[Minnewaska]

I get a bad vibe all around. All $2k boats will need more money put into them, just to keep them safe, let alone maintained. You need to be sure it won't require more than the boat is worth, if fully fixed up. I'm curious what makes you confident the sails are in good shape. How old are they?

If you can't make that determination, you have to view the $2k as rent. Can you afford to scrap the boat, after using it a little while and realizing it's not worth fixing up. Then endure the gut punch of another grand to have it cutup and hauled away, which is likely cheaper than the storage cost, while you wait to sell it (if it can be resold).

It's not that you couldn't win this gamble, but it's a gamble. Can you afford to gamble?

 

[Minnewaska]

Is it possible the Atomic 4 was a refit?

Despite it's supporters, that would be an extraordinarily odd choice, especially after it was discontinued.

Frankly, I think there is no way to defend a gasoline engine on a boat, over a diesel. Vapor ignition, carbon monoxide, cost to maintain, etc. It's on my never list. I'm not saying all boats that already have one should be avoided, but I'd never convert to one.

 

[Minnewaska]

I don’t want this to come off critically, rather potentially helpful. I wonder if the misunderstanding on the engine translates to the other maintenance and repair matters. The representation that a cored deck was repaired with silicon in the core, was a huge red flag to me. I hate to start the OPs review over again, but maybe it’s worth paying someone to go take a look at it to get the assessment straight.

 

[Minnewaska]

OP has already decided to walk away from that boat. A wise decision I think.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

From all indications, it was a good decision. I'm only wondering, if something as straight forward as the motor was misunderstood, whether the overall indication of this boat was equally flawed.