Re: Why are Starcraft owners such enthusiasts?
Heck, the 2011 models aren't that different. How long has the Islander been in the program, essentially unchanged?
In the aluminum hulls, from what I've seen having many of them apart over the years, there have been several changes over the years in the construction of these. The first was in the early to mid 60's when they moved away from the basically flat or round bottom v hull boats to what they called the Concave V. Then they slowly morphed into more of a V hull in the early 1970s and then somewhere around 1978 or so, they hull design again chainged with the loss of the lapstrake sides on some or part of several hulls and the newer deeper V meant more space and new structure under the deck. The newer hulls never seemed as rigid to me. I just looked at a 1979 22' SS, it lacks the lapstrake sides, the splashwell is narrow with enclosed corners, and the under deck area is pumped full of foam.
For me, the main interest has always been in the 1960's and very early 70's models.
I like the cut to fit foam they used over pour in urethane and the older splashwell is a lot simpler design. Also, transom wood replacement on those hulls is much easier since they didn't seal up or cover over the corners. The later boats completely covered the transom wood on the inside, which I think has both benefits and a few downfalls. I've done far more later model boat transom jobs than I have older boats. I also see more corrosion issues on the later models, those made in the 1990's and newer. I'm sure part of this is due to the fact that there are more of those around than the older boats but I've yet to find an older boat with the transom seam or keel corroded through. I think a lot has to do with the pour in foam holding saltwater in the bilge. For me, an aluminum Starcraft must have the following, a lapstrake hull, the older open wood type transom and splashwell design, and no poured in foam. I've owned many of this era Starcraft and none have ever let me down.
