It isn't hydraulic. It is hinged and hangs on the chains. It folds up flat against the transom to save a few feet of dock fees.The platform is hydraulic. Spooked me when we used it in Canada in 2017. See the chains on the side?
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
It isn't hydraulic. It is hinged and hangs on the chains. It folds up flat against the transom to save a few feet of dock fees.The platform is hydraulic. Spooked me when we used it in Canada in 2017. See the chains on the side?
The platform we used in 2017 and 2018 moved by a button 18 or so inches when we dove on the Miller and Jones. Maybe he got rid of it? That dive ladder of his was the only thing you held on as the platform moved up to the swing out transom door.It isn't hydraulic. It is hinged and hangs on the chains. It folds up flat against the transom to save a few feet of dock fees.
I asked him, he said it is fixed height and tilts up. It never moved by power.The platform we used in 2017 and 2018 moved by a button 18 or so inches when we dove on the Miller and Jones. Maybe he got rid of it? That dive ladder of his was the only thing you held on as the platform moved up to the swing out transom door.
Is there a reason why you didn't keep your inboards or upgrade to the Chrysler 360s? My Marinette is a 91, Dave's is a 67, Paul's is a 72, and we all have or put the 360s in them. I don't know what Jitka, Roth, or the Lynches use in theirs.
Marinette made a good hull. They are in-between the world's of Utilitarian and luxury when kept up. We need the inboards for surveying as the side scan needs to hang on one side or the other. I think the reason why they didn't make it was they never really upgraded the design, based their operations in Kentucky, and put the price out of reach for most owners after 88.I asked him, he said it is fixed height and tilts up. It never moved by power.
I upgraded because technology has changed for the better. With the outboards it is faster, lighter, and uses less fuel. I was able to drop the floor 14" and have more interior room. There isn't a single plus I can think of to running old school inboards outside of cost. The fuel savings alone would pay for the swap in a few years. My other Marinette is still inboards. I have the exact same gallons per hour on both boats. The outboard one is traveling at exactly double the speed for that fuel burn.
Jitka has a single 6.2 liter inboard. Travis has a single 454. I don't know what is in the Capital City Marinette. Such, Roth, and the Lynches all have the original 318s. It is amazing how many 28 Marinette dive boats are running in the Great Lakes. The new shop over in Milwaukee just bought a 32 to run as a dive boat.
The 34 was very upgraded and modern looking but they only made a few and by that point, they had definitely priced themselves out of the market.Marinette made a good hull. They are in-between the world's of Utilitarian and luxury when kept up. We need the inboards for surveying as the side scan needs to hang on one side or the other. I think the reason why they didn't make it was they never really upgraded the design, based their operations in Kentucky, and put the price out of reach for most owners after 88.
As for Ken's platform, there was something he did that raised or lowered the ladder or platform. I can't remember.
Wow.. I've never seen one in real life. That's fancy.I decided to step my game up over the winter. Gyro stabilization coupled with the elevator should really be a game changer. My new toy finally arrived today.
View attachment 806607