Who needs a AT when...
 

you can have this!!:drink:

http://keys.craigslist.org/boa/870086587.html

Well maybe because they went bellyup a while back and weren't all that great to start with.

nice boat for someone just not built to the same standerd as an active thunder

Alot slower than a 33 AT with the same horsepower.

The 33 Challenger got pretty poor ratings in handling and speed from what I read in a test article. I looked at a new 28 a few years back and it looked very cheaply built.

I've seen that boat many times. It's white and blue, and was in the Miami Boat Show. It has also been on eBay.

At the ECPR 2007, I attempted to help a kid who had just bought a new 28 Challenger. He had bunch of electrical issues. The entire cabin and under structure was built out of plywood spray painted black.

The guy obviously has a very high opinion of his boat, too bad no one else does !! :p

Yes, I know they are out of biz and pieces of crap. :rolleyes: Just thought the ad was interesting because he wants to trade for a convertible, the hardware has to be worth something. So how did they end up with the DDC bottom? I thought AT patend it?

Pat, How can they use the DDC claim ? Based on what I have read on this forum, your DDC 33 was based on your 37. Do you have any idea where their 33 came from ?

The DDC hull is awesome and I think you have done an excellent job of moving it to the forefront of performance boating. Just curious how this company can do this.

Having had a few Miller Lights with you, I know you either have all the facts or an opinion.

I can't believe Pat or anybody else hasn't answered you guys so I will try. The DDC hull isn't Pats it was done and owened by Harry Schoule (sorry spelling not correct on his last name) he did the design and holds the patent. A.T. and Challanger have to pay for the rights to use it. But that doesn't meen they are the same boats, the A.T. is built to much higher standards and the performance #s speak for themselves. I hope I answered your questions. Pat I hope I didn't butcher it.:rolleyes:

In a nutshell, the DDC design is the step and pad bottom put together into one package.

The 37, 33, and 43 Active Thunders are all scaled versions of each other.

The 33 Challenger only shares the design mentioned in previously.

TONS of great reading here:
http://www.schoellmarine.com/

I have worked for Challenger and Active Thunder both and there is no way that the Challenger could ever compare to an Actice Thunder in any way! By the way I had a lot of seat time in that very boat and on it's best day, going down hill with a tailwind it was only good for 68mph.

Thanks much for the education guy's. :rolleyes: We had no idea when we bought our AT that this was not exclusive to AT and not owned by Pat. :eek:

Even when we met Harry, and talked with him about the hull and his "other ventures", we did not realize the situation. Thanks much for the info. :cool:

Please don't take this post the wrong way. I have not been on the forum for a while and was trying to have fun with Pat.

I am however curious about the coincidence with the Challenger 33 and the AT 33. That was the real purpose of the post.

dosent Regal boats have a licence for the bottom as well??

yeah, anymore if you want a one of a kind exclusive hull you have to go with a apache, there might be one other out there but I can't think of it right now. :rolleyes:

http://www.schoellmarine.com/innovations.htm

Harry designed the DDC for our existing hulls. I know he did the Challenger, Larson and Infiniity as well.

Where others guessed and built, I chose Harry's design after riding in the Inifiniti one Saturday afternoon at the Tiki Bar.

We were down there for the SBI races and I was standing on the dock drinking a (fill in the blank). Harry was at the dock and wanted me to go out for a quick ride to check out the Pulse-drive he had just come out with.

I was so impressed with the ride that I had him design it for the 37! After a few years of building the 37 DDC I knew I needed it in the 32. However the 32 needed a little revamping and everybody expressed an interest in a larger cockpit and a little more cabin headroom. Hence the 32 was retired and the 33 was born. Again, with the DDC patented bottom. The 33 is an exact duplicate of the 37 where the step is proportional to the length and width.

I don't know enough about the Challenger to comment nor do I know why the design did not work as well from a performance stand point. Maybe the thing ways a ton or the "X" is in the basement? That would be my speculation.

BTW be sure to check this insane design Harry is working on. Since he is a few doors down I have had the treat of watching him bring this to where it is today.

UNBELIEVABLE!

http://www.cyclonepower.com/

WOW:eek: That is a concept that is really out there. Great idea if he can make it work:cool:

Thanks for the emails Pat.