Defending Your Boats History Is Essential.

Book2Yesterday we were made aware of a issue in the latest reprinting of the Chris Craft Essential Guide. Now many of you may have been aware of some small errors and for 99.9% of the book, it is the essential guide and the go to place for facts on the stats from Chris Craft. The big issue that came up though could not be a more controversial issue. Somehow on the new printing, the folks at the Mariners Museum added a notation or two on a certain page regarding the 22 Sportsman. According to this new printing, U22-1802 is the featured movie boat in the film On Golden Pond which is wrong.

Essential Guide-1

From the new reprinting. Note the new text in yellow added!

essential guide 2

The original printing in the blue covered book.

Now, if you are new to this topic, You may want to read the following links at the bottom of the page.. This subject has been beaten to death and beyond. A simple google search would have refuted this claim and to that point. Should a fact? Like that even be in a book like this? What about other boats owned by famous people? Or other boats used in films? Regardless of it all, the bottom line is when you own a boat with an amazing history, and U22 1460 is such a boat as the picture boat for the film, you have to not only have the responsibility to preserve it, but also protect it. And that’s what happened yesterday. Calls were made, and things are being corrected. A Huge thanks to Terry Fiest, Seth Katz, Pat Curtin and Patti Hinson from the Chris Craft Library at the Mariners Museum. She was fantastic to talk to and said that this happened out of trying to add from notations added in pencle over time in the original printing. So this notation would have been penciled in years ago, and not fact checked when reprinting.

There will be a notation on the website correcting the fact regarding U-22-1460 being the correct film boat. It will also mention the correction that Cobras come with Gold bottoms, not copper bronze. Which is in the new printing, and correct in the original. That was a issue of using the original file, not the corrected one that went to print.

Essential guide 3 cobra

The correct original notation of a GOLD bottom. The original draft had copper bronze and was corrected at the printer on the original printing

Essential Cobra 2

Here is the new reprint. This is WRONG!

For the record, we here at Woody Boater are the very last people on earth that have the credibility to point out typos or mistakes. And by no means are we trying to disparage any of the hard work done here, its a fantastic gesture to reprint the book, But it’s a great opportunity to point out that when you own a boat, you own its history! Defend it! Its what makes your boat special.


Here is a great link on the subject

Our original story on finding U22 1460 the picture boat from On Golden Pond CLICK HERE.


44 replies
  1. Ed F.
    Ed F. says:

    And that folks is how “facts??” Become facts. Once it is read in print, people think it’s a fact and defend the false fact to the very end. Eventually some of the these facts are accepted as being fact and the fact is lost to a fact which becomes the new fact losing sight of the fact that was a fact when facts first became facts. I know what I know because I read the facts.

  2. Chad
    Chad says:

    Right or wrong, I’m not sure why they felt it important to note what happened to the boat AFTER it left the factory. Was it noted on the hull card that the boat was custom ordered as a movie prop?

  3. Troy in ANE
    Troy in ANE says:


    Thanks for putting up the links. I was not around when this all went on so it is very interesting to read through the whole process.

    I really like the frame by frame break down on the Century site.

    I guess stating that 1802 was used in the movie is not deceptive. The only deception I find is changing the steering wheel during the restoration, especially when the most definite picture of 1802 is a close up of the wheel.

    If I owned 1460 I would also want proper recognition.

  4. Michael Hill
    Michael Hill says:

    I bought one of the new reprint books, and I have to say, the Mariners Museum should be ashamed of themselves. The quality of the reprint is horrible. Many of the pictures are fuzzy and distorted, as the text is all this low-resolution graphics. Truly embarrassing coming from such a fine institution. Don’t buy it!!

  5. Ed F.
    Ed F. says:

    Walmart has a new soon to be released version of On Golden Pond in Wide Screen and BluRay for $15.88. You can pre order now, mine said delivery by 1/27/15. I agree on the new version of the Essential Guide. I bought 2 intending to retire the original one and put a new one away in the wrapper. I still have the original at the shop and haven’t used a new one since I opened it. Very disapointing.

  6. Norman Thayer
    Norman Thayer says:

    I’ll try and get the clicks going for you, Mr. Woody.

    So, Troy, it was deceptive for the owner of 1802 to put a restored steering wheel on the boat, just like he did transom, wood, engine parts, etc? You have got to be kidding! If he was trying to make this boat look like it looked in the movie, he would have put all of those things (ladder, snaps, compass, wierd scoop, etc.) back on the boat, exactly what was done to 1460. When I talked to the 1802 owner at Lake Minnetonka, his goal was to restore as it was when it came from the factory. I think he did the hobby a service for restoring her and never did I hear him say anything regarding the credibility of his hull 1802 that Pat Curtin himself didn’t say. Mr. Curtin was the original source of the many publications that state that 1802 was in the movie, so if that is not true, who was deceptive?

    If you want to look for deception, maybe you should look at those like Mr. Curtin who changed his story many years later. Maybe look at someone running a blog that was also trying to sell a boat to a friend of his. Maybe look at a restorer and his friend (Mr. CSI) doing all they can for the blogmaster to help give the boat credibility. Other than Matt and his friends (including a suddenly changed story from Curtin), what independent publication has supported the claim of the main movie boat not being 1802? NONE!! And now, the same gang appears to be once again attempting to legitimize 1460 and insinuate that 1802 was not a picture boat? Clearly all stated and agreed that both boats were in the movie but now woodyblog and his friends have chosen to minimalize and slam the boat (1802), the one with the most independently-sourced credibility? In my opinion, there was nothing in the CSI story that could not be explained as changes made during the many restorations that boat went through over the years but you all still choose to push your agenda and convince the fine people at the Mariners Museum that you are right. Considering all of this, it is hard for me to believe anyone would first question the credibility of the owner of 1802.

    I wouldn’t give you 10 cents for either of those boats. You have all turned a wonderful story of restorations and woody boating into a terrible story of deception. I guess this could be what the blogger wants since he drives the stories and more hits create more value for the blog. God Bless American but what a shame!

  7. Pat Roberts
    Pat Roberts says:

    It is suddenly wrong to say 1802 was featured in movie? You got to be kidding. No self promotion here and once again Woody thanks Katz for his greatness. Is anyone seriously surprised?

  8. Curtis
    Curtis says:

    Thanks, Woody Boater, for the latest update on this story.

    I think I may order the widescreen version of On Golden Pond.

  9. Matt
    Matt says:

    NORMAN! You’re alive! That’s fantastic. HA. For the record, this has all been hashed out years ago. I had forgotten how it felt to be called a liar again.. Not good for the record. But you are an Old Pooh after all! The issue of this story is NOT which boat was used and which was not. They all 3 of the boats were owned by the production company for the film. As to us having an agenda, yes, we promised the owners of 1460 that we would defend the truth of the boats, which we are doing. The stories were written long before we acquired them and then were sold to Katz’s after several months. We did not want to restore them nor could we afford it. . For the record, no money was made on any of the deals. Katzs paid what we had in the boat. For us here at Woody Boater it was about the story and the truth. The boats from what I understand, both 1802 and 1460 will not ever be sold. They might eventually be donated to a museum. So there is no financial inventive here. No one has made a cent on these. So. Why the story? Well, that’s a question for the Mariners Museum. Which we asked. The drama is made when the information is one sided. Why add it without adding the complete story. Which by the way is all over the internet. As to being in print. The papers doing the original stories did not know of other boats and did not dig like we did. We spent two years on the story. I would imagine the two papers did not. And on top of that, there were agenda driven since 1802 was used and sold for a profit. We have spoken to the owner of 1802, who by the way is a fantastic guy, and he did save the boat for all the right reasons and it does bring great joy to folks. Except you I suppose.. HA..

    • Norman the Old Poop
      Norman the Old Poop says:

      There was one line of your story that made this old poop want to get things clicking, Mr. woodyboater. 1802 was one of the two U22’s that were featured in the movie and I may have perceived your statement that said claiming 1802 was, is “wrong”, as an insinuation that 1802 was not. Your story is about defending the truth regarding these boats and there is no reason we shouldn’t defend the truth of all boats, not just 1460. Once again, from my review of past stories, it appears all agree that both U22’s appeared in the movie. Is there someone who doesn’t now agree with that? What change did you promoted to the folks at Mariners Museum? If you and your colleuges worked with the museum to either add 1460 to the printing or take off any reference to any hull number, I will consider my perception incorrect and apologize. I look forward to hearing which remedy you chose as appropriate because the previous information, in my opinion, allows for only one of those two options to defend both boats.

      The other comment that made this old poop get clicking was Troy’s insinuation that the 1802 owner was deceptive for putting a restored steering wheel, or one Troy didn’t like, on his boat. Anyone can clearly see that the owner’s intent was not to make the boat look like it was in the movie. That seemed like a bizarre insinuation to me so I thought I would suggest possible deception as well to see if that would be acceptable to others. I am not proud of my approach but your response proved my point that it should not be acceptable to any of us. Nowhere did I call you a liar and if you think I did, then you must feel Troy called the owner of 1802 a liar as well. Obviously you don’t. I met him and spent some time with him at that MN boat show once and agree with your perception of the 1802 owner, by the way.

      I appreciate your blog and appreciate being heard.

      Old Poop Ha..

      • matt
        matt says:

        Dr Mr Poop! Sorry for the confusion. The reference to the statement is that its wrong to feature one boat if you are going to state a fact in a guide as a partial truth. That’s wrong. Back several years ago when this all took place. We did a complete story on 1460 AND 1802. Two seperate stories to be fair. The CSI report… a seperate indipendant story. 1460 was in the majority of the film. But the fact is they are both Golden Pond Boats. The detail of on or off film is a deeper dive. The conclusion is that both had time in the film. So its wrong to say 1802 was featured in the film without also mentioning 1460. Once again, the debate is old news, the printing is the issue. I invite you to really dig in a read all the stories. Issues like bilge drains, Dash, and other things that are NOT cosmetic or changable are key to the story. It all points out to the fact that for 30 years the owners did not want anyone to know they had the boats. So there history was not defended until 1802 was restored and the news media got involved.

        As to Troy. His reaction was the same as many when the wheel was changed. Read the comments. That does not change the fact that 1802 was owned and sold as a Golden Pond Boat. But it raised the debate that is aparently still not a fire thats out. It is winter after all. And might be the only thing going on in the culture. HA.. The good news is that these boats still evoke passion and the importance of them is still alive.

        • Norman the Old Poop
          Norman the Old Poop says:

          I appreciate your clarity woodyman and apologize for wrongly perceiving your statement. As you say, clearly both are boats were featured in the movie so that is what I assume you communicated with the museum to fairly correct and represent both boats, or neither.

          Please know that I did read all stories and still cannot understand why anyone would insinuate the wheel change was deceptive, unless 1802 owner was trying to make it look like it did in movie. He clearly stated, and the restoration proves, that was not his intent. That insinuation from anyone, makes no sense to me so we will have to respectfully disagree.

          Like you, I believe there is credible evidence that both boats were featured in the movie. Unlike others, I could care less about the how-much-each-was-used arguement. They are both OGP movie boats to me, as stated by all.

          Thanks again.

  10. Greg Lewandowski
    Greg Lewandowski says:

    I’m sure glad that no one is questioning that it was Jane Fonda standing on that dock in a bikini. That wold really be horrible!

  11. William Hammond
    William Hammond says:

    I sit here with an inner ear infection so my head is already reeling when I open up Woody Boater and see the 4 Thayer IVs controversy all brought up again. Like some morbidly curious accident gawker I have to go and reread ALL of it again and now my head is REALLY spinning! I find it curious that ‘Norman Thayer’ (probably AKA Anonymous {at least one of them}) has such vehement feelings on the subject. It makes me think that he(?) must have yet another of the ‘Thayer IVs’ that he is now finding impossible to claim as such or else he(?) is one of the disgruntled unsuccessful eBay bidders.

    Setting all that aside I find myself growing tired now of the whole story. I for one have had the enjoyment of my “On Golden Pond” experience taken away by all of this. I think all of this diminishes what Woody Boating (both the Blog & the Real Thing) is all about!!

    So maybe I’ll get the new release and just sit back and pay attention to the movie and not think about the boats. That’s how I came to enjoy the movie in the first place! The boats were just an added fun part but that is about when I acquired my first Woody Boat.

    Hoping I can let this all fade out of my memory soon and return to the blissful state of Woody Boating where I need to be! Get some sanity back!

  12. Al Benton
    Al Benton says:

    Fortunately I have 2 copies of the original book; one of them is worn and has several notes correcting glitches in a few models. These were discovered in the process of helping build the Classic Boat Wiki for the Chris-Craft Antique Boat Club. The other is in fair condition, but still used frequently. I shared most of the glitches that I ran across with Jerry Conrad when he was with The Mariners’ Museum. Unfortunately he and the notes are not around, and the new edition was recently reprinted without those changes.

    If I wanted one of these wonderful books I would not hesitate to purchase this latest printing of it. In spite of a few new inaccuracies and those that I discovered and reported, the value of The Essential Guide still exists for Chris-Craft enthusiasts and owners. I certainly would not be the least bit tempted to purchase an old version offered on eBay for a ridiculous price in lieu of purchasing this new one. Thee was a demand for reprinting, The Mariners’ Museum kindly responded by making it available once again.

    If you want one, then buy a new one. When you get it, start making your own footnotes on the pages. I have already added some new ones to my old copy regarding the U-22 model.

  13. Andy Monomous
    Andy Monomous says:

    Since it’s OK to make stuff up I’m happy with Norman’s first boat, before Thayer II, III, and IV. Yup: Thayer I. And Jane Fonda was 17 then. But I can’t find the movie.

      • Frank Miklos
        Frank Miklos says:

        Hmmm In my experience I have seen more Chris Crafts on the bottom than Centurys .. My grandfather’s 1942 Century Seamaid with a 103 Graymarine, Never had a bilge pump until restoration a few years back… It still does not need it but for safety only…

    • John Lisicich
      John Lisicich says:

      Aloha and Happy Friday!
      This is awesome and just puts a huge smile on my face and others that I shared it with today. Thank you!

      Hey, now this is a cool bathtub toy. I’m going to get one made of our Fairliner torpedo so we can use it on rainy days in Seattle, which is most of the time! But when the sun comes out, it’s God’s country!
      Rock the day, but not the boat!

  14. Troy in ANE
    Troy in ANE says:


    I did purchase a copy of the Essentials Guide. I am glad to have it. Would rather have the first print, but am unwilling to pay the crazy prices they were going for.

    I actually thought I was defending 1802 in my first post. I do not know either owner personally. If the steering wheel was changed due to originality it is completely justified. If it was done to look like most of the shots in the movie, deceptive. I don’t know what the intent was. I never even noticed the different wheels while watching the movie.

    I do LOVE a good debate though!

    Thanks Walter, Norman, Old Poop, Anonymous, or whomever you are.

    • DougP in the Great PNW
      DougP in the Great PNW says:

      When the movie came out on VHS, you could slow it down and see just before it hit the rocks. It was some what dismantled in that scene.

      Anybody who has a U-22 is fortunate, as inmho, feel this to be the best of the CC line.

  15. steve bunda
    steve bunda says:

    The nice thing is there are many U22 Chris Crafts available in project and restored form. Thus the whole essences of woody boating on any pond can be experienced by many families.

  16. thomas d.
    thomas d. says:

    i’m just surprised that you could get someone to answer the phone at the mariners museum, now back to “as the prop churns”…

  17. Ethel Thayer
    Ethel Thayer says:

    I’m glad someone found her. Norman and I tried to get Mr. Curtin to use her in the movie but if I recall correctly, there was something about the steering wheel he didn’t like. Anyone seen my canoe?

  18. Frank Miklos
    Frank Miklos says:

    Always fun stuff but but the complete break down of boats used in the movie …. The Essential guide another gaff. Wonder if they corrected the 1957-1959 Continental and Capri 21’s There were a number of things incorrect on that page in my issue… Those hulls were stained in vermilion stain no mention says red sides which suggest paint.. says blonde and natural decks way off.. Many other mistakes in the book also … Here is a photo of 1802 dash as original and after the original steering wheel was removed and replaced in 2010. This was done so the boat looked more like the main movie boat.. All of the answers of what boat was used an not can be seen here. I’m not sure if 1802 even made it into the movie for the throttle scene that may be the 4th boat that never had the name on the stern that Pat Curtin talked about one time… So it is actually possible that 1802 was not in the movie at all. Yes it was one of the 4 but it may have not made it on film.. Or it ended up on the cutting room floor.. Here is the link

  19. Frank Miklos
    Frank Miklos says:

    Of any boats in the movie this is the only one that could be 1802. But I’m thinking that it is not. the knobs don’t seem to be correct … So this would make 1802 not in the movie at all. I don’t know for sure maybe Pat could chime in on this one at some point… Note the Choke knob is not in the upper photo from the movie… This suggest that not even this one is 1802 so it is looking like 1802 did not make the final cut….

  20. Norman Thayer
    Norman Thayer says:

    Ok, Mr. CSI Miklos. Why would the 1802 owner just add a different steering wheel and nothing else if, as you say, he was just trying to make it look like the movie boat? You can suggest all you want about 1802 but that doesn’t make your suggestions fact. There were many partial restorations over the years and the current owner’s intent was clear and obvious as I reviewed past stories and comments. Frankly, now that I reviewed CSI again, there are may valid arguments for every part of your CSI claims but you will probably never admit those possibilities because you are too focused on perpetuating your chosen agenda. Let me give you just one example. The bilge hole might appear on the wrong side of the boat for the same reason that Chelsea’s about-to-be stepson appears to be driving a boat with the steering wheel on the port side of her. Your so called investigation doesnt even appear to acknowledge that things like snaps, knobs, steering wheel and other cosmetic issues were more than likely removed/changed when the partial restorations were done by Mr. Hendriks over the years, after the movie stills you use. There is even an article stating that Curtin was told by Mr. Hendricks not to put some of the movie items back on the boat before delivering it to Florida, as he didn’t want them. You now suggest Mr. Curtin can chime in and help you when he is in a newspaper picture with Mr. Hendricks stating 1802 was the boat used in the movie OGP.

    If your claims are all correct, the 1802 owner attempted to decieve, Curtin is a liar and 1802 was never even in the movie. Do you have any idea how rediculus that sounds? That would be about as dumb as someone saying that all of the items that Mr. Hendricks asked Mr. Curtin to leave off the boat when partially restoring before delivering it to FL. were later put on 1460 and sold again. There would be no proof and it would be equally rediculous. WOW!!!

    • Frank Miklos
      Frank Miklos says:

      You know what I saw that 1802 did not have the choke in the correct position years ago … And since that was the only real chance of it being in the movie, I chose not to say anything at that time because it was a boat that was on set.. But reading things today .. It really irked me.. So I decided to let it out that I don’t think it actually made the final cut in the film at all. When filming a movie the majority of film ends up not being used… Chance are it was used at some point. or there as back-up. But I’ll stand by my CSI page.. I have not gained anything because of this … Seems like someone is out there trying to push that 1802 boat a the main OGP boat.. It is NOT. Looking at the screen shots there are only 2 or 3 scenes that there is not 100% proof of being 1460. I’ll give you that … they are background shots with the boat… Every post that I do I put my name on not like some people… Norman…

  21. Norman Thayer
    Norman Thayer says:

    Thanks for proving my point, Mr. CSI that you could never possibly admit there are valid arguments that don’t support your so-called investigation as your original agenda wont allow it. I simply enjoy trying to get questions answered and when someone cannot or does not, that tells me something.

    You are certainly correct about the point that some people are willing to say rediculous things and put there name on it. This old poop is not.

    • Frank Miklos
      Frank Miklos says:

      You proved nothing but I back up everything that I have posted … both here and on the CSI page.. Sorry if that does not back your narrative… Show me anything that is more than hearsay then you may have a valid argument, you havn’t . Also sorry if my conclusions do not match what you would like them to .. I spent a hell of a lot of time to identify each the boat in each scene.. Show me where I am wrong, and why? Again I’ll stand by my conclusions .

      • billy ray jr
        billy ray jr says:

        Well Norman, you are at it again!
        You want us to believe that they changed the steering wheel to bring the boat back to original. SURE !!!
        Norman you have poop for brains!
        All 1800 serial number sportsman had two spoke wheels not three
        Looks like Frank Miklos made you out to look like an ass.
        I think Frank proved that 1802 was never in the movie and we know that he proved that 1460 was the picture boat.
        Well Norman why don’t you prove that 1802 was in the movie with pictures from the film!
        I am sure the people that you called lairs and cheats would be more than happy to help you but until you can prove that 1802 was in the movie, I just think you are full of S**T

        YOUR PAL
        Billy Ray Jr

  22. gesfour
    gesfour says:

    I noticed that the book’s U22 hull side color designation hasn’t changed from the earlier printing. Both reference 1946 – 1948 models as white sided. Since 1963 we have owned No. 107 which is all mahogany, inside and out. I’ve never been able to pin down exactly when the changeover occurred, both from all mahogany to white sided and then from white sided back to all mahogany. Does anyone have any insight?

  23. Norman Thayer
    Norman Thayer says:

    I have only asked questions and that has apparently hit a variety of nerves, Mr. CSI. I wonder why. It is clear that the only boat anyone has tried to make look like the movie boat is 1460, and only a blind person could disagree with that. You and yours have definitely spent a hell of a lot of time in that effort and I think its fair to wonder why. An earlier post suggested I go back and review previous info related to this subject. After doing so, I shared areas where your investigation could be wrong yet you ignore them. Is it because they do not back your narrative?

    Good to hear from you to billy ray jr. Who said I want to believe that the wheel was changed to put boat back to original? I dont and never have. Let me apologize if my communication has not been clear enough. When I talked to the owner a couple years back at a MN boat show he told me that it was his goal to restore it like it was before the movie. Knowing that, couldnt I assume he simply bought a restored steering wheel and put it on? That would be no more crazy than looking at his restored boat and saying his goal was to make it look like the movie boat. I called people liars and cheats? When and where? You, Mr. CSI, and other woodyposters appear to be doing that to Mr. Curtin, the 1802 owner, the late Mr. Hendricks, Mr. woodyboater, etc. yet I have poop for brains and look like an ass. Interesting…..

    I’ve never been out to prove anything regarding these boats but I do certainly find it interesting how any possible mention of 1802 being in the movie, is unacceptable to so many woodyboater posters and friends. There is nothing I have stated that is not fact, or is not a valid question, unless someone is blindly one-sided, yet I have poop for brains, look like an ass and am full of sh**t? Once again, WOW!

    I always thought that this was a grown-up site, billy. Apparently I was wrong since your post has now turned this back and forth into childish name calling and swearing instead of adult questions being asked and answered. How unfortunate for this great site.

Comments are closed.