That's a bunch of bullshit
 

You and I have been down this path what 20 or 30 different times?

And you just innocently bring up this topic just hoping that maybe somebody might share some ideas about .....

Bull**** BK, you know very well where your steering this, you have started this same thread dozens of times.

You promote half truths and some flat out lies about the practice you claim to be so widespread it is ruining an indusrty that you are only a by-stander in.

That **** you promote does take away from the livelyhood of some honest people.

The practice of coping succusful products takes place in every indusrty in America.

If those same couragous bold designers are so damn good, let them do it again.

You are only as good as your last design, now can you build a better product.

Who cares if it is hard and costly, that means very few will follow your path.

In America, we reward the best, not the complainers.

This should be about the consumer, that is the person in the chain that needs protection.

Of course I know where I'm steering this. Same place I've steered this issue for 14 years before I ever knew there was a Barney. This practice affected our business largely, and affects my builder friends who are still in business, so you can bully me, but it wont stop me from talking about it anymore.

There's nothing wrong with telling our views on why splashing is wrong. My personal goal is to spread the information about this law, so honest builders can use it to help design theft come to an end.

Oh yeah, poor little BK
 

Getting bullied in mans worlds.

So you think that there is nothing wrong with the practice of spreading your opinion even though it hurts honest buisness people?

Boy, you must be the industry savior.

You don't give a **** about anybody, your just playing political games with no purpose outside of your own ego.

My point has always been that it effected your business so much because your simply were never good at building your boats or selling them.

I have repaired enough of your transoms to know that.

To the best of my knowledge those were never original designs anyway.

If they were, how come original drawings or info is never available?

Maybe we should ask David Lee about that since they were his designs and his drawings to begin with.

Just had to come back and add, the idea BK, that you think your opinion is the only correct interpetation of boat building, boat design or even the effects on a marketplace, a marketplace that you are completely removed from, a marketplace you don't even subscribe to as a consumer (non boater), the idea that you are correct, reassures us all that you are indeed a woman.

I should have taken that into consideration and politely asked you to post a picture first! :D Then we'll all decide how valid your opinion is. ;)

As usual, you make this a personal thing. Throwing the decoys in to twist the issue.

This thread is about splashing: Right or wrong.

Opinions are welcomed and open to debate.


PS -- I really dont like to take this thread personal, but since you're making some false accusations directly toward our reputation, the history lesson is worth it: David Lee was "hired" to build the plug for Mirage (not to be confused with the Wasthington state Mirage boat company) using the Mirage owners own designs - a Collins/Cullen Company. Lee did not own those designs and never did. He built a few boats for Mirage, but only as a contract builder because Mirage did not have it's own facility at that time. The original Mirage design idea, that Lee built, came from my father in law and his partner.

The Lee family are good friends of ours, have been for years. We see them quite frequently. They are terrific designers too.

No BK
 

You made this personal many threads ago.

When you believe that your opinion is so highly valued that you can justify taking bread off the tables of honest hard working people, then you have turned it personal.

Every month, when the bills come, it's very personal.

When your comments are protected by the administration of another board and you continue to post half truths and lies directly about my friends, my boats, thier safty, YES, I take it very personal.

It's just my opinion BK, why is yours more valid than mine?

Just want to spread your opinion......?

Come on Barney. If I mention 'splashes' and you immediately assume I'm talking about your boats, then I really can't help that, can I.

If I have really have lied about your friends or whatever, I'm sure you can send a link -- But you can't because it NEVER happened. If true, then you should be able to post a copy of it here.

But I think the reality is that you are just desperate to change this subject any way you can. Or badger me like you normally do, hoping I will leave.

So instead of a repeat of the barrage of insults, why not just tell us why splashes are better?

No more personal crap -- let the thread continue.

I'm just going to sit back now, and read the rest of the opinions, whatever they may be.

Better?
 

The better boat is determined by the quality of materials and workmanship, splash or non-spash.

I'm not saying it's better, just needed in the equation.

In America it's like the equalizer, it's the other end of the spec trum from monopoly.

It exist everywhere, in every marketplace, food service, autos, housing, it's called an open market.

Who's to say where the next talent may emerge, let the best boat builders do that, build boats, the marketplace will take care of itself.

You want to back off with the "right or wrong, just direct copy" BS, we as consumers rarely even know what is what andwhich came first by whom, damn we just want the best boat we can get.

Your innocent conversations have always ventured into the existing legal business's that are using older and yes copied designs.

Your BS effects all the aspects of perfectly legal business, your tainted slant on things is just yours and it hurts innocent peoples lives.

Come on BK, you really think you can hide your personal feelings here?

You come in with this voice of authority thinking you have the right to say anything you want with recourse.... NEWS FLASH the waters a little deeper here, Offshore and all, you gotta stand on your own here. :D

Liberator makes a boat very similar to BK's old company.

Liberator also makes a boat very similar to an older ;) 24 Skater, mine is almost ready:).... didn't you just visit Skater BK?

I sell Liberators, sort of..., you have to want to buy one, I don't wanna sell.

Hmmm,

Barrage of insults??

I thought we were sharing opinions? :confused:

Hmmmmmm
 

Yep, just sweet innocent polling of the people, maybe a little push here and there..... :D

Out of the blue.......... ;)

o workl as a graphic and web designer. Desgn theft is pretty rampant in my field as well. It damne asy to steal a logo from a web siet change the text and resell it to another client.

Barney you keep refferring to "honest bussinessman" if they were honest whhy woulnd;t they contact the manufacturer of an existing hull (weather in production or not) and see what teh deal with producing it would be. Maybe the designer woudl sell them the origonal molds maybe they woudl just say who cares feel free maybe they might ask for asmall royalty fee. Point is if the biulder was honest the would ask permission first.

I know if someone ganked my website and changed the logo and called it thier that woudl piss me off big time and rightfully so I spend a lot of time and energy developing a produc that reflect my skills, tastes, and personality (my buissiness is just me). SO when soemone take my ideas and makes a few minor changes that would tick me off.

NOW if someone took my idea and manged to make it load ina 1/3 teh time be heigher quality and sell 10times as much product and look vastyly different but based it off my idea, taht is called progress.

If someone were to take a 1984 40' beak boat and pull a mold off it and resell it as a Sper HappyTime Special Boat that is thievery. Be just like stealing a websiet and hcnaging teh logo. But if they pulle dtah mold added 3 step moved the cabin forward and added 5 inches of headroom, removed the beak and set it up for tripples in stead of twins then there is a major change and that is progress. Not a splash.

Splashing is illegal and doe snotfallunder teh term of legitimate bussiness and certainly isn' honest or upstanding bussiness.

I think pullnig a mold from an existing hull with out paying for it isn't too bad IF you plan on making major improvments to it. BUT pulling a miold and selling it as knock of is ****ty.

Reguardless if the morality of it the stigma of knock off being of lesser quality tht the origonal is pretty obvious. Why woudl tehy make an illegal; copy of the hull and produce a duplicate? Simple to sell boat and cut out the cost of R&D. So automatically this sets up teh biulder ina position of tryign to save money by cuttina MAJOR corner. I say its cutting acorner becasue new hulls are evolutions of design sometimes you modify last years design and it suck so you start over agian. All eth while you learn about the quirks of the product, how to tuine it, how to rig it, You learn about your own invention. This is very important in design. Hell even in web design (software engineering, is engineering) taht important. Butr back to my point the biulder is alrady tryign to save money SO at what point ar etehy willing to stop? Well maybe instead of using balsa core they use half balsa half pine from home depot. Maybe thethin thier gelcote out a little more to use 5 gallosn instead of 6.

I am not sayign this is the case for all biulder but its certainly raises such questions.

FYI please lets nt get this all nasty. Open free discusion. The last page was a slap fest between you too. If you want to present your opinions (biased or not) please do it civily. No need to throw mud.





FYI you were just repremanded by the youngest member of oso ;) Lets keep it clean.

John at Lightning PowerBoats
 

Hi thread My name is John Christensen,owner of Lightning Power Boats,And you bet we do pop,Splash or what ever you want to call it,the common mistake you people are assuming is that a pop is not as good as the original,well ( MY Opinion) you need to look at one before you judge !I used to build a copy of (BK)'s husban's Mirage 18 ',he did a great job and I feel built a great boat,I've been told I build as good of boat,now look at the new owner of mirage boats,first off he dosen't even build his own boats,he has another company build them for him,and they are built outof the cheepest resins,cut up plywood,for coreing,and chopp,Im sorry my worse boat I've ever built was not built that bad,I don't need to bad mouth anyone else's boats to make me look good,Im just trying to make a point,If what I do was illegal,I would be in jail,guess what,Never been hope to never go,sounds like a bad place,75% of the molds I have are pops of other boats that i have changed in one way or another,And I do build a good boat not the best but never the less a good boat,you don't have to like pop's or splashes,but don't put them down till you judge for yourself ,HI wish fast and safe boating to all. John

Hey John, I like the looks of your boats. What do you have in the 28-32' Cat range? any for single engine? any pictures?

Now what about "Copying" other things-- exhaust systems, intakes, bravo lower units, extension boxes, guages, colored ropes, cylinder head porting.
Coke/pepsi, levis, cars, motorcycles, Where does it stop?

It's the American way. Take someone elses product and make it better, cheaper, faster, and call it yours'. And make a buck at it.
Doesn't that force the original guy to make sure his is the best, cheapest and fastest.

"Immitation is the finest form of flattery" Isn't it?

I'm not for or against 'splashing' But don't have double standards on other things. Now would I like a 36' Skater copy fully rigged out the door for $125,000.

But what if there isn't any visual difference between YOUR product and THIER product? There is no problem with improving a design until it isn't recognizable anymore, but that's not what this thread is about.

Jeep is suing Humvie right now, because the grill looks too similar to the deisgn of the Jeeps front grill. You can't splash a car or a coke -- a splash is made from a direct molding technique -- When you pop a hull its an exact image of the first. The coke bottle and recipe are both very much protected.


Sometimes the splashers claim there are some 'changes' in the hull. Many of them do make serious changes, but the splashes being done with our boats have such slight chages you can barely find them. Some have no change at all.

We got a call one time from some friends, congratulating us on our boat being in the new Mercury brochure -- when I saw it I even thought it was our boat!

It looked *exactly* the same, perfect mirror image to our boat, but it wasn't ours! It was a total splash. :(

Puder was right on when he said, if you think you can make improvements on an existing hull then do it the legit way -- buy the molds or design rights from the owner and go for it! And that's precisely what the guy did who purchased our company.

It is wrong to simply pop the designs and start calling them your own.

Wow! this thread sure took an unexpected turn to the south. It was a very interesting thread and history lesson untill people brought up what had evedently been hashed out on other boards.

BK I agree with your position. I'm pleasently suprised to find out your were, Mirage boats. I didn't know that when I posted that pic of my old Mirage. I would like to find out more about my boat.

Was this a different company than your's? I was told it was built ( and raced) in Florida. Now this may be wrong. I believe they also made a 30 or 32 foot version that was also availible with a jet drive.

Please feem free to email me.

Mark

im sorry jon . .im just have'n a tough time agreeing with you . .. i mean if you want to build a better boat, take the ideas and designs you like in other boats , build your own plug and pull your mold from IT.


there is a company close to me that has spent the last few years developing a 49 foot cat. they have spent countless hours and countless $$$ testing, designing, working plugs from scratch, building thier own molds. this whole process has taken many months (or years) and you say it is OK for you to buy one, flip it over , pull a mold with what about a months worth of labor an start sell'n boats because you think you can build it better.it takes more than just a styling change to constitute an improvment.

i realize this is a tough subject. you are right . . .some boats are built like crap and you may very well be able to build it better. but to just splash the original just dosent seem right. if you can build a better boat than do so . . but why dont you start from scratch.

Too Old your message box is full

Havasu, John et al:

1. If you build a fake Rolex you are not an "honest businessman"..... you are a thief.

2. If you get away with it and are not "in jail"...you are a lucky thief.......

3. If you get on a website and lash out at people who point this out............. you are defensive thief.

4. If you make it personal.....you are a nasty thief.

5. If you maintain that your Rolex is better than the original...... you are a deluded thief.

6. If people buy your Rolexes, that neither justifies nor minimizes your thievery....in fact, you pulled the wool over their eyes too.

6. Any way you look at it.....you'll always be a thief...until you take responsibility for being a thief....... and build an original watch. .... Of course if you could do that, you wouldn't have been a thief in the first place.

T2x

Just lost respect for Lightning Powerboats.

The difference is they are not trying to sell them as the 'original'. They are not calling them 'Rolexes'. They might be calling them something else but not by the original name-- yes that's thievery. If I splash a whatever say skater and try to sell it as a skater I belong in jail. If I tell what it is, and call it a skeeter a great impersonator but not an original and built it either better or worse, cheaper or more expensive, What am I?

Harley-Davidson had this problem when there was a 2 year wait for their product. So other companies 'Copied' the bikes and sell them as their own, by their own name. Now there are a half dozn companies selling what look just like Harleys out there. Ok not an original, but so..

Hi Payton~

I saw the pic of your boat and it comes from a different company company called Mirage Mfg out of Washington State. Our company was Mirage Boats Inc. and was in Texas until 1997,when it was purchased by Mike Mullins and the molds moved to the new owners location in Florida, where they are building them today.

Our Mirage company never built a boat larger than a 23', and everything was either a hi perf True Tunnel or Modified Tunnel. Much of our stuff was 18' and under, and built strictly for OPC, Drag or Lake racing, so you can imagne the R&D involved in this sector is incredible. Like glassdave said, there is so much hard work, not to mention the months of testing involved, before you can even thinking about building a plug or mold on this type of project.

But a splashing company can wait until after all that hard work has been completed, and then greases the boat up and pops it, and in just a few days he can start building a replica for a fraction of the hard work and cost of building an actual plug. Easy money, and that's why so many jumped on the bandwagon.

Our hull bottoms changed yearly, sometimes even more frequently than that, so by the time the splashers came along, we were already one step ahead of them. (Most of the time)

But boy is this a very, very costly way to do business! Huge chunk of a companies annual profits is bitten off with constant tooling and R&D. So out of necessity, many of the companies who actually could build better designs if the competition was on the level, had no choice but to join the splashers, rather than spend the tens of thousands of dollars it takes design their own stuff.

Sadly, a few of the original hull builders who normally spent tons of money on R&D had to find a solution to avoid financial ruin, so they turned to splashing too - even though they knew it was the wrong direction to take. They were just trying to keep up with the bargain prices of their splash-competition and remain in business. They knew all along is was theft, so they tried to disguise the product.

But there are a some who dont even bother disguising them anymore, and there are at least two brands I can't even tell if it is our boat or a splash of ours! Its blatant copying.

But when you speak to some of the original hull design companies -- even though they may have been sucked into the splash problem involuntarily -- they will tell you they would much prefer to get splashing back under control, so they can get back to the business of producing original hull designs, by legitimate hull designers.

With the new law passed in 1998, these beautiful works are now protected from copyright theft. So builders wont be hesitant to start a brand new hull from scratch any longer.

Puder
- Here's something you'll find interesting - The Vessel Hull Design Protection Act of 1998 is a sister to another law: The Pub. L. No. 105-147 "No Electronic Theft (NET) Act", which protects pirated software, but also protects the code designers from having years of hard work be "splashed' and modified just a tiny bit, and resold to the public in bulk at a ridiculous fraction of the cost.

Hey - just maybe your E-designs are protected after all? Check out this letter:

http://www.house.gov/judiciary/digr0512.htm

BK, You said you changed bottom designs yearly or even more frequently-- was that because of your own developement, redesign to make a better product or was your motive to just keep splashers at bay? It sound like you kept on making a better boat and product.
I ask what do you do with a design 5 iterations ago that you no longer use and are now on to a new and better model? Throw it in the trash out back? Cut it up? The molds are yours but you don't own what comes out of them. Or do you?

what do you think of this?
 

Go to the classifieds section of this board and go to boats for sale. Then go to Skater...............and you'll get a Liberator! is that right? It is advertised that way on boattrader.com that way too. I was contacted to buy this boat and was told it was better and faster than a Skater HA!! He said it had a small cabin in it too. If it has a cabin then it must not have any bulkheads in it like my 24. I would like to flip one of those over at 90 like I did my SKATER and see how pieces it is left in. MOST builders of copies build JUNK, some are ok, but very rarely are they as nice as origanals.

Wow!! What a cool thread!!
I thought the Velocity was a Malstrom(sp) with the bottom cut out and a allison bass boat put in?
Or something like that?
I won't say who, but I have drank a few beer's with a couple of guy's that have been around boat's for a long time, and it was cool to hear what all was copied and cut up and changed, and what never worked in the first place!

I said it earlier: "splashing" is wrong. I can only hope that the "original" designer/manufacturer aggresively litigates someone who splashes their product.

Cobra Marty -

Since we were in a race to build the fastest race boats, our frequent tooling reasons were two-fold:

1. We had to stay above the competition. Afterall, they were tooling as much as us.

2. It helped to keep fresh models, and a strong selling point as to why not to buy a cheaper, outdated splash copy.


Designs belong to the original builder. But if you sell a set of molds -- you are also selling the design that comes from those molds. You lose control of that particular design.
For that reason, we never, ever sold a mold that even resembled the current designs.

Funny you mention the molds that become obsolete.... Yes, there was a growing pile of EX-molds in our yard, and every year that pile grew and grew out by the creek. Probably close to $100,000 worth. A tidy sum if we had wanted to sell them. Some sat for years in the weather and warped and decayed. Finally, when we sold the company, the new owner didnt want anything to do with those molds, and paid to have the molds destroyed -- we'd never sell them to the public anyway, so the best option was destruction.

But we learned that the ex-employee who was hired to remove them to the dump, did not! A very dirty deal. We now know he took at least one of these to a competitor and THEY built boats from them! (and worse, it was a mold that previously ceased to build good parts!) Those molds -- and the design -- belonged to the owner who purchased the design rights of Mirage. Nobody else. Something the owner will have to take care of.

bk- just out of curiosity do you know any thing about these boats (see pic) i found it in the back of a local marina about a year ago and picked it up for running around our local river front. at the time i had no idea about the amount of spalashing that went on.i didnt even know what this thing was. after i researched mine alittle i found out it was known as one of the "91 freeway flyers" . it was built and titled as a 23.5' concord but i was told it was a copy of a mirage.

payton- nice boat by the way.and there used to be one of those big 33 foot jet boats run'n around here a few years ago . . . looked like a huge hawiian, was kinda cool. us daycruiser guys gotta stick together:D :cool:

I have been watching this thread unfold, and decided I would have to add my .02. A copy of an original is just that “A copy” I personally never ever buy a copy of anything. If I want something and can’t afford a new “Original” I will look for a pre-owned version of the “Original”. I have a Skater and would never own a “Copy”. I might look for a pre-owned, or a smaller “New” Skater. But never a “Copy”. I would be embarrassed to own a copy! And that brings me to pose a question to all of the “Skater Copy” owners. When someone asks you “what kind of boat is that” I wonder how many times you have answered, or rather mumbled, “Skater”? I would bet, more then once! Why? I ask? Maybe embarrassment? My next point is in the case of these Cats; don’t you guys care about your own safety? Just because it looks like a Skater does not mean it is built like one. One of the reasons a Skater costs more money then the Copy, other then the obvious lack of cost of R&D and plug production is Skater only uses the best materials to build their boats. Their boat is not build to fit into a price point. The boat is built the right way, using only the best and strongest material, and then the price is fixed on the product. I can tell you I never think about the boat coming apart at high speed. It just won’t happen. The forces acting on a cat at high speed are tremendous. Having to think about one sponson deciding to part ways with the tunnel, or the top of the tunnel or bottom of the sponson delaminating is not a comforting thought. I know for a fact the new 32’ Skater went through many design phases, changes, and new plug and mold changes. Should someone be allowed to copy the boat? I think not! I know one thing for sure, if I made a copy of a Chevrolet Corvette, and labeled and sold it under the name of “Philmobile” it would not be long before the Lawyers and District Attorneys paid me a visit. The lack of business Sophistication, and the willingness of some people to support the thievery of these boats is the reason the thieves are still in business. Don’t support Forgery.

The Coast Guard Should step in the Fray, if one is an Outright Thief, Too Cheap to pay a competent Designer, Or Incapable of performing the necessary design work in house, Then No H.I.N Period. As they are the Final Line. And have the Finial say as to who builds what!!

Best Regards

So the Coast Guard can control the H.I.N. Maybe now with technology we can shoot a picture of a boats bottom and represent it on the computer in 3D with wire frame technology and them when a munufacture applies for H.I.N.'s they can look thru a library of hulls and overlay them and see if there is a match or a near match and deny or issue HIN's.

As the Boss (Bruce Springsteen) said...
 

You can't start a fire without a spark!

Design is the spark. No matter how well you build it, you would have nothing without the original brainchild of the designer. But the idea without execution is also nothing, so the builder is often the midwife at the birth.

It seems that the brains of designers are wired differently than the brains of builders. Success in business requires both, but the builders often end up running the show, and they may tend to minimize the importance of the original designer. You can find examples of this in every industry.

So what is right? To use the example of music, if you steal a melody, you are a thief, no matter how much you dress it up with full orchestra and choir. You have robbed the original composer, and you should be required to pay royalties. Even if you only steal a few bars, and change (improve?) the rest of the song, the melody, and your theft, will be RECOGNIZABLE.

What about the argument that splashing with improvements is part of the natural evolution of the industry and shrewd competition includes or requires the concept of stealing designs, that this is somehow the American Way? I will go along with this up to a certain point, again using the example of music.

If a certain band or musician breaks out with a "new sound", there will soon be many sound-a-like bands. Nirvana "invents" grunge and opens the door for the "Seattle sound" and many other bands. The imitators are not breaking the law, sometimes they are even better composers and musicians than the original innovator. But as soon as they steal a melody, they have infringed on copyright.

It seems as though the splashers are saying that they are only copying the "sound", often from other splashers, who copied the sound before them. The challenge is deciding where to draw the line between "sound" and "melody" in the field of boat-building. What is truly a unique design feature and what is not. Can you RECOGNIZE the unique melody?

I just watched the movie "TRAINING DAY" with Denzel Washington as a crooked cop. His best line in the movie is, "It's not what you know, it's what you can prove!" You may know that a design was splashed, but can you prove it? Will the courts recognize the melody? If you have made the melody unrecognizable, did you splash or not? Is your new melody better or just different?

One other observation, design can be evolutionary or revolutionary. Revolutionary design is an easily recognizable melody. Evolutionary design may be an improvement but may not be easy to recognize as a distinct melody. The tunnel hull was a revolution, easily recognized by all. How many other boat design changes in the last 40 years qualify as revolutionary?

Right or wrong, it boils down to what you can recognize and prove is a unique design feature. Sounds like a legal nightmare.

This whole thread reminds me of that Eddie Murphy movie---'Coming to America' ---where the father of Eddie's love interest is the owner of 'Mic Donalds' home of the 'Big Mic'. I LMAO year's ago watching that --and still do:D If they couldn't be inventive enough to come up with a new gig what the hell???
Tomcat is right on with the music equation, Just like Coke and Pepsi both offer 'COLA' taste but art, taste, etc. is different--(Britney--YAWOO). What I'm saying is that Pepsi isn't using a red can with white lettering, and buying up old cans of coke to mix with there pepsi to cut cost. RIDING COAT TAILS What happens when those coat tails aren't there? ---sit and cry on the park bench until someone comes to there rescue. Half of me laughs at these people , the other half shakes my head (pity/anger).

Now, after all that ---I hope to hell that Scarab didn't splash my hull!!!! I had Know idea that there were so many that had been done. Opened my eyes:rolleyes:

Good points
 

There are sooo many industires that make the same type of product. Pepsi and Coke is a great example, but if you can't taste the difference, something is wrong. They are not the same...I mean Chevrolet and Doge both build truck right? But they are not copies. In music now, we have many different people making many different sounds, all relative to choice. People remake songs all the time, but there is a leagal process that has to be done to do so, if not, someone get sued. So if Person A can't put a beat together, and they hire Person B to do it for them, that's ok, but not if Person C takes that beat and markets it for themself.
I fail to see how Barney believes this is "harmless and Making a living" Just because the laws don't apply to you doesn't mean you can take advantage of them. If the laws were the same for cars, would it be ok for me to copy the Corvette and put my name on it? or a different set a wheels and name? What about Harley Davidson? Can I copy their bike and put my name on it and it be "inocent and making an honest living?
Spalshing may not be very punishable for boating, but keep this in mind. I'f i'm walkind down the beach and I see a sleek little tunnel and recognize it, I don't care what name is on it, It's still a Mirage, Eliminator, etc. no mater what vynal decals say. Just like the old saying says,...you can do to it what you want, but there is no substitute for an original

Whoa...this thread is cookin'! Lots of pro's and con's, good points and bad. BUT, just a little thought here. The man (Don Aronow) who actually made the offshore powerboat popular and is/was considered the KING, built his incredible reputation on splashing...didn't he? He would make his company popular, sell it, then splash to start another...correct? That is how the industry was built and grew to what it is today...correct? Formula, Donzi, Magnum, Squadron XII, Cigarette, USA, etc. Does everyone here know where these designs ACTUALLY came from? Who ACTUALLY designed the "now popular" 24 degree vee? Just food for thought!

glassdave-Sorry, that's not a 23'-4" Concord. The bow entry angle sure looks like a Concord, the hard chine also looks like the one on a Concord (although the chine appears to be significantly enlarged). The bottom also appears to be padded. If the bottom half started out as a Concord, then somebody chopped a good 9" of free board out of the stern area. And then there is the "unique" top deck. I'll post a picture of a 23' Concord for folks on Monday.


BTW-If somebody did start with a Concord for this hull, then I would not consider the "improved version" to be a splash. There are enough significant differences between the two boats, that they both can be considered their own independent designs. Unfortinatly, alot of people like to group a direct copy (splash) with a legally modified version.

The beginning of the American high-performance, deep-vee boat building industry is said to have started in 1958, with the first deep-vee boat, designed by Ray Hunt. The Hunt design had a 24 degree dead rise, which eliminated much of the pounding of the conventional hulls. An added feature of the Hunt design, were longitudinal strakes on the bottom to give added lift and throw out the spray to keep the boat dry. Naval architect, Jim Wynne, was impressed with the characteristics and performance of Hunt’s boat and designed a similar deep-vee hull, which was equally successful. In 1962, Don Aronow, a retired real estate developer, asked Jim Wynne and Walt Walters to design such a boat for him to race. This was the first of the famed, Aronow hulls, which he promoted first under the name Formula, then Donzi, then Magnum (1966 — 1968), then Cigarette.

This is one of the better history lessons copied from the Magnum site.

Best Regards

Thanks Steve.... I think we've been down this path before.... I'm about to move a post I did last fall( Great moments in Vee bottom history) to the top.......some of our newer members may find it interesting.......or, at least, add to the large body of questions and information that it represents.

T2x

BETTER NOT SPLASH
 

For the readers of HOT BOAT MAGAZINE, SEPTEMBER,2000 Page 61 was the story of HTM's MOLDS. After a year long legal battle, $15,000 in fees, the SPLASHED MOLDS were retrieved and crushed by a bull-dozer at a Lake Havasu City dump. In this case, the law worked for HTM.;) For those that have never seen a "PLUG" before, below is the 22ft Offshore design by T. DeAngelis...

The Bottom before the strakes were added...Something else of interest: V.H.D.P.A

Just a thought and after that it's off to bed we go........

This thread has been aimed at the practice of using someone else's original hull (either in whole or in part) as a "plug" for a boat mold.

To prevent misunderstanding let's detail the various names used to identify the process. This practice is referred to as copying, "popping", cloning, "splashing", and stealing.

None of these names sounds like an "honest way to make a living".

Good night

Don Arranow....


Yeha he was legand in tht he brought a ****load of attention to offshore boats. He was also a character.

BUT none of his accomplishments prove taht he was a moral or honest man. I'm not saying weather he was or he wasn;t BUT he certainly made a ****load of money selling extra superfast (fot hier day) boats to known drug smugglers.

And aren't there plenty of theories that he was in fact murdered as a result of this?

So please lets not hold up Don Aranow as our moral and ethical standard.

To Glassdave~

I've been passing your boat picture around to some folks to see if I can find any history on that design. The only clue was that it looks similar to a Wreidt Boat, a company out of California.

So I've been searching the Net for a picture of a Wreidt boat of that size, but so far nothing yet.

I don't know if this was a Mirage Mfg hull - the company that was/is out of Washington State -- that is a different company than the Mirage Inc of Texas/Florida that we used to own.

Sorry I couldnt help ya more. :(