Lund Pontoon VS LOTW

I agree that Mille Lacs is a completely different beast. And most launches don’t go out all that far. Most people fishing LOTW are going miles out.

I have a tritoon and I respect big waves because I’ve had times when the boat goes down into a wave and floods the deck, people get tossed off the seats, and stuff starts sliding around in the water. It’s true that in moderate waves, it does help to go fast to get on top of the waves, but I’m guessing the LOTW conditions were much worse than that.

As far as salvage goes, unless people thought to mark it on their graph, it’s going to be some sonar time just trying to find the thing in that lake. It’s not like the water is clear enough that you could have an aircraft spotter find it.

As far as salvage goes, unless people thought to mark it on their graph, it’s going to be some sonar time just trying to find the thing in that lake. It’s not like the water is clear enough that you could have an aircraft spotter find it.
[/quote]

The MN side could use a little more structure.

Did it totally sink?

Yes, it did in around 8 minutes apparently.

queenswake wrote:

I agree that Mille Lacs is a completely different beast. And most launches don’t go out all that far. Most people fishing LOTW are going miles out.

I have a tritoon and I respect big waves because I’ve had times when the boat goes down into a wave and floods the deck, people get tossed off the seats, and stuff starts sliding around in the water. It’s true that in moderate waves, it does help to go fast to get on top of the waves, but I’m guessing the LOTW conditions were much worse than that.

As far as salvage goes, unless people thought to mark it on their graph, it’s going to be some sonar time just trying to find the thing in that lake. It’s not like the water is clear enough that you could have an aircraft spotter find it.

I would think the people that rescued them would have it marked or be able to get close. Would be easy to find with side imaging even if they didn’t have the exact cordinates.

Lund may have some interest in recovering the pontoon to discover exactly what failed and how it failed.

Karry Kyllo wrote:

Lund may have some interest in recovering the pontoon to discover exactly what failed and how it failed.

I wonder how new the toon was and would Lund be liable because the tubes failed? I mean the guy didn’t hit rocks/reef so why would the tubes rupture?

From the sounds of it Lund isnt responsible for stupidity. Witnesses said he was going super fast and the waves were quite large.

I’m not saying that Lund is responsible but I’d bet they’d be interested in understanding how and why it failed. If I understand correctly, the pontooons on a Lund are baffled chamber pontoons designed not to all fail at the same time, even with irresponsible driving. Maybe there was prior damage of some type that caused catastrophic failure, maybe it was just the result of irresponsible driving or maybe it was caused by some type of design flaw. The pontoons could have even been damaged prior going out on Lake of the Woods. We can speculate all we want but until the pontoons are inspected, no one will ever know exactly what happened to make the pontoons fail as they did.

I doubt Lund is interested in why they failed, as the no longer make pontoons. They only made them 4 years.

CaptainMusky wrote:

From the sounds of it Lund isnt responsible for stupidity. Witnesses said he was going super fast and the waves were quite large.

Pontoon logs are usually 3 or 4 chambers. It seems odd to me that they would all leak at the same time so the toon sank completely in 8 minutes. There are tons of stupid boat owners doing stupid things and their boats don’t sink. JMO
The owners insurance can figure it out if Lund is responsible for any part of it.

Trev wrote:

I doubt Lund is interested in why they failed, as the no longer make pontoons. They only made them 4 years.

Thanks Trev. I dodn’t realize that.

The pontoon is still bobbing around out there. Last seen East of 9 mile flat and on the Canada side. Definitely making its rounds.

So it didn’t sink?
Sure would be nice to know the real story here.

It apparently didnt fully sink as was initially reported, but its still 95 percent or more submerged from the pics I saw. There are a couple buoys on it not sure if those were on it originally or if someone added them after the issue. Its definitely traveled a good distance from where it had the problems (Lem’s reef).

Ripjiggen wrote:

So it didn’t sink?

I wondered that too. How is any part of it still floating lol

I’m guessing it took a couple of those big rollers over the deck and did a nose dive. Once the seating area behind the rails fills up, it wont drain fast enough and the boat will go under, the water then seeps into compartments, motor, etc, the top becomes heaver than the bottom, and she rolls. But if the pontoons are still intact, it’s probably enough to keep it belly-up at the surface.

That’s my theory.