# Maverick HPX-S 17



## Creek Runner (Sep 1, 2011)

When I tested the HPXs, it was a nice boat. Top Speed is around 37-38 with 2 guys, no trolling motor, and half a tank of fuel. 4 Blade prop

Poled great and felt nice and light. 

Took the chop well and was dry, but it was a pretty nice day out so I would suggest testing on a bad day. 

Turns on rails, you can stand it up on its side. 

Build quality is not on par with Hells Bay specifically in the rigging area its a frigging night mare.

The 17.8 pro is 10x more stable.

For the minimal price difference I would be looking at re-sale value as well.


----------



## Creek Runner (Sep 1, 2011)

You wanted to know how it handles sharp turns, here you go! 

https://www.facebook.com/mbcboats/posts/10201930924652630


----------



## kamakuras (Feb 23, 2012)

Wish I could tell you but I was told by the salesman at Caribe Marine I had to sign a contract to buy one to test drive it...


----------



## Sheremeta (Nov 29, 2010)

That's a weak 180


----------



## MariettaMike (Jun 14, 2012)

I measured one in Maitland today, and it's a foot longer than a HPX-17 V. Since it will not fit in my garage without turning on an angle, and taking up my whole two car garage I didn't buy it for just North of $43k.
:
What I did find ??? is the hull price is the same as the HPX 17 V.


----------



## Creek Runner (Sep 1, 2011)

> That's a weak 180


Ha, really what are you comparing it to? I was impressed and it takes a lot to impress me. But hey I haven't been on every boat model out there. For a 0 degree dead rise hull it turned on rails with 0 sliding.


----------



## MariettaMike (Jun 14, 2012)

They had an SCD4R14P on the F70 I saw, so theoretical top speed with that prop would be 

6300*12/28*14/12/5280*60=35.8 mph

15 pitch would be 38.4 at 6300 rpm and zero slip


----------



## Sheremeta (Nov 29, 2010)

> > That's a weak 180
> 
> 
> Ha, really what are you comparing it to? I was impressed and it takes a lot to impress me. But hey I haven't been on every boat model out there. For a 0 degree dead rise hull it turned on rails with 0 sliding.


Holding onto something to avoid being thrown out.


----------



## swflatails (Jul 20, 2011)

The price difference is not minimal. I priced out both and the HB is 8-10k more.


----------



## ASB73 (Jan 27, 2012)

What is the price? Boat motor and trailer? I assume it's an f70


----------



## EclecticRednek (Sep 8, 2011)

I wet tested the HPX-S and an HB Professional with tunnel in Rockport TX a few days ago within an hour of each other.  Both had Yamaha 70's.

My Notes:
- Had no GPS on either so speed is TBA
- Both rode OK in the chop with the nod to the Maverick
- The HPX-S handled tight turns better with no sliding

DRAFT:
- HPX- S was a very strong 8" being nice here 
- HB Professional W/Tunnel just under 7"

Poling
- HPX-S tracked very well, no hull slap, heavier to pole than Professional
- HB - Poling was effortless but had minor hull slap with strong cross winds 

Hole shot 
Maverick -seemed to squat quite a bit and took more than a boat length to get up, may get better with more aggressive prop.  Bottom of skeg with jack plate all the way up was 11" below bottom of hull, estimate best hole shot @ 19ish"
HB - jumped up quick in less than a boat length.  Bottom up skeg with JP all the way up was 5" and estimate hole shot at 12"ish

Water depth to run in:
Not able to measure, as set up estimate HB around 6" and Maverick around 11" based on skeg distance from hull.

Clearly each boat has its pluses and minuses depending on how you fish.


----------



## Creek Runner (Sep 1, 2011)

> What is the price? Boat motor and trailer? I assume it's an f70


Base MSRP is 42k but since your dealing with a dealer you can negotiate  I was at 39K with a few options when I wet tested it. My speed numbers came from a GPS so not really sure what to tell you on that. Boat poled great to me and spun easy with no sponsons. The boat I tested didn't have a jack plate, and with tabs down it jumped up on plane very quick. 

It was a very nice boat and if it was rated for a 90hp I would have bought it.


----------



## Ginclear (Aug 11, 2013)

Hahnster , great comparative report ! Side by side comparison tests are very rare and are much
appreciated . I know that it is a rare situation to have access to more than one skiff of interest
on the same day , so kudos to you for arranging that . Sharing the results and opinions on this
site is what makes this site worth paying attention to .

I am not in the market for either skiff , but I am interested in skiff development and performance in general . 
Your report held some surprises for me . I thought that the HPX S would pole better and draft better than 
the Professional , not the other way around . I thought the Pro would turn better than Maverick , not 
the other way around . I thought they would perform about the same on hole shot and running depth ,
but you gave the Pro the edge there . 

Did you perform these tests with another person on board , or were you solo ? And was the draft poling 
draft or was the boat sitting empty at dockside ? 

Thank you again for the useful information .


----------



## EclecticRednek (Sep 8, 2011)

Blueskimmer,

I used a 12" old school wooden ruler to measure the draft and measured depth with two anglers when the boat bottomed out while poling.

Like you I was expecting very different results. I went to the trials with high expectations planning to buy one boat and left with plans to likely by the other. Will do the same measurement with an ECC Lostmen in the near future before I buy. The Maverick does not have a tunnel and the Professional did so that makes a difference in the cornering for sure. 

Trying to let my grade school wooden ruler will make the decision for me, not marketing hype or my emotions.


----------



## shafterjohnston (Mar 20, 2011)

I do not comment on alot of these threads but I have had alot of time on the water in the new S and wanted to chime in. I will start by saying that i was very impressed with the skiff and caught everything from belly crawling reds to tarpon from it in the short time i used it. The top speed on the S is around 38 with the 4 blade. I saw 2-3 more with different props when the boat was being broke in initially. The boat is very dry due to the extended chine and large spray rails. As several have said it is almost impossible to make this skiff slide out. There is absolutely no slippage. As for the rigging It was very simple with a small battery and battery switch with the wires cleanly zip tied to the wall of the console which is standard on most skiffs. The boat has the excellent poling and quiet hull characteristics of all the skiffs in the HPX line. Last week caribee had a open house and the skiff was demoed by many and if anyone is interested Im sure maverick can arrange a test ride. draft is always a touchy subject so i will not quote numbers. I will say that i have owned two 17 mavericks and an 18 and this skiff goes places the others never could and it drafts 2-4 inches less than a 17v depending on power on the V.


----------



## blondmonkey777 (Oct 18, 2012)

I have always been a big fan of maverick boats and also hells bay but looking at the hpx-s vs the 17.8 pro something came to mind. I read on maverick website that the hpx-s weighs in a 790 lb with no motor while hells bay pro is 625 lb, Both boats are 17.8 feet long and the maverick has a beam of 74 inches while the hells bay has a beam of 70, but im pretty sure the 17.8 pro has more beam at water line. Isn't that a pretty big weight jump for 4 more inches of beam? Also the hells bay has a 22 gal tank while the mav has a 19. What I'm getting at is I would love to own either boats but I'm pretty sure mav is rating there boat heavier then it really is or hells bay is posting numbers that are lighter then what the boat really weighs. would love to see a unbiased showdown of both, like real world loaded weight, speed, ride, draft and oh most of all who has the shiniest gel coat   ;D


----------



## permitchaser (Aug 26, 2013)

You guys make way to much about draft. What the hell is the difference in 6-7" or 5-6". I don't know what my boat drafts and I don't care it's the boat I want and draft did not make any difference


----------



## Jacob_Johnson (Sep 15, 2010)

There was no dispute about draft on this thread.... That comment was completely unnecessary. But on that topic there is a difference between the 5-7 inches this boat drafts and the 10-12" yours does but to each their own. Some people fish areas that 10-12" drafting boats can't get into


----------



## Ginclear (Aug 11, 2013)

Hahnster , I strongly urge you to test an HB Waterman 18 before you buy . I know that it will out perform the
Pro in every respect except HP rating ( 60 - 90 for Pro ) . We can not make our Waterman slide in a turn   
( has a tunnel ) . Poles very easily ( very nimbly avoids oyster clumps ) . Drafts exceptionally well ( 8" w 3 ).
Measured 10" hole shot ( Foreman prop ) . It will probably beat that , but we haven't pushed it . Fishes 3 very
comfortably . I assume you know the HB rep who probably knows Waterman 18 owners who would be willing
to take you for a wet test . Oh , forgot to mention the versatility advantage that the Waterman has inherent 
in its design  : You can raise and lower the bow to accommodate changing chop and wave conditions . No skiff
this size should ride as softly as this one does . Or be as versatile . It does , however , require a learning
process to access the skiff's full potential . Other skiffs although less versatile have less of a learning curve . 
The Professional fits that category . It would be great if you could arrange a Waterman 18/Lostmen test . 
I appreciate your sharing your experience with us - so I'm sharing my experience with you . I have not been 
out on a Lostmen , so I am eager to hear your results .


----------



## jason_sullivan (Nov 27, 2009)

I recently spent a full day fishing  on the HPX-S and have to say that I was extremely impressed on the performance of this skiff.  I really didn't know what to expect from what I've heard about the skiff.  We fished in less than ideal conditions and the S performed flawlessly. Anybody who has ever fished Whitewater Bay before knows it can get a little sporty at times, and on that day it lived up to its name.  I was very impressed on how it handled a chop and how dry we were.    I guide out of an HPX-micro and the draft isn't much different between the 2 skiffs, which was something that was very impressive because the micro floats so shallow.   I think Maverick really set the bar in this class of skiffs with the S.


----------



## Creek Runner (Sep 1, 2011)

I didn't comment on draft as well because I didn't want to get in a pissing match with anyone. But I can tell you I poled in some shallow water that looked a lot shallower than 8", also the hpxs is much more weight sensitive than the pro so I'm not sure how you would measure it unless you were in the water with sand bags in the boat for the weight of the anglers. 

Shadowcast777 the 2 boats are weighed differently, maverick weighs their boats with hatches and console, HB does not only hull and cap.


----------



## ASB73 (Jan 27, 2012)

> DRAFT:
> - HPX- S was a very strong 8" being nice here
> - HB Professional W/Tunnel just under 7"


I thought Maverick claimed it was a 5" draft??

Great comparison review btw


----------



## jcellis (Feb 11, 2013)

Thanks for all the comparisons. I didn't realize so many of y'all have been on both skiffs. This thread was very informative and I was surprised by the results some of you had. I know this is a sore subject around here but I think HB will win this battle because it seems the performance one these boats are very similar but HB has a much greater resale value. Thanks again for all the great information.


----------



## Jacob_Johnson (Sep 15, 2010)

^ If I ever had the cash to get a hells bay, that's probably one of the main reasons I would get one over other skiffs. Enjoy it while you have it!


----------



## Dillusion (May 21, 2012)

> > DRAFT:
> > - HPX- S was a very strong 8" being nice here
> > - HB Professional W/Tunnel just under 7"
> 
> ...


I have never in my life seen a manufacturer post an accurate draft measurement.


----------



## Ginclear (Aug 11, 2013)

> > > DRAFT:
> > > - HPX- S was a very strong 8" being nice here
> > > - HB Professional W/Tunnel just under 7"
> >
> ...


Mattyvac , Remember the old 99 Whipray ad that was posted back in Dec. , 2012 .Had a picture of Flip in a
Whip ? Wasn't the draft claim in that ad accurate ? I believe it was 3 1/8 " . I know there was skepticism at 
the time , In fact , I have to admit , I shared that viewpoint . A few months later , we picked up a 2000 
Waterman 16 . First day in the water , we put ruled tape on the stern and observed that it was drafting 3 " 
with a 2s Merc 25 ,15 gallons of gas and 100 lbs of gear . So , I had to conclude that back in that day , that 
manufacturer posted an accurate draft measurement . However , I had to put a ruler to it to be convinced ,  
didn't I ? I guess skepticism is still in order when it comes to draft claims . In fact , I still have to refer to  
the picture we took that day to renew my faith that sometimes , draft claims are honest .


----------



## Jacob_Johnson (Sep 15, 2010)

^ were those numbers with a person on the stern/bow? The draft of a boat without anyone on it is honestly useless and that's what most manufactures post. There's a big difference between a 3" draft with nobody in the boat and a 5-6" draft with a person on the front/back


----------



## Recidivists (May 9, 2011)

Touche!


----------



## Ginclear (Aug 11, 2013)

> ^ were those numbers with a person on the stern/bow? The draft of a boat without anyone on it is honestly useless and that's what most manufactures post. There's a big difference between a 3" draft with nobody in the boat and a 5-6" draft with a person on the front/back


Think baseline . Our Waterman 16 drafts 3" at the dock with full tank . Add my son and I , 400 lbs , and 100  
lbs of ice chest and gear . The skiff now drafts 2" more , making the poling draft 5" . I know of another  
beautifully finished Waterman 16 with a floor , a full cap , lined hatches and plumbed livewell ( full ) with  
side console and 40 hp 4s Merc . It drafts 5" at the dock with a full tank . Still a good number . Add the same  
2 guys and gear and that skiff now drafts 2" more , making the poling draft 7" , still a very good number .  
So the baseline draft numbers that most manufacturers give you are the opposite of useless . They are the  
most useful draft figures you can get . But here's the rub , sometimes those numbers are wrong . A simple 
photograph of a finished skiff with motor and fuel with a ruled tape on the stern taken in deep enough water  
so you know nothing is touching bottom , will tell the true baseline depth . The fact is , most poling skiffs are 
more alike in size and shape than they are different , length and beam ( 16 - 18 ' and 5 - 6 ' ) , so the rate of 
displacement between them is pretty close . Add 250 lbs , they lose about 1" in draft . If we can take a picture 
of our skiff that clearly shows baseline draft , any boatworks surely can . It would stop the controversy about  
about posting dishonest draft numbers , I think . Will they ?


----------



## Creek Runner (Sep 1, 2011)

Another video of the HPXS. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7vLjXOYeEU&feature=youtu.be


----------



## bflyfish (Feb 14, 2014)

Has anyone tested a Dolphin 16 Renegade versus the HPX-s?
Anyone have some thoughts on the Dolphin Renegade?


----------

