PHP Warning: Use of undefined constant VBA_SCRIPT - assumed 'VBA_SCRIPT' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in ..../includes/functions_navigation.php(802) : eval()'d code on line 1
Which Cat - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 19 of 19

Thread: Which Cat

  1. #16

    Re: Which Cat

    Quote Originally Posted by julian1 View Post
    geez Frank your getting a bit slowin your old age i thought you would have been onto these KC boys earlier

    are you heading down this way soon or heading North ??
    No doubt the KC boys have a package to boast about but sick to
    death about the negative MD reports considering most are ol hype
    and no substance!!

    Hope to get down your way soon mate just waitin for a few more
    positive reports and a lull in work ! North aint lookin likely albeit
    a hit and run to Port Stephens later this month might just
    be on the cards
    Goodluck for the upcomin trip

  2. #17

    Re: Which Cat

    I thought the 5.2 went better I have test driven the 2400 with different size motors and I agree that it runs better than the 5.2 with a set of 140 4 strokes but I thought they under performed with any less hp I ended up buying a 34 ft black watch I've had that for 2 years now I'm going back to a noosa cat 2700 they are defiantly the best boat I have owned not as pretty as the kc butt much better riding when it gets rough even the big kc berry the nose from side to side the noosa cats seem to ride a lot flatter in the rough

  3. #18
    Ausfish Silver Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006

    Re: Which Cat

    Quote Originally Posted by Offshore 79 View Post
    I thought the 5.2 went better I have test driven the 2400 with different size motors and I agree that it runs better than the 5.2 with a set of 140 4 strokes but I thought they under performed with any less hp I ended up buying a 34 ft black watch I've had that for 2 years now I'm going back to a noosa cat 2700 they are defiantly the best boat I have owned not as pretty as the kc butt much better riding when it gets rough even the big kc berry the nose from side to side the noosa cats seem to ride a lot flatter in the rough

    Mate i owned a 2700 noosa & it is a great boat , but if your trying to say that the big kevlacat as in 3000 series buries it's nose & isnt as good a tub,then no way the 2700 isnt in the same ball park as the big kc it's the ducks nuts imo & i've done a lot of trips in 1 it's mind blowing the speed you can travel in that thing & it's a dry ride.I found the 2700 to be wet even in good conditions it sneezes a lot because of the low tunnel at low speeds ,gets annoying but everything is a compromise.

    cheers

  4. #19

    Re: Which Cat

    Quote Originally Posted by soulfish View Post
    Mate i owned a 2700 noosa & it is a great boat , but if your trying to say that the big kevlacat as in 3000 series buries it's nose & isnt as good a tub,then no way the 2700 isnt in the same ball park as the big kc it's the ducks nuts imo & i've done a lot of trips in 1 it's mind blowing the speed you can travel in that thing & it's a dry ride.I found the 2700 to be wet even in good conditions it sneezes a lot because of the low tunnel at low speeds ,gets annoying but everything is a compromise.

    cheers
    I agree they may get a little spray back through the tunnel but that's IMO why they ride different maybe not from your point of view I thought the kc performed great until I got a very close at a 3000 starboard prop when it buried it port side so badly in rough conditions I think you also need to look at price you can buy my 34 ft 2004 model black watch for the same price of a 3000 kc and they are heavier to tow

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •