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.
I'm new here, name's Alex (duh). I don't actually have a Whaler yet, but I've dreamed of owning a 17 Montauk for several decades now. I've spent a lot of time fishing off a friend's 17 footer, and I really loved that boat.
My financial situation is shaping up nicely, and it looks like I'll FINALLY be pulling the trigger on a Whaler within the next six months to a year. I think a 17 foot Montauk will be a perfect match for me here in the Bay Area (California) - seaworthy enough to head out the Gate trolling for salmon, light enough to tow with our 4Runner, and simple/compact enough not to be overkill for a relaxing day at the lake or river.
Many of the 17 Montauks I'm seeing on the market seem to be due (or way past due) for a repower, which I understand is a serious endeavor with a $7,000 to $10,000+ pricetag. There's a chance I might be able to score one that's already been repowered with an early 2000's 4 stroke (or DFI 2-stroke), but they seem to sell VERY quickly when they hit the market here in CA. I may have better luck buying a less expensive boat with an old 2 stroke then saving money for a repower after using it where I can for a year or two.
I've read a LOT of different opinions about the various options for repowering a 17 Whaler. I understand that transom weight capacity is a very important consideration. Here in CA, many of our lakes (including Tahoe) prohibit carb'd 2-strokes, so they are out of the question. Also, my GF is very sensitive to fuel and exhaust fumes - we'll both be a lot happier if she can breath easy.
Now on to my "hypothetical" thoughts and questions...
1) From the perspective of seaworthiness and safety while boating and fishing off the Central and Northern California coast, would you feel safer with (a) 90 HP main WITHOUT a kicker, (b) 70 HP main WITHOUT a kicker, or (c) a 70 HP main WITH a 6-10 HP kicker. I think all the low-emission 90 HPs are too heavy to pair with a kicker on a 17 whaler, but please correct me if I'm mistaken.
2) Generally speaking, would a 17 Montauk with a 70 HP motor be any more or less safe/seaworthy than the same boat with a heavier 90 HP motor? This discussion usually centers around how fast people want to go, but that is not a priority for me. I just want a motor that's a good match for the hull and allows the boat to perform safely when the afternoon winds inevitably kick up. I can see the benefit of the extra 20 HP if you needed to react very quickly in a sketchy situation, but I can also see the extra transom weight being a potential issue in following seas...
Most days on the ocean will not allow full power on a 90hp motor or even a 70hp motor. So you would need to determine which motor is best for all of your situations.
If you troll a lot for fishing, then a kicker motor is a plus rather then putting all those hours on the larger, more expensive, motor.
There are only a few times I would have enjoyed to have had a 90 on the back as I am not a speed demon.The other days it was just too rough on the back and teeth.
A lot of people today are using the Yamaha F70 at 257 pounds
or the E-Tec 90 at 320 pounds
Depends on what dealers are around you and their reputation.
All good motors and all good choices depending on what, or how, a person uses their boat.
I'll let others comment on specific repower options for your Montauk. One thing to keep in mind is not just the stern weight, but also the center of gravity. There have been a few reports about Montauks capsizing. It's hard to say whether those circumstances were extenuating, or whether the Montauk 17 may be slightly more susceptible to this problem than other Whaler designs.
If the latter is the case, keeping center of gravity as low as possible would be a consideration. Some engines have lower centers of gravity than others due to their designs (e.g. V4 vs I-4). I doubt this would ever be much of an issue for how most folks use their Montauk 17s (typically protected waters or near coastal with protection close at hand), but you mention wanting to run out through the Golden Gate into the Pacific - so something to keep in mind.
Another suggestion is to keep an open mind about which model(s) you watch for. Given your intended use, you might keep your eyes open for a 17 Outrage or an Outrage 18. Realizing the market and prices are different out your way, but back here on the East Coast, we often see these Outrage models selling in the same price range as Montauk 17s. Either one of these Outrages would give you quite a bit more capability for trips beyond the Golden Gate. They can both be repowered with 115 HP engines, which helps to keep costs down if that becomes necessary. And your tow vehicle should do okay with either of them, too.
Thanks for the quick replies, Joe and JRP! Both very helpful.
I would certainly consider a 17 or 18 Outrage, we just don't see as many of them for sale out here.
JRP - You mentioned that the 115 HP could help keep costs down. How is that? Are the 115's cheaper than 70s or 90s for some reason?
Thanks again for waxing hypothetical with me. I'm one of those people who likes to think 5 or 6 steps ahead before I make big purchases, and I don't always get such a positive response.
I saltwater fish out of Bodega and used to head "....out the Gate...." when in Sausalito. You would really have to pick your days and be comfortable piloting a 17' boat out the "Gate"...."Potato Patch" no fun. That being said if you insist on a 17' Montauk the 70hp set up with a kicker is the way to go. Right now on Craigslist is (and I do try to refrain from language) one hell of a Whaler fishing boat. I have seen it and talked with the seller. I posted it here a month or so ago. It is now back for sale at $17,500 with trailer and brand new custom fuel tanks. A 25' Whaler Revenge only made for one year. They took the cuddy off the 22' Revenge (which I own) and slapped it on a 25' Outrage. The extra 3 feet when straight to the deck. Most of the 25' Revenges have the more luxurious cabins with the deck staying pretty much the same size as the 22'. If I did not already have (and customize) my existing Whaler I would snatch this up in a heartbeat. Very well known and highly regarded hull cared for by the fellows out by Lawson's Landing. Hopefully a member can post a link to the "SF Bay Area Craigslist" so all can see what I am talking about. The posted pictures do not do justice to the deck space. Good luck.
AlexB wrote:...
JRP - You mentioned that the 115 HP could help keep costs down. How is that? Are the 115's cheaper than 70s or 90s for some reason?
...
Alex
Alex,
Sorry about the confusion there. I did not mean to imply that a 115 hp engine would be less expensive than the 70-90 hp engines you're discussing for the Montauk 17. What I meant was that these two model Outrages (17&18) can do fine with a 115. If you go to a larger size Whaler than these, you get into 150+ hp territory which is a much more expensive engine than a 115 (almost 50% more money.)
Almost all of us are prone to "mission creep" as we look at boats, and it's easy to be seduced by more power and more size. But whenever you can stay with boats sizes that use engines in 115 hp territory or below, you are talking about much more reasonable prices on engines, and the entire boating experience is generally quite a bit less expensive too. You seem like a guy who is planning an investment and budgeting carefully to make it happen, so I just thought I'd toss out that data point.
Hey, Garris. I recognize you from Coastside. Always enjoy reading your posts and reports. I'm "AlexB" over there, too. You've likely seen my reports of chasing salmon from my kayak off Marin, Bodega, HMB, etc.
I've definitely checked out that 25' revenge on Craigslist, but it's just more boat than I can deal with right now. It would likely require a bigger tow vehicle, which is out of the question. Someone is going to be very happy with that thing. Soooo much deck space...
As for running a 17' out the Gate, it certainly isn't something I would take lightly. I won't even try it until I have any days of experience with whatever boat I get, and when I do I will arrange to go with a "buddy boat" who has experience in the area.
My dad and I talk a lot about this type of thing. He has run everything from a 1960's 5hp Johnson to an I/O. He trolls. A lot. Lake Erie, originally, but now down in Western North Carolina, in lakes that are many hundreds of feet deep.
With the old two-stroke outboards, a trolling motor (kicker) was super useful. Everybody has trouble getting two-strokes to idle low enough without coughing and sputtering. But these days, the four-strokes just purr, and if you put the boat into the wind, you can achieve a 1, 2, 3 mph trolling speed.
I just bought my first four-stroke and though I am a fan of the 2cycle oil burning smell, I can't say I miss it. The four stroke is quiet and clean.
But Joe's comment about saving the hours on the bigger more expensive motor was wise, especially if you troll all the time. Also, if you have an older big motor, and it craps out on you, you can at least get back home ... if slowly. Or maybe keep the boat facing the right way, which might be good enough to save you.
ClevelandBill Ferry
m/v SHRUG
2015 150 Super Sport 60hp Merc
JRB - That makes a lot of sense. I'm trying to keep this simple, affordable and (relatively) low maintenance. After the initial purchase I don't want it to sting to bad each time I go fishing...
AlexB wrote:
Thanks guys.
After the initial purchase I don't want it to sting to bad each time I go fishing...
Then I would also suggest reading this article.
I spent 8 hours a day trolling with the 8hp motor for many, many, many days with rarely using the larger main motor. http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...icle_id=48
Alex,
You are a good fellow. Kayaker's are are breed which I respect and love. Do not push this motorized boat too hard. The Montauk 17' is one wonderful hull. My 22' 1979 Revenge has been down for a couple of years. Please recognize the limitations and use. You do trade off "boat ability" for use. I have fished off a friends Montauk for years....but I am 2" shorter in reasonable weather when stepping off. You need to determine your poison. Tow-able, access, launching, etc.... all tied in. I would personally go with the 17'/18' plus Outrages and bide my time till the right deal came up. I have a feeling for your journey and will keep a heads up for you.
Garris
Alex, determine the longest hull you can deal with with your set up and look for a Whaler in that direction. One safe hull.
I went with a Montauk for a few reasons. I wanted the smallest boat that I could feel safe fishing the surf and passes in the GOM. I wanted small because I still wanted to easily fish the marsh and shallow ponds during the winter. I wanted something light enough that if I got into too shallow of water I could get out and push or pole it out. I also wanted something I could bring half of my family fishing or the whole family just riding. I have 3 kids, I usually bring 2 fishing at a time.
During my purchase process, I kept finding acceptable boats with unacceptable motors for entirely too much money. No 20 year old outboard is worth more than a thousand to me if it has been used in saltwater. I kept seeing okay boats with old motors for $8000 to $10,000. Just the fact that a 20 year motor is bolted to a Boston Whaler hull doesn't make the motor worth $4000 or $5000. I picked up a 1978 hull with the rails and a bad trailer for $1500. I refinished the hull with Interlux performance epoxy on the bottom and Perfection on the top. Repowered with a new ETEC 90 with hydraulic steering. I could not be happier. The last time I brought it to the river, I had several people compliment me on it and the owner of the marina told me to call him if I ever felt the urge to sell. Other comments were things like, "I cant believe you bring this thing fishing in the marsh, I'd have it loaded up with bikinis every weekend."
I'm from "the other coast" and I don't fish much, but just some thoughts on trolling and whether to get a kicker.
For trolling, if you go with the F70 and get the digital tach setup, it has a feature to give fine control of trolling speed even down below the normal idle speed. If you need to go slower, throwing out a bucket on a line is always an option too.
As far as I can see, most people get a kicker either for trolling or for safety. If you're going to always be in areas where there are other boats around, nearby Coast Guard, and/or tow services are available I would be inclined to invest in a good radio setup rather than a kicker. Modern outboards are pretty reliable compared to the old warhorses. Only you can make the call on safety, of course.
For trolling, many people used to use kickers because their carbed main motors were incredibly inefficient at trolling speeds, and they also didn't run very well at idle for long. Modern motors don't have either of those problems. Putting trolling hours on the main motor is a concern if you're planning on selling it, but otherwise I would not stress about it - after all, running at 600 RPMs for 10 hours puts the same or less wear and tear on as running at 6000 RPM for an hour.
Regarding 70 vs. 90, although I am very happy with the F70 that I have on my 15, I always like to put the max power on a boat - you never know when you might be running extra-heavy, or have some type of situation where you need the extra ponies. With modern motors, there is very little mileage penalty with the larger motor.
Just some thoughts, possibly worth what you paid for 'em!
NeilCarp wrote:
I went with a Montauk for a few reasons. I wanted the smallest boat that I could feel safe fishing the surf and passes in the GOM. I wanted small because I still wanted to easily fish the marsh and shallow ponds during the winter. I wanted something light enough that if I got into too shallow of water I could get out and push or pole it out. I also wanted something I could bring half of my family fishing or the whole family just riding. I have 3 kids, I usually bring 2 fishing at a time.
During my purchase process, I kept finding acceptable boats with unacceptable motors for entirely too much money. No 20 year old outboard is worth more than a thousand to me if it has been used in saltwater. I kept seeing okay boats with old motors for $8000 to $10,000. Just the fact that a 20 year motor is bolted to a Boston Whaler hull doesn't make the motor worth $4000 or $5000. I picked up a 78 hull with the rails and a bad trailer for $1500. I refinished the hull with Interlux performance epoxy on the bottom and Perfection on the top. Repowered with a new ETEC 90 with hydraulic steering. I could not be happier. The last time I brought it to the river, I had several people compliment me on it and the owner of the marina told me to call him if I ever felt the urge to sell. Other comments were things like, "I cant believe you bring this thing fishing in the marsh, I'd have it loaded up with bikinis every weekend." [IMG]http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg48/NeilC1/20151111_101057_zpsv7fznisg.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg48/NeilC1/b168b717-4596-479e-9075-7142a0845d4c_zpsajhb2wbj.jpg[/IMG]
Very nice!
I've also pondered a scenario where I could pick up a boat with a serviceable 70 or 90 HP 2-stroke for ~$7,500 then spend ~$2,000 on a new (or nearly new) 8-10 HP kicker (4-stroke). This would give me peace of mind knowing I could get home if the big motor died, or at least keep my bow facing in the right direction while I summon help. I just can't see myself fully trusting a 20 year old outboard when I have no idea how well it's been maintained.
I'm more inclined toward a 70 HP main plus 10 HP kicker than I am toward a 90 HP with no kicker. This option would also buy me some time to save up for a repower. Only downsides would be limited freshwater options (no Tahoe, no East Bay reservoirs), and GF would have to deal with fuel/exhaust fumes whenever the big motor was running. I guess I could take the boat out to the reservoir and just use the kicker, but that would be pretty funny...
I'm a little confused - you're willing to spend $7500 for a Montauk with an old junker 2-stroke, plus $2000 for a kicker, but you don't want to spend $8500 for a turnkey setup with an almost-new motor?
tedious wrote:
I'm a little confused - you're willing to spend $7500 for a Montauk with an old junker 2-stroke, plus $2000 for a kicker, but you don't want to spend $8500 for a turnkey setup with an almost-new motor?
What am I missing?
Tim
What you're missing is that I am not ready to plop down the cash just yet. My 2016 tax return and x-mas bonus will cover a large part of my purchase, but I'll have to wait until early 2017 for that. Whatever extra I need to drop in addition to my "end of year" income will come from a small personal loan that will be painless to pay off within 1-3 years.
If I DID have the cash in hand right now (without dipping into our savings), I would be driving to Auburn today to check out that turn key boat for $8,500. That thing looks sweet... I bet it's sold already. I'm actually very surprised to see that thing priced at $8,500. Similar boats seem to list around $10-15k plus.
In addition to not having the cash on hand right this minute, I'm also pretty busy right now with home improvements. Just bought my first house last July, and there are still a few projects I need to knock off the list before I add a new one (boat). Next step: Rip up and replace the floor of my front porch (previous owner used 1" OSB and just painted over it, now the porch leaks into the basement when it rains.)
Alex, I think the lesson is: get prepared with cash in hand, do your homework so you know what you're looking for (you're doing this now), be patient, and move fast once you see what you want.
If I were you, I'd be targeting the early fall - used boat prices drop, and motors go on sale. You're going to pay top dollar for the next couple of months.
I'd strongly recommend getting a boat with an older motor just because you're in a hurry - as you see, good ones with newer motors are out there! And new motors depreciate instantly by 50%+ once attached to an older boat - why not let the seller eat that?
tedious wrote:
Alex, I think the lesson is: get prepared with cash in hand, do your homework so you know what you're looking for (you're doing this now), be patient, and move fast once you see what you want.
If I were you, I'd be targeting the early fall - used boat prices drop, and motors go on sale. You're going to pay top dollar for the next couple of months.
I'd strongly recommend getting a boat with an older motor just because you're in a hurry - as you see, good ones with newer motors are out there! And new motors depreciate instantly by 50%+ once attached to an older boat - why not let the seller eat that?
Tim
Good advice. Thanks. That's my plan. Lots of research, dial it down to a few different boat/motor options (and respective price points) that will fit my needs, get the cash in hand, then hit the market. From there, it'll just be a matter of religiously checking Craigslist, Boatttader, etc, multiple times per day until I see a deal worth jumping on.
I'm noticing I don't see many used 70-90 HP 4 strokes or DFI 2-strokes on the market unless they're stuck on a boat.
My buddy with the 17 foot whaler had to get creative when he repowered from the old 70 HP 2-stroke. He ended up buying an old beater Bayliner that had been repowered with a 90 HP 4-Stroke. Then he plopped his 70 on the Bayliner and sold it (don't think he even rigged it up). Ended up saving a pile of money.
