Fish hawk 1650 or 1750?

[Chode2235]

I am looking at used boats and am really hoping to find a fish hawk. I have fished out of a buddies 1750 a few times and really like the boat.

I am seeing a fair number of 1650s out there as well, and am wondering if I should be considering these as well.

Who has fished out of both, or has feedback on one or the other. I know a foot is a lot in a boat, but let me know your thoughts.

I live close to the hidden falls launch so I am looking for something that will work well in pool 2, but I hit up a lot of the local lakes, fish a few of the bigger ones (vermilion, mille lacs) at least once a year, spend quite a few of my summer weekends on the Gull chain, and make a few voyages on the Mississippi down to pools 6, 6a.

Thanks for the input everyone.

[PerchJerker]

I am seeing a fair number of 1650s out there as well, and am wondering if I should be considering these as well.

Who has fished out of both, or has feedback on one or the other. I know a foot is a lot in a boat, but let me know your thoughts.

Like you say, a foot is a lot in a boat. I'd guess there's more width in the 1750 as well. But the only way you'll know for sure is to check out some 1650s yourself, get in them and imagine where your gear and companions would be, and try to get a feel of whether or not it would work for you.

A longer boat will be smoother and drier, but I don't think the difference between the 1750 and the 1650 is going to be that significant. I don't think there's any weather days where you'd be going out in the 1750 but not in the 1650. I think the layout and interior space will be the biggest differences you'll notice.

Good luck getting it figured out, and have fun shopping for your boat!

[MinnesotaMongo]

You know - I looked a LONG, LONG time before buying a boat - and I looked long and hard at 16 footers - and I am so thankful I picked up the 18 footer.

There are a lot of really good deals out there - and a lot of people are getting out of 16 footers, because they want the extra room.

Just one man's opinion - but I think it's worth considering. Don't be in a big hurry - you're boat is out there and a motivated guy really wants to sell it....

[Archerysniper]

I have the 1750 fishhawk and love it it's nice and deep and handels millacs very well and I have been out their when the waves are braking over gunwales. So if you fish big water like millacs and simular waters I would say 1750 or bigger the only thing I'm going to do diffrent on my next boat is buy a bigger one like the lund 21 footer.

[Northlander]

Always go bigger when you can. As long as you can store it and afford it go as big as you can. I never heard anyone say I wish my boat was smaller, had less storage or a smaller motor.

The 1750 is a very nice boat. I run a Lund Explorer in the 17' size and there have been many times I wished I had a 20' boat.

As long as it works in the bodies of water you fish go as big as possible.

[goose89]

Nice looking 1750 for sale in the boats for sale thread. (2006 Fishhawk). Good luck.

[Hoffer]

Lots of things to consider...what will you be pulling it with? what kind of storage (garage size etc...) do you have? How much HP do you want (1650 maxes out at 90HP...)

I bought a 1650 last year and I couldnt be happier. I absolutely love it. I find it to have plenty of room - yet if I want to get it off and on the water by myself its not a chore. I pull it with a Dodge caravan and I hardly notice it behind the van - pulls nice and easy. I also fish out of my friends 1750. Nice boat as well. I actually think for some reason my 1650 isnt as "bouncy" on the water. It seems to run a little smoother - but then again he has higher horsepower and we go faster so maybe the 1750 just seems bumpier.

As far as storage - i could be wrong - but it seems like the layout for storage was exactly the same for the 1750 as it is for my 1650. The only difference is more square feet to move around.

Don think you can go wrong either way.

[Mid-Lake Rock]

I've owned both and I'd go 1750 every time. The wider beam makes a huge difference and in my opinion the 1750 has a better ride.

[Chode2235]

Thanks, thats what I thought.

[propster]

I agree with the 1750 over the 1650 if you will be hitting any sizeable water at all. But if I was looking (and I was), I'd make sure to go with a '95 or newer 1750. It has 4 inches more in the beam than the previous years' - 95" vs 91". There's an '08 for sale in the Outdoor News, he works for the Wisconsin ON. He might go down a fair piece, he's had it in there awhile now.

[Wish-I-Were-Fishn]

Bigger is better if you have the dough and the tow

[Ray Esboldt]

I owned a 1650 for many years. I loved that boat. You did get the snot beat out of you on waves that exceeded the 1.5 mark. I now have an 1850 and can run full blast through water that I use to have to take my time with. 2+ feet means a lot.

I think the 1650 is only 16' long, and the 1750 is 17.5'. So. you're actually getting another 1.5'. There will be a big ride difference (and space) difference between the 2 boats.