|
13, 15, or 17?
|
| LCnSac |
Posted on 09/25/10 - 8:59 PM
|
Member
Posts: 3
Comments:
0
Joined: 09/25/10
|
All over the board I know, but I'm conflicted. This will be my 4th Whaler.
Unlike practically everyone else, the 170 I bought new wasn't the right boat for me. I fly fish freshwater, smaller lakes, and the Delta on occasion. I found the boat to be too big. No intimacy with the water, kind of a pain to launch myself as more often than not I'm by myself, and as such I had about 50 hours in 4 years. I had hoped this would be a family boat too, but due to the seating (and the fact it wasn't a wakeboard boat), it really wasn't. No more compromises. The next one is for me.
I had a Dauntless 13 before and that was OK, but it was a little tender with the lateral stability.
I am thinking a 13 Sport, or a newer 130. I'm also considering a 15 Sport, but I've read on other sites their lateral stability isn't great either. That's very important to me as I stand and cast from the bow. I rarely have to deal with much chop--sometimes on the Delta and moments on the large lakes from wakes.
The typical response has been to get a Classic Montauk. For the money that's obviously a good value, but it seems big and again, too removed from the water and difficult to snake around skinny water. I'm in Northern California, and typically fish Crowley, Bridgeport, Indian Creek, Folsom Lake, and the Delta. My absolute favorite way to fish is from a float tube/pontoon.
Priorities:
1. Stability
2. Ease of use
3. Relative comfort
4. Fishing with two. Three if family and not fly fishing and this would be fairly rare.
Conisiderations:
1. 13 Sport, 130 Sport
2. 15 Sport, 15 Striper would be near perfect
3. 17 Montauk
Questions:
1. Is the 13,130 too small? I'm thinking it may not be for my needs.
2. Stability of the 15 Classic?
3. Should I even consider a Montauk?
No pre-smirks. My budget is $10K and that would include re-power to a 4S if necessary, trolling motor, tax, etc.
I appreciate your comments. Thank you.
John
Edited by LCnSac on 09/25/10 - 9:00 PM |
| |
|
|
| MW |
Posted on 09/26/10 - 12:10 AM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 1827
Comments:
10
Joined: 01/08/06
|
I think that the front casting Deck is the BEST feature on the 15', you won't have any stability problems. It's designed to scoot across the Bay quickly with "little" fuss to the next fishing spot. 2 people can fish with comfort, even an occassional 3 people. It is a "sport" model though, so "All day Cruising Comfort" is not there, it can stretch it's leg's though and run though the chop with the big dogs if it has to, and it does this as if it "Likes" to do it. It can "Hot Rod" through the "chop" better than the 13' can. You might want to try the 13' as well, I've pulled many fish into the 13' and it's a wonderful boat for ease of maint., and just "EASY" everything, and "Easy" is "FUN" !
Matt |
| |
|
|
| fishinhotwater |
Posted on 09/26/10 - 3:12 AM
|
Member
Posts: 5
Comments:
0
Joined: 09/26/10
|
I fish in the inshore rivers of South Carolina where the chop can be 1-2 feet on a slightly windy day depending on the wind direction and tide flow. i have a 1979 13 foot sport and I've never complain about the ride in choppy water. My previous boat was an 86 15 footer and it was perfect! It would skip right accross the chop and never look back. I sold it to a friend a few years back when I was laid off from work and needed the cash. As we speak I am trying to find another one. It was definately more stable than the 13 and nearly as manuverable. I would definately go with the 15. Just my opinion. Hope it helps
|
| |
|
|
| BobL |
Posted on 09/26/10 - 5:42 PM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 40
Comments:
0
Joined: 09/28/05
|
I would recommend a 15’. I have a 13’ and a 15’ (older classic models). The 13 is a little more stable but fishing two in my opinion is tight. Both are easy to launch alone. I think the best combination with good comfort, stability, ease of use, and the ability to fish 2-3 is the 15. I can’t speak to the Dauntless models or newer 130 or 150 models because I have not been in those models. Good luck in your search.
BobL
|
| |
|
|
| Barryg |
Posted on 09/26/10 - 7:12 PM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 242
Comments:
1
Joined: 04/01/08
|
John , I have a 1985 15 CC . This boat is very easy to launch by yourself. The ride is good not as good as something you could stand up in like a Montauk but adequate. You are near the water more so than a Montauk for sure. The best thing is the front area. It is very flat and not much in the way to catch the fly line. I hit the schooling stripers in the fall. The boat is light and takes little effort with the trolling motor to keep up with the fish. Reminds me of a flats boat, low to the water.
|
| |
|
|
| bmw90w |
Posted on 09/26/10 - 7:44 PM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 328
Comments:
1
Joined: 09/08/09
|
I have a 17 montauk, and I have taken it in very skinny water. It doesn't draft much at all, and you wouldn't believe where it has been!! I have never been in a 15, but my buddy and I were pretty cramped in the 13 we rented. It wasn't very stable for us either, and took a lot of water over the transom even while anchored. I launch my 17, and once I got my trailer set right, it is a piece of cake by myself. Either way I don't think you can go wrong with a whaler! I don't mean to sound biased, but I would stick with atleast a 15 if I were you. I am not bashing the 13's I actually really enjoyed it. I just needed something a little bigger for me.
1984 Montauk |
| |
|
|
| LCnSac |
Posted on 09/26/10 - 8:20 PM
|
Member
Posts: 3
Comments:
0
Joined: 09/25/10
|
I'm not saying no to a 17 Montauk. What I have learned is that the 17 is a much different craft than a 170. I think it sits closer to the water and is much lighter. Correct?
|
| |
|
|
| bmw90w |
Posted on 09/26/10 - 8:37 PM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 328
Comments:
1
Joined: 09/08/09
|
I am not sure if its closer, but it does sit pretty close. The classic also weighs 500 pounds less.
1984 Montauk |
| |
|
|
| Fishmore |
Posted on 09/27/10 - 1:03 AM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 270
Comments:
0
Joined: 11/20/07
|
Have you looked through the whaler models section on this site? I fish many of the same areas you do and I think the Currituck model would be perfect for your usage. Of course I would remove the rails to help with line management. That interior could work with a few models smirked and non smirked.
|
| |
|
|
| LCnSac |
Posted on 09/27/10 - 4:46 PM
|
Member
Posts: 3
Comments:
0
Joined: 09/25/10
|
Fishmore, the Currituck model went right by me. Thank you. Of course you are correct--that would be perfect. I imagine it would be difficult to find, no? Keep your eyes open!
John
|
| |
|
|
| Fishmore |
Posted on 09/27/10 - 7:59 PM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 270
Comments:
0
Joined: 11/20/07
|
John,
If you look at my personal page you will see that I converted my beat up Currituck to a refurbished Montauk. I would bet that Specialty Marine or Nautical Lumber could build a Currituck interior and you could reverse the process I went through.
I went to the Montauk design partially because my friends all ran Montauks, partially because I like to stand when running in the ocean swells and partially because I wanted the rails to keep my 7 year old on board in the San Francisco Bay. I often think that someday I may switch it back. I found the Currituck layout was much better for small lakes and the Delta especially when using a fly rod. I would think that after selling the RPS, console and rails you could have a brand new Currituck interior at no additional cost. Something to think about any way.
Regards, Tim
|
| |
|
|
| Karlow |
Posted on 09/28/10 - 8:22 PM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 192
Comments:
0
Joined: 07/20/10
|
Have you considered the GLS?
My current project is a 1990 17' GLS.
|
| |
|
