Matching a modified vee Kingfisher 1825 Trio SC 2013 against a tunnel Kingfisher 1875 Extreme Shallow 2013 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 — Kingfisher 1825 Trio SC 2013 at 17,7 ft versus Kingfisher 1875 Extreme Shallow 2013 at 18,0 ft. At 105 lbs and 181 lbs respectively, both sit in a similar weight class — either should pair comfortably with most mid-size SUVs and half-ton trucks, though always confirm your specific tow rating with the motor added.

The power gap is worth calling out. Rated to 200 hp, the Kingfisher 1875 Extreme Shallow 2013 has a 85-hp advantage over the Kingfisher 1825 Trio SC 2013's 115-hp ceiling — enough to notice on acceleration and at cruising speed, particularly with a full passenger load. Fuel capacity breaks the other way: the Kingfisher 1875 Extreme Shallow 2013 carries 36 gallons versus 2 gallons in the Kingfisher 1825 Trio SC 2013. On a lake day that's negligible, but for coastal cruising or long reservoir runs the extra range matters.

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 Kingfisher 1875 Extreme Shallow 2013 comes in at 1 lbs per hp versus 1 lbs per hp for the Kingfisher 1825 Trio SC 2013. 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.