Seafarer 22 vs Offshore 24

[82seafarer]

Hey guys, looking to possibly upgrade from my 82 Seafarer to an 81 Offshore and was wondering what to expect.
Was wondering if the 24 would handle better and not use much more fuel. Also if my 87 225 Johnson from my 22 would work fine on it.
The 24 has a new gas tank and transom and my 22 may need both soon.
The weight is listed as about 400 difference between the two. I am assuming the only differences is a bigger fishing area on the 24.
I am hoping it just doesn't pound more since it has a longer flat area of the hull in back. Also it's not worse with a following sea since the weight of the cabin would be even further forward

 

[VeroWing]

I've had 2-22' Seafarers, a 25' kingfisher, and currently have a 24 Offshore I/O model. To me the 22 Seafarers seemed more nimble and responsive, but not to any great degree. If you trailer the boat, the 22 is easier to handle, especially if you're alone, and will require less fuel. Most of the older Grady hulls will pound if conditions are right (wrong). The larger Offshore has nice, spaceous cockpit space, great for fishing, relaxing, etc. You could use the 225, but a 250 or twins would be better, if you want quicker out of the hole and top end. All things being equal such as hull condition, power, etc., I would prefer the 22 Seafarer, but if your hull has bad transom, etc, then the Offshore makes sense if price and condition is right.

 

[82seafarer]

Thanks for the reply. I looked at the 24 footer and it was beat to death. I saw that the cockpit looked a little bigger but that's about all. I think I'm probably better off sticking with a 22 seafarer over the 24 offshore since it will use less fuel and be more maneuverable and trailerable. Plus I think it will really allow me to cut back on the throttle and maintain good speeds and fuel economy using my 225 Johnson. I think the 24 will need the bigger engine to do that. I going to try and look for another (NEWER) 22 that has a good transom. If I can't find a good one then I may get mine repaired.
I may go look at one today actually.

 

[SmokyMtnGrady]

In general more wetter surface of a boat tends to mean a better riding boat. The pre sea v 2installed ulls from folks who had a Seafarer model similar to yours have told me the boat pounded. The guy installed to at Hadrels in Charleston called his mid 80s seafarer the sea donkey. He said the boat was solid bureporter g seas she was rough ride at times. I think any boat in the 20 to 30 foot size in rough seas could ride poorly depending on how it is piloted.

Fuel economy....well when I repowered my 192 and removed the Johnson 2 stroke ocean pro and installed a 4 stroke motor of the same size, my fuel economy doubled. Old carburated 2 strokes are gas hogs. Then again you likely know this. Perhaps If your budget allows look for a newer Sea V 2 hull and then think rrepower as a second step? I like my seafarer and i like the Journey too. Good luck in your search.

 

[moorehaven]

I have a 86 Offshore with a 225 Honda and I love the economy and performance . The ride is not too bad if you are smart and not try not to run too fast in seas over 3 ft .I have trim tabs also which help .

 

[lime4x4]

I have a 86 offshore with twin 1987 150 yamaha 2 strokes. I've been in some 4 footers with it and it wasn;t bad. I trailer the boat. Sometimes if the wife is busy i'll take it to the local lake and i have no trouble getting it off and on the trailer by myself