Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  They didn't cut it in half but ........

Post New Topic  Post Reply
search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   They didn't cut it in half but ........
bluewaterpirate posted 10-27-2006 11:10 PM ET (US)   Profile for bluewaterpirate   Send Email to bluewaterpirate  
Another commercial ....... you'll like it got a ETEC on it. \


andygere posted 10-28-2006 12:13 AM ET (US)     Profile for andygere  Send Email to andygere     
I thought it was a clever ad until I saw this. I think we all recognize the "competitor's" boat.

an86carrera posted 10-28-2006 01:24 AM ET (US)     Profile for an86carrera  Send Email to an86carrera     
Have you seen one of these boats? Better yet..have you seen a used one? What crap!!!


minitauk85 posted 10-28-2006 08:20 AM ET (US)     Profile for minitauk85  Send Email to minitauk85     
This is very deceptive! If you look at the hammers being dropped the whaler hammer has additional wight on it, and is hitting near the stern, where the fiberglass won't give and flex as much as the wide area of glass on the other boat! The wide area flexes more and diffuses the impact energy of the smaller hammer! Nice try though!-k
Mambo Minnow posted 10-28-2006 08:38 AM ET (US)     Profile for Mambo Minnow    
Very clever, I like the Bubba one best :)

That sledgehammered Whaler reminds me of the damage recently to one of our Hawaii CW posters, but it was from a kayak collision!

kingfish posted 10-28-2006 09:06 AM ET (US)     Profile for kingfish  Send Email to kingfish     
That second ad really is deceptive - the hammer being dropped on the Whaler appears *way* bigger than the one dropped on the Bubba Boat. Those boats are made out of polypropylene or something like it; like the material in plastic water buckets. It's soft and will absorb impact very unlike the fiberglass in *any* fiberglass boat. I'm not sure what happens when they stuff a really big wave at any kind of speed, though. Maybe they kind of fold up and collapse and have to be sort of re-inflated by pulling on each end??
Chuck Tribolet posted 10-28-2006 03:24 PM ET (US)     Profile for Chuck Tribolet  Send Email to Chuck Tribolet     
I've got a dive buddy who's had a Triumph for a couple of
years, and it's holding up to Monterey so far.


ConnorEl posted 10-28-2006 03:32 PM ET (US)     Profile for ConnorEl  Send Email to ConnorEl     
I think the Triumph boats are interesting. They are made of plastic, not fiberglass. The plastic is soft/flexible. It will float even if broken into a hundred pieces.

But the boats are sort of strange to ride/drive. They “flex” when you hit any kind of wave. This actually provides for a relatively soft ride. One problem with the design is that the hull doesn’t seem to hold its shape well over time. I’ve seen lots of Triumphs with distorted hulls. I guess they still are functional but they look, once distorted, quiet cheap and damaged.

And yes, I agree, the second commercial (with the hammer) is deceptive and meaningless. Anyone fooled by this kind of marketing deserves to enjoy his or her Triumph.

highanddry posted 10-28-2006 08:01 PM ET (US)     Profile for highanddry  Send Email to highanddry     
Do they really think that nobody will notice the hammer is three times larger and probably accelerated toward the hull which is why thye don't show the "swing".

It is likely that the fiberglass hull of the Whaler because it is supported rigidly by the foam may well punture more easily because it cannot "give" being supported by the foam. Who cares, it is repairable damage and I noticed a hammer mark on that Triumph, now how do they fix that poc whren it is punctured and torn?

jimh posted 10-29-2006 12:28 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
I agree: the hammer does look like it has had weight added to it in the test of the Boston Whaler hull. The hammer strikes right above the wheel. This would be the point of most resistance on the trailer for lateral movement, too.
highanddry posted 10-29-2006 01:52 AM ET (US)     Profile for highanddry  Send Email to highanddry     
Most likely when they swung the hammer with the same weight and method it bounced off of the Whaler without a mark. So, they added weight, picked the most damage prone area of the hull and then swung the crap out the hammer. If they had done that on the Triumph it would have punched right through.
Royboy posted 10-29-2006 05:52 PM ET (US)     Profile for Royboy  Send Email to Royboy     
The deceptive pseudo-testing aside, it's pretty cool that my boat is apparently the gold standard of strength.

I'd really like to see someone take off in the "Bubba" boat after that ride. Maybe head out offshore somewhere for a nice long troll.


wilson posted 10-29-2006 10:28 PM ET (US)     Profile for wilson  Send Email to wilson     
just had to comment on this topic I've had several boston whalers over the last 30 year's along with a dozen or more other boats my first two were total wrecks I paid 75 dollars for a 16 footer and about the same for a 13 repaired both removed saturated foam refilled haul with two part marine foam and repaired numerous dents and holes then added new layer of glass and resin to bottom ,sprayed with automotive finish. Had to make interior for the 16 and was able to refinish interior on 13 used boats for a while then sold them and then bought another 16 about 15 years ago for about 1000 that had bottom damage and saturated foam this boat came with 70 evinrude that was suppose to be in good condition. This boat I took my time and did a nice job repairing also made a really nice center console from fiberglass and resin.The lower unit blew up on my maiden voyage and I bought a new 70 yamaha. What a great boat had it for 15 years along with a Baja that had supercharged premium fuel engines.I used the whaler mostly for diving and fishing and then I saw the triumph boat and somehow thought what a great material to make boats with and almost half the price of a new whaler and bought the 17 center console.Let me say this ,I couldn't get rid of the triumph fast enough,major complaints flexing of the haul kept bringing throttle back from set position,bow heavy when anybody upfront of center console,sides and bottom warped [nornal],cheap aluminum hardware,terrible steering torque[no clutch in steering helm],seat cushions poorly attached and blow out when trailering,higher speeds boat wanted to fall to the left or right,boat numbers and decals peeling off[,dirt and debri gets in the floor seams,more difficult to keep clean than normal finish,thickness of haul construction used up interior space boat very small for 17foot.I had sold my old whaler to a freind and I missed it so much that I sold my baja[just before gasoline went over 1.50 lucky me]and traded the triuph at a huge loss just to get rid of it on a new 170montauk which handles and performs like a dream in comparison and lots of room for a17foot boat.I should say something good about the triuph after all any boat is better than no boat it had a 70 yamaha.
erik selis posted 10-30-2006 06:07 AM ET (US)     Profile for erik selis  Send Email to erik selis     
It's clear that the weight hitting the 170 Montauk is almost twice the size of the one hitting the toy boat. Isn't it illegal making advertising like this?


DeepSouthWhaler posted 10-30-2006 01:06 PM ET (US)     Profile for DeepSouthWhaler    
Several years ago I was approaching a dock in the Mississippi River down in Venice, LA. The current was very strong. I was coming in too fast when the wake from a passing cargo ship threw the boat into the dock knocking the two front passengers from the cooler seat onto the bow locker. The dock was made of concrete and steel. I was amazed that the boat had very minor damage. The damage was limited to the rubrail and the gelcoat with a little bit of fiberglass missing. These boats are tough. I think that the Triumph's bow would have caved in.
stikbo posted 11-07-2006 08:54 PM ET (US)     Profile for stikbo  Send Email to stikbo     
The first hammer hitting the Triumph is smaller than the one hitting the BW. The second part of the clip where they hit the Triumph 3 times it is the same larger hammer and you can see the impression left by each hit. Not that it matters. I wouldn't want a plastic boat anyway.
maxferran posted 11-08-2006 09:08 AM ET (US)     Profile for maxferran  Send Email to maxferran     
Forget the hammer, they swing the boat in a fast turn with a truck and let it use its own weight and momentum to hit a tree! It is a very convincing commercial. I just wouldn't buy it.
Livingwater posted 11-08-2006 01:48 PM ET (US)     Profile for Livingwater  Send Email to Livingwater     
They drove over a Whaler with a bulldozer. Try that with the Triumph!!!
ScottS posted 11-09-2006 09:31 AM ET (US)     Profile for ScottS  Send Email to ScottS     
I pointed out this video to Brunswick's General Counsel a week ago. He wasn't aware of it, but I'm sure Triumph will be getting a nasty letter shortly. It's just too obvious that both boats were not hit using the same method.

Livingwater, I'd like to see the bulldozer comparative testing done!


highspeed_jd posted 11-10-2006 01:37 PM ET (US)     Profile for highspeed_jd  Send Email to highspeed_jd     
From the first hit, it looks as if the rub rail takes some of the impact away from the side.

Post New Topic  Post Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.