Mitzi Skiff Defects

Bad MitziBad Mitzi Posts: 9 Greenhorn
Hi, I am making this post to help Mitzi Skiff owners and buyers prevent having the same materials and workmanship problems, defects and conflict as I am now experiencing. If you purchased a 2009 or later Mitzi Skiff flats boat, you may want to check for these dangerous problems in materials and workmanship (reviews). In brief, the newer hulls are two pieces with a liner/hull and insert/cockpit. Nearly the whole length of the cockpit (on both sides) the insert separated from the liner causing a dangerous weakening of the structural integrity of my Mitzi 17. This is not the first time Mitzi Skiff has dealt with materials and workmanship problems. Please reply with a "yes" or "no" if you agree or disagree that we need to expose problems like this by boat manufacturers. You can get the full details at www.reeledin.net/mitziskiffforsale-skiffs.htm . (please note this skiff is NOT for sale) Lee www.reeledin.net

Replies

  • Jeff BJeff B Posts: 67 Greenhorn
    Good luck. I had one built prior to 2008 and it had some major cosmetic problems. Cracks and bubbles all throughout the gelcoat. Mitzi did fix these, but it was not pretty.
  • SCFD rtrd.SCFD rtrd. Posts: 1,380 Officer
    My friend has a Mitzi skiff and the hull separated from the inner-liner. Apparently the liner and hull are bonded together with foam. When the bond was lost it compromised the structural integrity of the entire boat. We were able to remove all the old foam and inject new foam, which bonded the hull and liner back together.
  • finbullyfinbully Posts: 572 Officer
    Wow what a nightmare. Good luck to you.

    I had a bad experience with a "top name" tournament bass boat that I factory ordered. The manufacturer did buy it back from me after I told them I was going to broadcast it at ICAST.
  • Bad MitziBad Mitzi Posts: 9 Greenhorn
    Until you read my webpage at www.reeledin.net/mitziskiffforsale-skiffs.htm (plus these posts) and:
    1. Understand the complete facts of this Mitzi Skiff defects problem,
    2. Plus you have reviewed the Florida boat motor overpowering statute (327.52),
    3. In addition you also realize and accept the fact no one likes being stuck with a lemon (whether it's a boat or a car, or anything else for that matter),
    4. And [especially so] decide not to present yourself as a pseudo expert...
    Then please spare this forum your diatribe and avoid looking foolish because it's already been said and disproved. "Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." (unknown author) That being said, you will see many people making posts here that decided to become pseudo experts and open their mouths... Lee
  • GeorgeSGeorgeS Posts: 2 Greenhorn
    Bad Mitzi wrote: »
    Hi, I am making this post to help Mitzi Skiff owners and prospective buyers prevent having the same defective materials and workmanship issues and conflict as I am now experiencing. If you purchased a 2009 or later Mitzi Skiff, you may want to check for these dangerous defects in materials and workmanship too. In brief, the newer hulls are two pieces with a liner/hull and insert/cockpit. Nearly the whole length of the cockpit (on both sides) the insert separated from the liner causing a dangerous weakening of the structural integrity of my Mitzi 17. This is not the first time Mitzi Skiff has dealt with defective materials and workmanship. You can get the full details at www.reeledin.net/mitziskiffforsale-skiffs.htm . (please note this skiff is NOT for sale) Lee www.reeledin.net





    I thought I should check further into the specifics of this complaint as I'm ready to purchase a 17 Tournament with a 70 Yamaha. Several issues confused me. In research and past experience with new boat warranties they are all written about the same. The customer has to take the boat to the dealer or factory, whichever is closer, for warranty repairs. I had to do this with a flats boat a few years ago. I took it to the dealer and they called me when it was ready for pick up, about two weeks later. I was satisfied with the procedure.

    In the link, I noticed the factory offered to repair your boat, if the over powered issue was resolved. Your Yamaha F 90 TLR at 366 lbs. plus oil is 130 lbs. heavier than a Yamaha 70. This is a very large difference on a light weight flats boat. I have never seen a factory warranty that would cover a boat that is powered over the rated horse power shown on the Coast Guard sticker/plate for the boat. Over powering voids the warranty. The Florida Wildlife Commission states No person may operate a monohull boat of less than 20 feet in length while exceeding the maximum weight, persons or horsepower capacity on the manufacturers capacity plate.

    The factory is probably being generous to agree to warranty your boat in this situation. I thought perhaps it was because your boat was the first one built after the line was bought in 2009 from another manufacturer so I called the factory. I don't want to chance spending $26K without getting to the bottom of the issue. Turns out forty three Mitzi boats were built by the current owner before they also bought the C-Hawk boat line and as I understand it they then created Custom Fiberglass Products for the two lines of boats. The CF 001 in your serial number is really the 44th Mitzi they built. Boats built prior to 2009 were manufactured by the previous owner and have nothing to do with the current manufacturer.

    It dawns on me at this point, the factory is going beyond their obligation to offer to repair your boat.

    To my dismay, in your list of expenses, you are asking for a refund on the motor you didn't even buy from the factory, plus a fee to remove rigging from the boat. It actually has over $9k for rigging labor only, that has to be the motor too. If rigging labor is $9K, I will quit everything and just rig for about 3 months and retire. This is just completely ridiculous.

    Knowing something about fishing guides, which seem to be associated with this blog, I hope the guides realize using a boat for hire with a motor in excess of the Coast Guard maximum horse power rating is a definite liability issue from a customers point of view. Guides should check with their insurance agent. The liability coverage could be null & voided by over powering their guide boat.

    My final note on this is it seems to me this is an attempt to discredit Mitzi, and get some money. The problem doesn't seem to be the Mitzi boat or Custom Fiberglass Products.
    Why not just get the factory to repair the boat, if they will still do it ?

    I'm ordering my 17T Mitzi and plan on years of enjoyment. I am confident after all my research, the dealer and the factory will be there, if I do have a problem.
  • Bad MitziBad Mitzi Posts: 9 Greenhorn
    George, thanks for your reply. Let me correct the facts you misunderstood or stated incorrectly.

    1. First of all, I am not a guide. Secondly, I have a friend who owns a great 2007 Mitzi 17 and I stated on my web page that the Mitzi 17 is a wonderful design.

    2. I am aware of the USCG limits as I state on my web page. I can tell you overlooked much of the detail I included on my web page by many of the comments you made.

    3. If you will read the link to the 23 page forum on my web page you will see what kind of headaches you can get into when you leave your boat with a boat manufacturer for a major repair - they can put it on the back burner and when/if it does get fixed, the repairs are sublevel. This 23 page forum is not an isolated situation.

    4. As I mentioned on my web page, I can no longer trust the Mitzi factory to do the right thing since they have performed so much sublevel work on my boat already. After receiving sublevel work on your boat twice, would you be the fool to have them work on it a third time. I should hope not! You got lucky with your factory boat fix.

    5. Whether my boat is the first of this type they made or the 44th as you say (plus, can you really believe their story?) -- their work is still sublevel and not representative of acceptable work by the skilled craftsman they claim to be.

    6. Your comment about rigging cost including my motor is your misunderstanding, as it does not include the motor. Your comment about my rigging costing $9K being completely ridiculous is unfounded since you have no idea what my rigging entails. You may want to get more detail before making these general type statements that are unfounded.

    7. Bottom line, since I cannot trust Mitzi to carry out acceptable craftsmanship on my boat I am not interested in using their warranty. Below are a few posts from other forums I've found:

    GAfly: Don't want to be the bearer of bad news, but my fishing partner owns a Mitzi Skiff (16 ft) and after fishing his I would not own one. Sure, they are cheap, but they are kind of weak structurally. Seriously...every time we fish he has to go home an fill in chips in the gel coat along the chines.

    Nate: the guys at mitzi skiffs are a bunch of a*******. the new owners in north carolina treated me real bad. my 2006 had a bunch of air voids pop up in 2009. i emailed em and they basically said "screw off". well, i posted their emails on tht and florida sportsman and they delivered me a new console. that was the short story.

    Saltwatersensations: I bought a mitzi skiff and burned it.

    8. George, I also did research before buying my boat (2 years worth) so that is no guarantee you will buy the best boat for you. Even so, Mitzi may finally get their act together and do the right thing in building their boats. That's the reason for my posting as I really love my Mitzi, just very disappointed that I was misled about their boat building ability. Lee
  • ShallowExpectationsShallowExpectations Posts: 381 Deckhand
    perhaps you should have been a smarter buyer and based your purchase off more than reviews and price.
  • Bad MitziBad Mitzi Posts: 9 Greenhorn
    Thanks for your reply. You may be right, since all I did was compare prices, read reviews and posts, and take many test rides. Even so, all that research still cannot prepare you for poor material and workmanship practices or simply just getting a lemon, like car buyers do in the auto industry. Maybe we should have a "lemon law" in the boat industry too. The Mitzi Skiff 17 offered me a combination of light weight, largest cockpit, small baitwell, spacious foredeck, and slim hull which I could not find in any other skiff. Lee
  • capt.natecapt.nate Posts: 2,359 Officer
    Plus, I met an angler here in Sarasota with a Mitzi 17 tunnel and a 90 hp 2 stroke - no problems other than this 90 hp 2 stroke is noisy and gets poor gas mileage.

    thats me. i beat the **** out of my mitzis and never had any structural problems other than me hitting a channel marker.

    are you the guy i saw at the ramp one night at ken thompson park with the 90 4 stroke yamaha?
    http://www.captain-nate.com/
    "If I had my life to live over again, there are some things I’d do differently, but, oh yeah, I’d still be a fisherman. No doubt about that."
    Thomas 'Blue' Fulford
    sig%20pic%20yamaha_zps9bj5fb89.png
  • Bad MitziBad Mitzi Posts: 9 Greenhorn
    capt.nate wrote: »
    Plus, I met an angler here in Sarasota with a Mitzi 17 tunnel and a 90 hp 2 stroke - no problems other than this 90 hp 2 stroke is noisy and gets poor gas mileage.

    thats me. i beat the **** out of my mitzis and never had any structural problems other than me hitting a channel marker.

    are you the guy i saw at the ramp one night at ken thompson park with the 90 4 stroke yamaha?

    Could have been me. Glad to hear your Mitzi Skiff is a good one. Is it 2008 or earlier? There are probably plenty of other Mitzi Skiff owners that have good skiffs. Unfortunately, other Mitzi Skiff owners (and boat buyers in general) aren't so fortunate...
  • GeorgeSGeorgeS Posts: 2 Greenhorn
    Bad Mitzi wrote: »
    George, thanks for your reply. Let me correct the facts you misunderstood or stated incorrectly.

    1. First of all, I am not a guide. Secondly, I have a friend who owns a great 2007 Mitzi 17 and I stated on my web page that the Mitzi 17 is a wonderful design.

    2. I am aware of the USCG limits as I state on my web page. I can tell you overlooked much of the detail I included on my web page by many of the comments you made.

    3. If you will read the link to the 23 page forum on my web page you will see what kind of headaches you can get into when you leave your boat with a boat manufacturer for a major repair - they can put it on the back burner and when/if it does get fixed, the repairs are sublevel. This 23 page forum is not an isolated situation.

    4. As I mentioned on my web page, I can no longer trust the Mitzi factory to do the right thing since they have performed so much sublevel work on my boat already. After receiving sublevel work on your boat twice, would you be the fool to have them work on it a third time. I should hope not! You got lucky with your factory boat fix.

    5. Whether my boat is the first of this type they made or the 44th as you say (plus, can you really believe their story?) -- their work is still sublevel and not representative of acceptable work by the skilled craftsman they claim to be.

    6. Your comment about rigging cost including my motor is your misunderstanding, as it does not include the motor. Your comment about my rigging costing $9K being completely ridiculous is unfounded since you have no idea what my rigging entails. You may want to get more detail before making these general type statements that are unfounded.

    7. Bottom line, since I cannot trust Mitzi to carry out acceptable craftsmanship on my boat I am not interested in using their warranty. Below are a few posts from other forums I've found:

    GAfly: Don't want to be the bearer of bad news, but my fishing partner owns a Mitzi Skiff (16 ft) and after fishing his I would not own one. Sure, they are cheap, but they are kind of weak structurally. Seriously...every time we fish he has to go home an fill in chips in the gel coat along the chines.

    Nate: the guys at mitzi skiffs are a bunch of a*******. the new owners in north carolina treated me real bad. my 2006 had a bunch of air voids pop up in 2009. i emailed em and they basically said "screw off". well, i posted their emails on tht and florida sportsman and they delivered me a new console. that was the short story.

    Saltwatersensations: I bought a mitzi skiff and burned it.

    8. George, I also did research before buying my boat (2 years worth) so that is no guarantee you will buy the best boat for you. Even so, Mitzi may finally get their act together and do the right thing in building their boats. That's the reason for my posting as I really love my Mitzi, just very disappointed that I was misled about their boat building ability. Lee





    Well, I wasn't going to respond, but I can't help myself.

    I never said you were a guide. Real sorry you can't see the facts staring you in the face. Any issue on any Mitzi boat not built by the present owner has nothing to do with anything. It is a non issue.

    The number one fact and only real issue remains you overpowered your boat and that voided the warranty. If I had been foolish enough to put a 366 lbs. motor on a light weight flats boat, I would have been smart enough not to show that heavy motor on the transom to try to get my mistake repaired for free under warranty.

    By the way, a Yamaha 90 2 stroke weighs 261 lbs. and has nowhere near the torque or power of a 2009 or 2010 Yamaha 90 4 stroke at 366 lbs.. Again reiterating the over power issue beyond the 70 hp rating per the Coast Guard plate.

    You voluntarily refuse to get it repaired so you again void the warranty. If you don't want their warranty and for them to repair the boat, then what do you really want? Back to my first thoughts. You want money and to discredit the manufacturer.

    Do you really think anyone believes your rigging and unrigging labor figures? Sorry, I don't buy in and I doubt anyone else reading this forum does either.

    You should have accepted the generous offer from the factory to repair your boat.

    Have a nice day complaining and trying to justify your mistakes.
  • GrizGriz Palm Beach Gardens, FloridaPosts: 9,781 Admin
    I don't see how you could over-power by almost 30% in power and that in weight from what the manufacturer specifies and expect them to eat your poor decision making.

    I also take what is stated on posts like this from new members who's only reason for posting here is to further their agenda. Perhaps I would carry more weight had you posted before.

    I would love to hear the Manufacturer's response. Much seems to be missing here.
    The early bird may get the worm, but the Second Mouse gets the cheese. SW

    :Griz
  • TriplewrapTriplewrap Posts: 173 Deckhand
    Griz,
    You are a gentleman and a decade-long voice of reason here. We have seen many owners come to the forums to blackmail manufacturers into fixing boats that have been mishandled or misused. This seems to be the case here as well. These ultra light skiffs are made to float very shallow and be stable at rest. Their horsepower ratings are calculated to ensure safe handling at speed and consider the integrity of the hull design. This hull was overpowered, and presumably went faster with a heavier loading. The physical forces on the hull increased exponentially. A structural failure occured in a good chop, hitting a boat wake, or rough road conditions on the trailer. Sadly, some manufacturers capitulate and fix the hulls. The small skiff builders have more to lose by the bad press on a forum like this: lots of entry level boaters who would own an inexpensive skiff, and be influenced by a 23 page web site dedicated to one side of a story.

    Lee, since you bring this issue to a public boating forum, let me offer my recommendation. Allow the manufacturer to repair your hull, and say 'Thank You' to them.

    Otherwise, get an attorney and file a claim in Civil Court. You can have your day in Court where you can explain the sublevel (sic) repairs, disregard the warranty procedure, and justify your estimated costs. However, you will be held accountable for exceeding the safety standard set by the Coast Guard, and that percentage of the subsequent damages you are found responsible for.

    It is not fair to hang out a builder when you played a significant part in the failure. Many have tried this in the past here. Few have succeeded. If you too fail, you will have a boat that the factory will not support and a 23 page website about why not to buy it.

    I would accept their generous offer.
    Woodsie
    FS Forum member since February, 2002
    Throwing Money into the Marine Industry since 1981
  • Bad MitziBad Mitzi Posts: 9 Greenhorn
    For those of you who responded, thanks for your follow up. My post was never intended to please everyone, but to inform. For those of you who tend to blame overpowering as part of the problem, I know you haven't done your homework, that you are speaking from lack experience in this type of situation, and merely spewing hyperbole -- thinking you are a boat expert of some sort. If you will do the math, you will also see the USCG formula allows up to a 98hp motor for this size skiff. I received feedback from well seasoned local boat shops and a veteran boat builder that the larger motor had nothing to do with the hull/insert defects issue. Plus, my boat arrived with many defects (costing me over $700 to fix) before I even put it in the water as I described earlier. And, it only got worse from there with the hull and deck separation. So, as I have stated, I would not want to be the fool to allow Mitzi Skiff the opportunity to practice their poor workmanship on my boat a third time -- even though some of you are blind to this fact and think that having them try to fix my skiff would be a good idea...kind of like playing the lotto. I already covered all these facts on my webpage at www.reeledin.net/mitziskiffforsale-skiffs.htm but people have a tendency to only believe what they want to believe as it suits them and not accept the truth. Let me emphasize (again) that I believe a Mitzi Skiff 17 is a great skiff in design and I hope anyone buying a newer skiff will be lucky enough to get a good one instead of a lemon like other buyers and I got. However, even with the information I have given prospective Mitzi Skiff buyers, try not to get too disappointed if the honeymoon is over sooner than you'd like. Lee
  • Meatgeter941Meatgeter941 Posts: 111 Officer
    Ask Nate, I think he had a problem with his, it may have been the user that caused it, I can't remember
  • TriplewrapTriplewrap Posts: 173 Deckhand
    Bad Mitzi wrote: »
    ... For those of you who tend to blame overpowering as part of the problem, I know you haven't done your homework, that you are speaking from lack experience in this type of situation, and merely spewing hyperbole -- thinking you are a boat expert of some sort. If you will do the math, you will also see the USCG formula allows up to a 98hp motor for this size skiff...

    I am no boat expert by any means, and I have done no homework on your calamity. I DO speak from experience. In addition, I am smart enough to not overpower a microskiff with a heavy four stroke engine, hang it out on a jackplate, and drive it around for three years.. and then claim defective construction. Look at the picture of your boat on the trailer and you will clearly see why your hull and liner are separating. The stress of that heavy motor torquing down the hull is your problem. That's why the Coast Guard plate limits that hull to 70 horsepower. No problem hanging a 115 on a Lake and Bay 17 Predator. No problem hanging a Merc 200 on a Formula 1 Hydroplane: They are designed and built for the rated power. You paid $10,400 for the hull in Dec 2009, and three years later you demand $22,700 cash refund ?? Chutzpa. Look that word up. Then, be more deliberate where you place your warning. This General Fishing Forum, Really ? You should have posted in the Boating Forum. People there know boats & boating. That's a sign of leverage.. No posting on THT yet either. Be careful there. How did you like the warm and fuzzy reception you got on SaltyTexan.com ? Try to avoid Boards with no Mods in the future.

    Your hull may not have been bonded correctly, but under the circumstances I would still recommend you get the hull fixed by the factory so you can legally and ethically sell it down the road. Otherwise, you may have to use it as a planter or sell it overseas.
    T/W
    FS Forum member since February, 2002
    Throwing Money into the Marine Industry since 1981
  • GrizGriz Palm Beach Gardens, FloridaPosts: 9,781 Admin
    Bad Mitzi wrote: »
    For those of you who responded, thanks for your follow up. My post was never intended to please everyone, but to inform. For those of you who tend to blame overpowering as part of the problem, I know you haven't done your homework, that you are speaking from lack experience in this type of situation, and merely spewing hyperbole -- thinking you are a boat expert of some sort. If you will do the math, you will also see the USCG formula allows up to a 98hp motor for this size skiff. I received feedback from well seasoned local boat shops and a veteran boat builder that the larger motor had nothing to do with the hull/insert defects issue. Plus, my boat arrived with many defects (costing me over $700 to fix) before I even put it in the water as I described earlier. And, it only got worse from there with the hull and deck separation. So, as I have stated, I would not want to be the fool to allow Mitzi Skiff the opportunity to practice their poor workmanship on my boat a third time -- even though some of you are blind to this fact and think that having them try to fix my skiff would be a good idea...kind of like playing the lotto. I already covered all these facts on my webpage at www.reeledin.net/mitziskiffforsale-skiffs.htm but people have a tendency to only believe what they want to believe as it suits them and not accept the truth. Let me emphasize (again) that I believe a Mitzi Skiff 17 is a great skiff in design and I hope anyone buying a newer skiff will be lucky enough to get a good one instead of a lemon like other buyers and I got. However, even with the information I have given prospective Mitzi Skiff buyers, try not to get too disappointed if the honeymoon is over sooner than you'd like. Lee

    If the manufacturer of boat tells me it is suitable for x horsepower they have made a disclaimer to anything more being installed. Can you install anything larger? Sure. Do you assume responsibility to ignore the manufacturer's guidelines-yes.
    The early bird may get the worm, but the Second Mouse gets the cheese. SW

    :Griz
  • GrizGriz Palm Beach Gardens, FloridaPosts: 9,781 Admin
    Ask Nate, I think he had a problem with his, it may have been the user that caused it, I can't remember

    I think that was a spatially challenged channel marker.
    The early bird may get the worm, but the Second Mouse gets the cheese. SW

    :Griz
  • Bad MitziBad Mitzi Posts: 9 Greenhorn
    I appreciate your reply and insight and want to thank you and the viewers who PMed me to support my position. Last season I watched NASCAR for the first time, watched a half dozen races, and read the race fan blogs. As much as I love racecars (even raced a Porsche myself), I quit watching when I realized NASCAR reminded me of those fake pro wrestling events. Also, the comments from the NASCAR bloggers were filled with misinformation, half truths, and shooting from the hip -- kinda like too many of the viewers replying in this forum string. Lee
  • Panhandler80Panhandler80 Posts: 7,997 Moderator
    Bad Mitzi wrote: »
    If you will do the math, you will also see the USCG formula allows up to a 98hp motor for this size skiff

    Yeah, that's the max HP for < 20'. What's your point?

    The legal alcohol limit in the state of Florida is .08. Do you think it would be wise to stay up for two nights straight and then get on the interstate with a BAC of .075? If you do, then I hope you have a really good lawyer. In fact, I'm surprised that you didn't have to lawyer up for your Mitzi issue. The fact that they are helping at all is pretty impressive. Warranty work in the boat industry is a fine line and it is extremely expensive, probably third to labor and material, depending on how well a mfg honors their warranty and how comprehensive it is to begin with. That being said, Mitzi had an extremely clean "pass" card that they could play here. The fact that they are even talking to you is impressive.

    That being said, if they DO have an ongoing structural hull issue and you knew about it and still bought the boat, then shame on you. If you knew about it AND overpowered a lightweight little toy, then that's plane dumb. If you didn't know about it, and simply over-powered the MANUFACTURERS recommended max HP, then, well... I guess shame on you. Which entity do you think knows more that particular boat? USCG or the builder? Using the USCG formula to justify your decision to overpower the boat makes about as much sense as disregarding your personal doctor's recommendation and instead relying on some survey data from the CDC.

    SUcks that your boat is falling apart and I sincerely hope that you are able to get it all taken care of. I just think that you should cut the builder some slack.
    "Whatcha doin' in my waters?"
  • lonniejlonniej Posts: 150 Deckhand
    As a designer and builder with some experience, it really pains me to see someone push the limits beyond the rules and design parameters, and then cry foul because the builder did not close down operations, and rebuild their boat. As someone said, be glad the builder is gracious enough to make repairs, get 'er done, and hope after all the fuss you have made, some LEO doesn't spot you on the water and write you a fat citation for overpowering your vessel.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]"I fish, therefore I lie"
  • Bad MitziBad Mitzi Posts: 9 Greenhorn
    Thanks for your reply. Let me try and make this clear (again). Mitzi Skiff cost me an extra $700+ to repair defects before I even got the boat in the water. Then shortly after I put the boat in the water I hear creaking noises from the hull -- and now I've discovered these hull and cockpit problems most likely started when the creaking began. That's twice now I've had materials and workmanship problems. As I said on my webpage, I will not be the fool to allow Mitzi Skiff to try and fix these severe issues when they have already proven to me they are incapable of even coming close to the "skilled Hatteras Yacht workers" they allude to on their website. Think of it this way, if you were unfortunate enough to purchase a car that proved to be a lemon (and we all know that once a lemon always a lemon), would you want to waste your time, lost income, and aggravation to continually return the car to the dealership to get fixed -- while waiting weeks and even months for that to happen? Or, would you prefer to get a replacement or a full refund of your expenses, or both? Seems like a no brainer answer to me... Lee
  • GrizGriz Palm Beach Gardens, FloridaPosts: 9,781 Admin
    Bad Mitzi wrote: »
    Thanks for your reply. Let me try and make this clear (again). Mitzi Skiff cost me an extra $700+ to repair defects before I even got the boat in the water. Then shortly after I put the boat in the water I hear creaking noises from the hull -- and now I've discovered these hull and cockpit problems most likely started when the creaking began. That's twice now I've had materials and workmanship problems. As I said on my webpage, I will not be the fool to allow Mitzi Skiff to try and fix these severe issues when they have already proven to me they are incapable of even coming close to the "skilled Hatteras Yacht workers" they allude to on their website. Think of it this way, if you were unfortunate enough to purchase a car that proved to be a lemon (and we all know that once a lemon always a lemon), would you want to waste your time, lost income, and aggravation to continually return the car to the dealership to get fixed -- while waiting weeks and even months for that to happen? Or, would you prefer to get a replacement or a full refund of your expenses, or both? Seems like a no brainer answer to me... Lee


    So, you put a boat that you powered with or without the oversized engine on the hull? Or were you intending to do a maiden voyage with paddles and/or trolling motor!
    The early bird may get the worm, but the Second Mouse gets the cheese. SW

    :Griz
  • TriplewrapTriplewrap Posts: 173 Deckhand
    No Griz. Suffer through his website again. He is demanding that he receive payment of $23K : The total price of everything he paid for. Not sure, but I think he wants the engine de-rigged and returned to him.
    Even with the Lemon-Law on vehicles, you have twelve months to complete the process. Not 3 years. (Yeah, yeah.. You heard squeaking on your shakedown)

    Lee, I apologize for calling you out here. I don't know anyone at Mitzi or anyone who even owns one. It's not like me in general. I guess I took offense because you want your money back, double, after three years, and acknowledge zero responsibility for the hull separating. You threaten the Mfr that you will poison their name on a dozen boating forums, and then try it.. Demand $23K cash back.. !!
    Others like you have tried forum blackmail because they don"t want their hull examined by the factory, or a dealer.. There are a number of ways you can separate the hull and liner, many on the trailer.
    You get a FAIL for trying to convince me. Seems like a no brainer answer to me too.
    FS Forum member since February, 2002
    Throwing Money into the Marine Industry since 1981
  • Bad MitziBad Mitzi Posts: 9 Greenhorn
    GeorgeS wrote: »
    Well, I wasn't going to respond, but I can't help myself.

    I never said you were a guide. Real sorry you can't see the facts staring you in the face. Any issue on any Mitzi boat not built by the present owner has nothing to do with anything. It is a non issue.

    The number one fact and only real issue remains you overpowered your boat and that voided the warranty. If I had been foolish enough to put a 366 lbs. motor on a light weight flats boat, I would have been smart enough not to show that heavy motor on the transom to try to get my mistake repaired for free under warranty.

    By the way, a Yamaha 90 2 stroke weighs 261 lbs. and has nowhere near the torque or power of a 2009 or 2010 Yamaha 90 4 stroke at 366 lbs.. Again reiterating the over power issue beyond the 70 hp rating per the Coast Guard plate.

    You voluntarily refuse to get it repaired so you again void the warranty. If you don't want their warranty and for them to repair the boat, then what do you really want? Back to my first thoughts. You want money and to discredit the manufacturer.

    Do you really think anyone believes your rigging and unrigging labor figures? Sorry, I don't buy in and I doubt anyone else reading this forum does either.

    You should have accepted the generous offer from the factory to repair your boat.

    Have a nice day complaining and trying to justify your mistakes.

    Hi GeorgeS, thanks for getting back. I knew I could count on you to bring up the overweight engine issue. You seem to be knowledgeable with the numbers/lbs. of engine weights that are obvious. Unfortunately, you overlooked the not so obvious facts about the real numbers. Let me enlighten you with a reality you have not considered. As I mentioned on my web page at www.reeledin.net/mitziskiffforsale-skiffs.htm when I was researching Mitzi Skiff, a Mitzi Skiff dealer in TX was offering a Tournament 17 with an Etec 75 and jack plate. At that same time Mitzi Skiff also was sponsoring a Royal Purple Mitzi 17 with an Etec 75. The USCG maximum capacity plate Mitzi Skiff (Grubbs Marine) gave me also shows 75hp.

    Yes, you are correct in stating the Yamaha 90-4 stroke is about 366 lbs. which is about 46 pounds heavier than the Etec 75 and Etec 90. The Yamaha 75-4 stroke is also the same weight as the 90hp 4 stroke. Now, when you consider the Tournament 17 had a poling platform (my boat does not) you can add about 20 lbs., plus a jack plate add about another 10 lbs. So, here we already have another 30 lbs. added to the Etec 75 now making the weight difference only about 16 lbs. compared to my Yamaha 90-4, which is negligible. The numbers are even more in my favor since my weight of 153 lbs. pushing down at the back of the skiff is much less than the majority of viewers on this forum which are probably 25+ lbs. heavier.

    Here's another scenario: the earlier model Mitzi Skiff has a 34 gallon (272 lbs.) baitwell compared to the Mitzi I have which only has a 16 gallon (128 lbs.) tank. The difference here is an additional 144 lbs. Add on another 20 lbs. for the poling platform (which is not on my skiff) and you now have 164 lbs. Do you follow me? Coincidentally, these 164 lbs. of "overweight" are greater than number of pounds the Yamaha 90-4 stroke weighs over the Yamaha 70hp 2 stroke (138 lbs.) which is standard on the Mitzi Skiff 17. Certainly, since this weight is not directly hanging off the transom, you'd want to allow some adjustment. Even so, when you take these real numbers in these two examples into account, your "overweight" argument just sprung a leak and sank. Same goes for your rigging comment. When you don't have all the facts in your arsenal it's not in your best interest to make assumptions.

    When I was discussing the size of my baitwell with a fishing buddy, he asked if the Mitzi Tournament model had the same small baitwell (approx. 25.25"x12.5"x11.25") as my skiff. I said I believe so , however it's now used as a release well and the baitwell is located under the seat in front of the center console (and is even smaller). He then asked me how this can qualify as a tournament boat when you'd be hard pressed putting a couple decent sized redfish in it. I just laughed...

    Lastly, you may ask why I prefer a 90-4 stroke over a 70hp. It's simple and basic logic I gathered from being a Porsche/Audi mechanic decades ago prior to my advertising and executive coaching careers i.e. You work a bigger motor less to get the same performance (and it's quieter), which is much better for the engine. I’d rather baby my 90 than work a 70 hard. Plus, I love getting about 7 mpg with my 4 blade prop tuned for midrange performance -- as I am not interested in top end speed. Lee "Sometimes the least important thing about fishing...is the fishing" Roderick Haig Brown
  • Dan983Dan983 Posts: 27 Greenhorn
    I have one of the last Mitzi 17s built in Jacksonville! I got one of the very last Yammi 70 HP carbed motors. Over all, I couldn't be happier with the boat's design and construction. I did have an issue with the transom height which I had lowered by 1 & 1/2 inches to fix planing attitude. The Georgia company paid the tab. I then installed 2 BOB'S fixed setbacks giving 8 inches of transom setback. It is great now.

    These are great hulls remembering all boats are a mix of various compromises. For a 550 pound skiff, It handles rough bay water well, runs very swallow and has terrific fishing space. For the dollars it cannot be beat!
Sign In or Register to comment.