Alumacraft or Lund

[mcconnell63]

I've been reading the threads on these two boats and I like them both. But, the two lund dealers are 2 1/2 to 3 hrs away and one lund dealer doesn't carry the models I like and doesn't seem interested in ordering it. The Alumacraft dealers are within 45 mins away. One I don't like because he never returned my calls or emails and when I did speak to me he started selling me a stainless prop and all the bells and whisles I don't want. The second dealer I have known for years and he alway seem like he has a bug up his butt, if you know what I mean. The third dealer I never met. But I have to say I like the Alumacraft 165 Classic CS. Money wise this boat is $12,400 compaired to the Lund 1625 Classic with the same equipment is $16,000. Round figures on both boats. I haven't seen either boat close up, just in brochures. So I guess I will go with the Alumacraft 165 Classic CS. Has anyone ever owned this boat. Thanks, Al

 

[Silvertip]

Re: Alumacraft or Lund

I have a 2004 165CS which is a nicer appearing boat in my view but otherwise identical to the current classic. Its a great boat. Power it with at least 60HP -- preferably a 75. It is every bit as good as the Lund.

 

[mcconnell63]

Re: Alumacraft or Lund

Thanks for the info, I contacked Alumacraft looking for a bimini top for the 165CS and they don't make one for it. That's one big drawback since it gets hot here in NC. I really should check with the local boat dealers to see if they have another BT that would fit this boat. I just now thought about doing that. I will let you know what I find out. Al

 

[mcconnell63]

Re: Alumacraft or Lund

Up Date, I called two boat dealers and they do have BT's for the Alumacraft, I also got an, out the door price, and it's just under $15,000.oo and that's with a Yamaha 60 Four stroke. Al ( Old Guy's Rule )

 

[Navy Jr.]

Re: Alumacraft or Lund

McConnel63, I believe the reason your Lund dealer wasn't interested in ordering a 1625 Classic is because rumor has it that Lund is discontinuing the Classic series in May. Perhaps the next closest model comparable to the Alumacraft Classic 165 would be the Lund 1600 Alaskan SS.

Insofar as Lund vs Alumacraft is concerned, I went through the same dilemma myself, finally deciding to order a Lund 1750 Fisherman (vs Alumacraft's Trophy 175). The Alumacraft would have been a little less money, but the dealer wanted to put it on a trailer I didn't care for. Lund puts their boats on Shoreland'r trailers with the Lund name on them. About the boats themselves, the Alumacraft was heavier and required a larger and heavier motor, but the weight appeared to be invested in a true double-bottom hull versus only a forward section double hull on the Lund, a plus for Alumacraft.

I toured the Lund factory in New York Mills and the Alumacraft factory in St. Peter (Minnesota). Both companies make fine boats, but the nice thing about Alumacraft is the company isn't owned by Brunswick like Lund is, so you aren't limited to picking a Mercury motor. You can get whatever your dealer has to offer.

Both boat lines are good, but where I live the Lund line seems to have a slight edge on resale value. Oh, and Lund offers a lifetime limited warranty on its double-riveted seams and all of its wood.

It's a tough decision. Hope this helps.

 

[Expidia]

Re: Alumacraft or Lund

Navy Jr . . . I thought they are no longer owned by Brunswick. But it seems they still are as their logo is on their site. A while back I read they were going to be taken private again by an investment group and one of the group is from the original family.

I guess I'm confused and that didn't happen. But I think Brunswick had a 4 or 5 year deal that the dealers had to push the Mercury package and now that deal is up so dealers can sell any motor with a Lund now.

Is this true?

 

[vintage boat junky]

Re: Alumacraft or Lund

My dad bought a Lund Fisherman, but when he was shopping around we did happen upon some nice looking Alumacrafts that seemed to match the Lund pound for pound with considerably less $$. My dad, being the Lund favoritist that he is, didn't even stop to look. I saw a model (don't remember which one) fully decked out for about $12,000. I know that the Lund model would have run at least $20,000 for the same package.

It's like anything that's popular wether it be boats or clothes - you pay for the name. I could go either way, despite owning a Lund (vintage).

 

[Navy Jr.]

Re: Alumacraft or Lund

Navy Jr . . . I thought they are no longer owned by Brunswick. But it seems they still are as their logo is on their site. A while back I read they were going to be taken private again by an investment group and one of the group is from the original family.

I guess I'm confused and that didn't happen. But I think Brunswick had a 4 or 5 year deal that the dealers had to push the Mercury package and now that deal is up so dealers can sell any motor with a Lund now.

Is this true?

I wasn't aware of a 4 or 5 year plan with Brunswick, but today Lund is still owned by Brunswick, and today the package deals come with Mercury motors. It is possible to get a Honda motor as an option, per the Lund printed brochure, but my dealer sells Merc and Yamaha, not Honda. I had to stick with Mercury.

No big deal. The motors made today are so much better than they were 10 years ago, and I believe all are pretty reliable, or at least as reliable as the owners who care for them.

 

[Navy Jr.]

Re: Alumacraft or Lund

It's like anything that's popular weather it be boats or clothes - you pay for the name. I could go either way, despite owning a Lund (vintage).

Yes, I originally thought the same thing when comparing Alum vs Lund, but after looking very closely at both brands, it appears there are valid reasons for the additional $$ Lund commands. One is the trailer. Lund ships their boats on their own branded trailers made by Shoreland'r. With Alumacraft you get the trailer the dealer has. Shoreland'r is a popular brand here in the upper Midwest as it offers lots of nice features. They are also more expensive. Another reason for the $$ difference is the boat warranty. I don't know of any other tin boat manufacturer who sells boats in this area who also offers a transferable lifetime warranty on all its marine plywood.

 

[Cakers]

Re: Alumacraft or Lund

I've owned both brands. They were comparable models (Tournament Sport vs Pro-V), although they were different years (2005 v. 2007) and sizes (approx one foot). I don't see the differences between the two that you're suggesting makes up for the difference in price.

I owned the Lund originally, and I have nothing bad to say about the boat.....great boat, great ride, but I just wanted something a little bit longer/wider. I was set on another Lund, but looked at Alumacraft.

All the Alumacraft dealers I looked at in Minnesota had Shoreland'r trailers on their boats. I understand that I didn't look at every dealer, but I didn't have a hard time finding an Alumacraft/Shorland'r dealer, and the prices certainly weren't significantly higher for a Shorland'r trailer as you're suggesting.

With the warranty, both are different, and one is not necessarily better than the other's. My advice is to read them both carefully or contact the manufacturer directly. Lund's is "Lifetime Limited". The double-riveted seams have a lifetime warranty....but the rest of the hull, stringers, rivets, gussets, and other parts? Ten-year pro-rated is what I last read when I had mine. Sorry, but I don't know if that's been updated recently.

As for Alumacraft, the last time I looked at their warranty, it was non-transferable, but the entire 2XB hull is a full 20-year warranty including seams and rivets, no pro-rating, and not "limited". Plywood is guranteed for the "lifetime".

Honestly, I believe the quality in both brands is excellent and you're far more likely to be using your motor's warranty than either of the boat warranties. Alumacraft gives you unlimited motor options, although certain dealers will work with you on a Lund.

Resale? Sure, the Lund resale might be higher, but if the initial price is higher, I hope the resale is also. Both hold their value in the market I live in very well. I can't say equally, because I certainly don't know what people have paid for their boats, and what they've re-sold them for. NADA guides are sometimes poor at best.

Fit and finish? Layout? Both of these are personal opinions.

Either way, you have to decide. Both are excellent, excellent boats and you can't go wrong either way. I went with Alumacraft this time for price reasons and don't regret it at all. However, I'd be happy owning either one.