Originally Posted by FIXX (Post 4011397)

owning a FORMULA and seeing how they are built i would want to be their during the building process.''if i were to ever buy another one but new this time''.everything in the engine compartment is built solid..everything you dont see like the forward bulkheads are built like chit..under the cockpit floor is built like chit and even the bulkhead in front of the engines is just plane marine plywood that has been gelled over and tabbed in around the edges and thats it..under the cockpit then staple all the wood,bulkheads and gussets together.then tab it and foam it then put a piece of mat over everything..what chit work..on mine around the gas tank they left bare wood and did not even paint it same goes for the forward stringers..bare wood just tabbed in and then they put carpet over it..Btw after time all the staples rot out holding the wood together under the cockpit floor and then everything starts moving..i have seen several formulas built the same way...

thats just my o2..

Originally Posted by Full Force (Post 4011406)

Soooo I was not only one to notice the same thing???? The Scarab had even more of that and it really surprised me on both honestly....

Originally Posted by FIXX (Post 4011416)

No tim,,im disappointed the way formula are building boats..i think batliner glassed in all of the exposed wood on their boats..we the people pay good hard earned money for these boats and they are cutting corners or should i say were cutting corners because i have not had a fastec opened up yet..it really piss's me off that formula wont do anything about it,one rep asked me to asend him pic's and i never gor a response,i know mine is 20 yrs old but damm i have a friend that has a 79 formula that is built like a brick house..

Originally Posted by Full Force (Post 4011426)

That's what I'm saying, I agree with you!

Originally Posted by FIXX (Post 4011397)

owning a FORMULA and seeing how they are built i would want to be their during the building process.''if i were to ever buy another one but new this time''.everything in the engine compartment is built solid..everything you dont see like the forward bulkheads are built like chit..under the cockpit floor is built like chit and even the bulkhead in front of the engines is just plane marine plywood that has been gelled over and tabbed in around the edges and thats it..under the cockpit then staple all the wood,bulkheads and gussets together.then tab it and foam it then put a piece of mat over everything..what chit work..on mine around the gas tank they left bare wood and did not even paint it same goes for the forward stringers..bare wood just tabbed in and then they put carpet over it..Btw after time all the staples rot out holding the wood together under the cockpit floor and then everything starts moving..i have seen several formulas built the same way...

thats just my o2..

Originally Posted by Full Force (Post 4011406)

Soooo I was not only one to notice the same thing???? The Scarab had even more of that and it really surprised me on both honestly....

Originally Posted by Tinkerer (Post 4011463)

I have had my head stuck in areas that are not normally visible on my Scarab and everything was glassed. The build quality on my Scarab is much better than the Eliminator that I now own.
The hull to deck joint is Fully glassed. The wiring is fairly clean and neat. I have remodeled the cabin to make it more user friendly. All wood was glassed.
The stringers are fully encapsulated with glass.
The 1992 Scarab 34 is a different boat than the old SCARAB III - I don't know what they changed but they are faster. I looked at and drove the 357 and was not impressed.

Originally Posted by glassdave (Post 4011786)

my ScarabIII weighs in at 7900 dry

Originally Posted by glassdave (Post 4011568)

A buddy of mine has a 357 that was showing a little of softness in the bulkhead in front of the engines so he pulled the engines to repair it . . . . ended up pulling everything all the way to the bow eye. Could not believe how poorly the superstructure was in that boat. Under the cockpit floor it was just a half inch gridwork that only tabbed on at the edges and brush coated with resin. The entire thing was a sponge and every bit of it had to be replaced. The build techniques looked very non standard and cheap, odd though because they are such good looking boats from the outside.

I see some performance comments on the Scarab vs the Formula i thought the formula would be faster but that was just a guess.

yep you pretty much summed it up..look at page 6,,this is how they come from the factory but they at leaste glassed the stringers in the engine compartment..dont get me wrong formula made a good boat but they chimped out on the materials and i feel they should stand up to the plate and do somthing about ot for the people that had to pay good money to fix it properly

Scarabs built before 87 were completely different, they used older construction methods. I am actually surprised at how well mine is wired and laid up. Wellcraft changed up their game in 88.

I'll tell ya something else ( i saw ya mentioned ride quality) before i raised my X dim it rode like crap. After it was a completely different boat, cannot believe how much of a difference it made.




Same here. had my head in many places on many boats. Not sure what happened but Wellcraft went through some kind of major change in 87 and everything after 88 is built completely different from earlier boats. I mean to the point it looks like they are from a completely different plant/facility. Wiring, glasswork, trim, all vastly improved (or at least on its way to better refinement) :cool: what was the X dim on your ScarabIII?

Originally Posted by 32 Active Thunder (Post 4011980)

Brochure says it won offshore boat of the year with that design!!! So I ask this question what were some of the best built boats back then?? Please give some facts!! That question should open some good debate