AT vs. OL
01-21-2014 | 05:29 PM
#11
Registered
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11,903
Likes: 1,140
The AT is a bigger boat at 37 feet assuming they are not including the bolt on swim platform as the OL is a 36 foot boat with what appears to be a 3 foot bussle . The AT definitely has a bigger cabin and appaers to have a roomier cockpit . Notwithstanding all of that, my guess is the OL might hold its value a bit better in the long run.
RG.
RG.
I like the boat, the speed is fantastic on 2 yr warranty 520's but 370K buys you a lot of options on the used boat market.
01-21-2014 | 05:51 PM
#13
Registered
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,341
Likes: 10
From: Frankfort, IL
I really like Outerlimits boats (IF I go bigger, that's my number one choice)...but between those two, AT all the way. The difference in speed is not that great...but I've seen few boats that could touch the popcorn-making awesome that is the AT interior...
01-21-2014 | 05:56 PM
#14
Thread Starter
Registered
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,865
Likes: 793
From: St. Pete Beach, FL
Here's my beef, if you took the name brands off the boats and the average person looked at the two side by side, that particular OL looks like a stripped out model with no bling, no billet, etc...
I understand that OL is trying to build this boat as a lower cost type boat but it def shows. Why can't they build a boat optioned out, with the fit and finish that the AT has for the same price?
I understand that OL is trying to build this boat as a lower cost type boat but it def shows. Why can't they build a boat optioned out, with the fit and finish that the AT has for the same price?
01-21-2014 | 05:58 PM
#15
Thread Starter
Registered
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,865
Likes: 793
From: St. Pete Beach, FL
Yeah I didn't catch that initially. I just thought it was interesting that they were priced within 10k for a while and both had the brand new merc packages.
01-21-2014 | 06:20 PM
#18
Registered
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,867
Likes: 14
From: Here and There
For me I would go with the AT all day long. Not a fan of side by side bolsters but still wouldn't think twice about the AT over the OL. It is a lot more boat for the money and as soon as the water gets bumpy you will quickly notice the difference between a 33' boat with a 3' bussle and a 37' boat. The other thing is in the the choice of power. The 520's get you some warranty but it seems like that is a power package being used for big bow riders and runabouts and not really in performance style boats (could be a problem at resale time). Lastly, any time you are dealing with a new model you have the issue of whether or not it will have a following. The 29' OL is great example of that. Not sure how many they actually sold, but I don't know many guys that would love to add a 29' OL to their stable. The 36' to me seems like a big brother to the 29' (shorter boat and bigger bussle) and only time will tell if it develops a following. Should be fun to watch.
I know I feel for these dealers with inventory sitting on floor plan after 90 days when principal payments kick in (probably has something to do with the recent price drop on that OL).
I know I feel for these dealers with inventory sitting on floor plan after 90 days when principal payments kick in (probably has something to do with the recent price drop on that OL).
Last edited by baywatch; 01-21-2014 at 06:57 PM. Reason: spelling :-))
01-21-2014 | 08:17 PM
#19
Registered
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,311
Likes: 1,817
From: Merritt Island, FL
Funny I was thinking the same thing when this was "hinted" at on another thread.
Like most said AT, love OL's but 350k+ for something with 520's and a ports potty seems high.
How fast would a striped down 33 AT run with those motors?
Like most said AT, love OL's but 350k+ for something with 520's and a ports potty seems high.
How fast would a striped down 33 AT run with those motors?
01-21-2014 | 08:27 PM
#20
Thread Starter
Registered
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,865
Likes: 793
From: St. Pete Beach, FL
