bucked a few of the rivets, may have to buck another as there was a few drops of water in the boat....however it could have been beer.

nothing wrong with a riveted boat.

Yup, I had a 1967 riveted glaspar that didn't leak a drop.

 

[jbcurt00]

Yup, I had a 1967 riveted glaspar that didn't leak a drop.

Glaspar? Didnt know they made tinnys, rivets or welded