Before Posting, Please Read Our Posting Guidelines Below.
1. Use the full 4 digit year for everything you are asking your question about. Example: 1962, 1988, 2000, 2011 2. Include the correct name of your Whaler model. Example: Montauk 17, Montauk 170, Outrage 26, Outrage 260 3. Include the length when necessary. Example: 16, 17, 18, 20, 22 4. Do not post your email address anywhere on this site as it is already in your user profile.
Thanks for all the great info.
Your points are well taken, this is why I didn't change the shifter the first week I had it. I guess I can find a place for the key/dead man. I'm not sure where I would put the trim toggle. At 4000RPM that boat needs a hand on the wheel and hand on the throttle. The toggle would have to be close or right next to the shifter in the "thin Base".
I will take some pics and mull it over.
I really want to have the "click Click" shifter...
I think it's beautiful, the finest, most professional, restoration work I have ever seen, and a great service to the overall Classic Whaler community, keeping these famous boats out on the water and in the classic boat shows...
Go back to the first pictures and look close at the hull they used for this project. You have museum quality Whalers because you have genuine hulls & genuine parts. They took one of the last remaining quality 50 year old hulls and raped it. This is now a second tier hull, never to be genuine again.
And this isn't a restoration, I doubt there is an original part other than the rails & there are many things not "right" with the reproduction. It is a very professional finish, top rate. Someone asked what the sale price is, is it 20-30k? Try like 60K, and I doubt they got a buyer, and if so I doubt they are out frolicking. And what happened to the Red Ritchie Compass?
Regardless, I didn't mean to post to this thread, Joe made me do it. He poked at us to check out the sponsors, (Metan isn't now, btw), so I did. I remained shocked at what happened with this specific hull and didn't reply several times, because this is an old thread, but I had to post what I did above.
I am more shocked that I am the only one here that has a problem with the destruction of that classic hull. Actually, not restoring that entire boat was an opportunity lost,
A genuine Whaler is genuine once!
That's ok, I am used to the masses not having a clue what I am talking about.
MG56, is your issue with the restoration that the boat is now "thicker" than the original. I reviewed the slide show and I do not see where the original lines were compromised or changed. Are you happening to look at this as a "good paint job"? Part of me understands the lack of true restoration. The other part of me is enthralled with the craftsmanship to present an old hull to "from the factory condition" with materials as close to possible to factory original.
That's ok, I am used to the masses not having a clue what I am talking about.
The problem I have is your superior and dismissive attitude that there is only one way to treat an old boat and everyone else is an idiot who is not as elevated as you. You think old boats would be restored a particular way? Fine. You think anyone else who doesn't hold the same view is inferior to you? Not fine.
I have seen several of Metan's restored boats at the shows every year, they are nothing short of amazing in their quality and finish. Mike is also a very nice guy.
Hey MG56, what is up with bashing the guys work? Have you ever seen one of his restored boats in person? Quit being such a smug SOB. If you have nothing nice to say.....STFU :)
gchuba wrote:
MG56, is your issue with the restoration that the boat is now "thicker" than the original. I reviewed the slide show and I do not see where the original lines were compromised or changed. Are you happening to look at this as a "good paint job"? Part of me understands the lack of true restoration. The other part of me is enthralled with the craftsmanship to present an old hull to "from the factory condition" with materials as close to possible to factory original.
Garris
My one single issue is the hull they started with was the most perfect blue hull I have seen in a very long time, and it should not have been ground down.
Pictures make everything look rosy and I may be wrong but that hull looked to be in near mint original condition. As it was taken off the mold with the non skid and green line intact. I'm sure after over 40 years it had issues but that hull deserved to be restored, not re-fabricated.
You have to understand, there were only so many blue 16 footers made, and there are VERY few remaining that can be restored with a mold correct hull. How many do you think are left in equal condition to that hull, 50?
I don't want to confuse the point I am trying to make with whether Metan did a good job. Their work is outstanding, and second to none.
I also think it is unfair to continue this disagreement you all seem to have with me on a venders thread, even though they are no longer a sponsor.
We should move the argument over to the boat forum if you all want to keep beating up on me. I would actually like that because I am surprised I am the only that places the proper value on a genuine hull.
Actually, I agree with you. If you're going to go to that extent, start with a basket case. Don't destroy a fine original. Can't really tell if that boat had crazing as it's sometimes difficult to spot, however if it didn't, and considering it hasn't been bottom painted, I think it's a shame..
