Considering a 1975 - 1980 300 Weekender

G

ghuskin

New Member
Jul 10, 2007
1,089
Lake St. Clair, DYC
Boat Info
SRV225 Cuddy Cabin, 1983
Engines
228 Mercruiser w/ pre-Alpha1 "R" Drive
does anyone have any input, good or bad, on the 300 weekender?
I really like the lines/styling of the boat. Will I be comfortable on an extended trip w/family of 4?
 
ghuskin,

As you may know, there were two distinct model express style 30 foot boats in those years, the 300EC and the 300WE Weekender. I'm with you on the Weekender especially. It has very nice lines.

In 1987 I was looking to move up from my 1979 260DA and decided that the 300 in the years you mention was what I wanted. They are straight inboard boats, as you probably know.

I looked at several, and contacted the Seattle area Sea Ray dealer to see if he had one. He didn't have a used one, but he did have a left over 1986 300WE, and the rest is history.

I didn't get to the point of a sea trial on an older one, but I know they had an 11' 6" beam, compared to my '86 beam of 11' even. They didn't have prop pockets like mine did, or at least the early ones I looked at didn't. This would make them a little slower, but probably better handling in some ways.

Another neat model you might look at would be a 31' Vanguard, made in about 1981 through 1983, I think. It's very similar to the later 340EC.

It should be plenty comfortable for four people. The salon seat can be made into a bed, and a lot of times the kids like to sleep in the cockpit.

John
 
John,

Thank you for your input. It is much appreciated. I hadn't even thought of the Vanguard. Nice boat, similar lines. Not as many on the market??? more $$$.

My main concern on comfort is for my wife. The kids could care less. My wife needs all the creature comforts of home (bed, full bath, kitchen, living quarters, hair dryer...).

that being said, I still love the classic lines and the amount of day space of the 300WE Weekender (w/ or w/o the flybridge).

You mentioned that they will only be powered by inboards. I was planning on looking at a 1975 powered w/ I/O's. Was it possible that this was an option that year?

Gregg
 
Gregg,

I/O's? Not that I know of, or have seen, anyway. I've always thought that they were all inboard powered. I suppose it could have been changed to I/O power, but that would seem really odd considering the expense and labor, etc.

If it were originally I/O powered, I think they would be the old Mercruiser 888 drives, but I'm not well versed on this.

It's funny how these old boats hold their value over the years. In 1987 I looked at four or five 300 Weekenders and Express Cruisers. If I remember, the least expensive one was in Gig Harbor, a '75 or '76 WE, for $25,900. They ranged to about $35,000. My new, left over 1986 listed for $72,950 and my screaming deal was just under $60,000 total, with sales tax. A nice '70's 300 still seems to bring maybe $20-$25k, at least a good running one. Of course, a lot of the reason for that would have to be the cost of a new 300.

Good luck, and have fun looking.

John
 
John,

I guess looking is half the fun. I am trying to look at a 300WE locally. Again, I think it has I/O's (will verify), and they are asking just under 10k.

I will be looking at structural issues, more so than cosmetic, as well as how it will suit my needs.

Back to the drives question...

Which drive method would be preferable in this boat? Performance? Mileage? Handling?

Again, thank you for your input.

Gregg
 
Gregg,

Well, that was why I originally was looking for a '70's 300- because they were inboard powered.

You're right though, they apparently were also offered with I/O power. Here's a link to one in MI that has drives-

http://yachtworld.com/core/listing/....jsp&n=1%3A3%3A77151%3A96008%3A63&searchtype=

Do a search on Yachtworld.com. That's where I quickly found this one.

As for preference in drivetrain, I really like inboards. The transmissions are trouble free and require little maintenance, and they slide into gear without the "clunk" of an outdrive. Docking is probably easier with inboard power, especially these models without the pocketed hulls.

The I/O set up would be faster, as the prop is more at a right angle to the hull, and you can trim them out a bit for more bow lift once you're on plane. They are more efficient, and so would burn less fuel.

Overall though, for me, I'd take the inboards. I'm assuming you'll be in the water full time. Take a look at the photos of the above boat. The drives are subject to corrosion and can get to be a real mess, though less so since you're in fresh water.

Here's another Weekender in MI, with inboards and small block Fords (less power than the Chev motors, but probably pretty cheap to run)-

http://yachtworld.com/core/listing/...p&n=4%3A-1%3A109982%3A112917%3A63&searchtype=

Wow, those links are long...

John
 
The 300 WEr came with straight inboards or I/Os. The inboards handled much better in a cross wind than the I/O powered boats. The I/O boat had too much weight in the aft area and weather vanes in a wind. They are much harder to dock and have poor low speed handling characteristics. We owned an inboard, 1986 30 foot express which is the same hull, but with a little taller deck. It has more head room than the week enders. You should assume most of the boats of that era have stringer and transom rot unless they have been repaired or kept on a lift. A good survey is essential prior to purchase.
 
Nice looking and seems to be completely upgraded. Long haul to Lake Michigan though.
 
I'd be a little leary of this boat. Why would he spend all of that money only to sell it at a loss? It is not anywhere close to stock, having been painted and has a custom windscreen, seating etc. And yes, it's an old salt water boat. Looks like the engines are raw water cooled. Look out. I wonder if it ever sank and it was refurbished it for sale.
 
My thoughts were finding a freshwater boat that is structurally/mechanically sound on the cheap, then doing the custom work (have it done).

Dreaming is free...
 
Gregg,

Just a thought on salt vs. fresh water boats.

A fresh water boat is absolutely a better find in terms of corrosion to outdrives and any metal trim (the windshield frame, for example). On an inboard boat, the struts and props are generally bronze, and the shaft will be stainless steel. This stuff lives very well in salt water, so long as zincs have been watched and changed, etc.

Regarding rot of stringers and transoms, there are different opinions about which environment is better. I've had brokers in the Great Lakes say that fresh water boats can tend to develop blisters easier than salt, and that salt will "pickle" a boat and make it resistant to that.

My own experience with our old 340EC supports this. It was a repo out of NY that we bought in FL. I had balsa core rot in the deck, which leaked around snaps for the sun pads, as well as the windshield screws. This would have been fresh water damage (rain).

When I pulled the PVC tubing that the factory had installed as limber holes in the stringers, the wood was perfect. No rot at all, and I was being very picky. Of course, the water in the bilge would be of the salt variety. The PVC was poorly sealed, as the silicone that was used to seal it had come loose. The wood inside the holes was wet, but solid. I dried it out and reinstalled the PVC, sealing it with 3M 5200.

I've never seen a Sea Ray in my area (Seattle) that had blisters. I have heard of Great Lakes Sea Rays that developed them.

It makes sense if you think about it. Salt water is "harder" than fresh, more dense, and less able to seep into the pores of gelcoat and wood (osmosis).

There are boat houses near mine that are over 50 years old. The studs are now so hard that it has to be pre drilled before putting a screw or nail into it.

Food for Thought...

John
 
You are correct about fresh water and stringers. Rot is related to fresh water not salt. However, a lot of fresh water (rain) gets into Florida boats. The old SRs leaked (leak) alot around windows, hatches, windshields, etc. However, some are kept on lifts in the Great Lakes and these will be less prone to rot and be in better condition than a Florida boat mechainically and cosmetically. A friend just bought an old Amberjack that was polished, restripped and has new Awlgrip bottom paint on it. The outdrives were taken apart and look very good. It has twin 350's in it and seems to run very strong. Compression is high and consistent. It was a lift kept boat. Time will tell.
 
you guys aren't making my decision any easier! :smt017

I guess any boat of that age will go through a complete survey.

Thank you for easing my mind about a saltwater boat. That opens my options.

Gregg
 
I have grown up around salt water and would give no preference to fresh water. I share concerns about increased fresh water rot. Salt water metal corrosion makes sense. The big benefit of Great Lakes boats in my mind is the lack of sun and related damage. Southern boats have a big problem with this. But I wouldn't travel an extra mile for a fresh water boat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,162
Messages
1,427,585
Members
61,071
Latest member
TellurideBoater
Back
Top