Matching a deep vee Alumacraft Navigator 175 CS 2008 against a modified vee Alumacraft V-Bow 1756 AW Tunnel 2006 means you're likely deciding between two genuinely different on-water experiences. Hull type shapes everything from ride quality and fuel burn to dock handling and resale trajectory.
On paper these two are close siblings in the size department — Alumacraft Navigator 175 CS 2008 at 17,0 ft versus Alumacraft V-Bow 1756 AW Tunnel 2006 at 17,0 ft. Weight tells a clearer story for trailering families: the Alumacraft Navigator 175 CS 2008 tips the scales at 127 lbs — 121 lbs more than the Alumacraft V-Bow 1756 AW Tunnel 2006 at 6 lbs. That difference is meaningful if you're working within a half-ton or three-quarter-ton truck's tow rating, especially once you factor in a motor, gear, and fuel.
The power gap is worth calling out. Rated to 150 hp, the Alumacraft Navigator 175 CS 2008 has a 100-hp advantage over the Alumacraft V-Bow 1756 AW Tunnel 2006's 50-hp ceiling — enough to notice on acceleration and at cruising speed, particularly with a full passenger load.
Both boats are rated for 5 passengers — a good fit for a family of four or five plus guests. Comfort at capacity is another matter; the longer hull typically means more seat options and better weight distribution.
At this size, power-to-weight ratio matters more than outright horsepower. The Alumacraft V-Bow 1756 AW Tunnel 2006 comes in at 0 lbs per hp versus 1 lbs per hp for the Alumacraft Navigator 175 CS 2008. The lower the ratio the more explosive the acceleration — meaningful on a short RIB where bursts of speed, quick planing, and agility in surf or tight waterways define the experience.
Bottom line: Performance buyers should lean toward the Alumacraft Navigator 175 CS 2008 and its 150-hp ceiling. If fuel economy and quieter running matter more than top-end speed, the Alumacraft V-Bow 1756 AW Tunnel 2006 with its 50-hp rating is the more economical daily driver.