2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Optimizing the performance of Boston Whaler boats
Montauk2003
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 12:41 pm
Location: Lake Wylie, SC

2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby Montauk2003 » Wed Apr 20, 2016 1:00 pm

Hi fellow boaters. I am thinking about re-powering my 2003 Montauk that currently has a Mercury 90-HP FOURSTROKE with carburetors. I would like to go to a fuel injected version. Not sure if I should stay with a Mercury or switch to a Yamaha. I was thinking about the Yamaha 70-HP since it is around 100 pounds lighter than the 90-HP but am not sure if that is a great idea. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks--Dan

hauptjm
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 3:26 pm

Re: 22003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby hauptjm » Wed Apr 20, 2016 2:50 pm

The SUZUKI DF90 four-stroke-cycle outboard engine weighs even less than a Yamaha 70: 341-lbs. v. 372-lbs. We use these mid-size Suzuki engines on our fleet of 17-foot Boston Whaler boats at our club, and they are [very reliable]. We regularly get 4000-hours or more of abusing use by Club members, coaches and summer instructors.

Montauk2003
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 12:41 pm
Location: Lake Wylie, SC

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby Montauk2003 » Wed Apr 20, 2016 2:58 pm

I will check out the Suzuki four-stroke-cycle outboard engines, I will see if there are any dealers near Charlotte, North Carolina. Thank you--Dan

jimh
Posts: 6937
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby jimh » Wed Apr 20, 2016 6:54 pm

Several years ago when in coastal North Carolina around the Southport area, Suzuki outboard engines were about all I saw on boats there. There were several dealers in the area.

Montauk2003
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 12:41 pm
Location: Lake Wylie, SC

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby Montauk2003 » Wed Apr 20, 2016 7:07 pm

jimh wrote:Several years ago when in coastal North Carolina around the Southport area, Suzuki outboard engines were about all I saw on boats there. There were several dealers in the area.

What would be your choice Jim in a 90HP 4-stroke? Thanks for your help.

jimh
Posts: 6937
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby jimh » Wed Apr 20, 2016 7:34 pm

When buying a new outboard engine, my recommendation is to first select the dealer to get into business with. Find a dealer that you like, trust, and respect. Make sure he is a completely authorized dealer, is certified for the particular brand and model of engine you will be buying, has a service department that is factory-trained, factory-certified, and appears to be proficient in providing service.

Among modern engines there is not a great deal of variation in most parameters. All modern engines run well, have similar characteristics, and similar prices. The most difference among these engines will be found in the different dealers selling them.

I have not made a study of the present market choices in 90-HP outboards that use the four-stroke-power-cycle designs. They most likely all use electronic fuel injection.

By the way, Suzuki was the first outboard two-stroke-cycle engine manufacturer to transition to an all-four-stroke-cycle engine line, and to eliminate use of carburetors in their engines. Suzuki was also very early an adopter of NMEA-2000 instrumentation. They completely changed outboard engine marketing by introducing the six-year warranty. The only drawback about Suzuki is their dealer network is somewhat regionalized, and in some regions they are not well represented.

Montauk2003
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 12:41 pm
Location: Lake Wylie, SC

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby Montauk2003 » Wed Apr 20, 2016 7:57 pm

Jim: I was leaning towards Yahama due to authorized dealers being in driving distance from Charlotte. I have a 2010 Yamaha 70hp 4 stroke on my pontoon boat and it appears much smaller and is very quiet compared to my Mercury 90hp 4-stroke. Then I wonder if the 100 less pounds would make it less durable. Maybe I am thinking too much but it is a big expense. The dealers that service Mercurys and repower are rare where I live. Not sure why unless it is not as profitable to repower compared to selling boat packages with Mercury outboards.

jimh
Posts: 6937
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby jimh » Wed Apr 20, 2016 10:20 pm

Mercury outboard engine marketing in the loose engine or re-power segment has been acknowledged by senior management of Brunswick to be an area in which greater success is desired. That is one way to say that Mercury market share in re-power is poor. Brunswick is trying to fix this by introducing new outboard engine products that are more suitable for the re-power market. Brunswick's latest model Mercury 90-HP FOURSTROKE BASED ON 2.1-LITER BLOCK is a product that Brunswick expects will help it gain market share in the re-power segment.

Dealers that are not familiar with, sell in volume into, or cultivate the re-power market are probably not the best choice for doing business with for buying an engine for re-powering a Boston Whaler MONTAUK.

When I invested in a new engine in c.2009, my first choice was the dealer. Once I found the right dealer, his assistance and help guided all my decisions. The dealer I chose made re-power sales and installation of loose engines onto existing boat transoms a very big part of his business.

Montauk2003
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 12:41 pm
Location: Lake Wylie, SC

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby Montauk2003 » Thu Apr 21, 2016 8:13 am

Thanks for the great advice Jim ! If I need to drive 200 miles to find the right dealer and certified technician, I will.
Dan

jimh
Posts: 6937
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 2003 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby jimh » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:12 am

Dan--don't ignore your initial thoughts about Yamaha. They're a fine organization. I think they are dominating the outboard engine market these days in the conventional four-stroke-cycle engine category, that is, engines without supercharging. Really, all the brands make great products. You can't say anything bad about any of these modern engines now. That's why I am not as much concerned about the brand as I am concerned about the dealer.

Also--IMPORTANT--is the boat you call a 2003 MONTAUK the older 17-foot classic boat? Or, is it the new hull introduced then as 170 MONTAUK?

And one final comment--when re-powering and changing brands, the existing rigging often has to be replaced. Sometimes the mechanical throttle and shift linkages can be adapted, but usually the electrical harnesses are not compatible. Since your boat is from c.2003, I would expect the rigging would be in good condition. You can save some costs if you can re-use it. If you look at a Mercury engine, you may find that all the existing rigging can remain, and no new rigging costs will be incurred. If you change brands, include the cost of new rigging in a comparison. And Brunswick has a new Mercury 90-HP FOURSTROKE BASED ON 2.1-LITER BLOCK engine that looks like a nice candidate.

Montauk2003
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 12:41 pm
Location: Lake Wylie, SC

Re: 2003 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby Montauk2003 » Thu Apr 21, 2016 10:41 am

Jim: I have the Montauk 170 dated 2003 and it is like new since it sits in my garage most of the time. I will do that math and see if it is worth switching brands. If it is less than $1,000, I may go with the Yamaha. thanks again.

[Edited thread topic to reflect a 170 MONTAUK.--jimh]

Marc-B
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:07 pm

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby Marc-B » Thu Apr 21, 2016 2:37 pm

I agree with Jim: the choice of dealer is very important.

When I was shopping around for either a Yamaha F70 or E-TEC 90, a lot of the larger dealers did not give me the comfort level I was looking for, many of them were looking to sell me a complete new package, and were treating my 37-year-old Whaler as something that should be sent to landfill.

The dealer I chose is 90 minutes from my house and carried both Yamaha and Evinrude, and that made the decision even harder, I decided to go for the E-TEC.

The reason I went with this dealer is that he was willing to Install as I wanted it installed and he appreciated that I came in fully documented on how to install on a classic Whaler, not many Whalers in my area. He would send me pictures during and after the install to see if he was meeting my expectations.

Today he is doing a water test to see if the engine mounting height and propeller choice are correct. I will be picking up the boat on Saturday.

To keep cost down, we removed the 37-year-old Mercury engine, cables, controls, etc., filled in the holes in the transom, removed all the old gauges, even took out the RPS so he could get easier access to the console of the Newport. He just sent me the installation invoice, $790 taxes in. I sold the old Mercury with all the cables and controls for $800, I am a happy man.

Marc

Montauk2003
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 12:41 pm
Location: Lake Wylie, SC

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby Montauk2003 » Thu Apr 21, 2016 2:52 pm

Sounds like you did well Marc. I am weird about my Boston Whaler so I will add finding a technician who is familiar with them to do the installation. Thanks.

PJMSport15MY1984
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2015 2:20 pm
Location: Marysville, WA

"Outboard Choices for a Montauk 17"

Postby PJMSport15MY1984 » Sat May 07, 2016 1:35 pm

Hello Montauk 17,

I see you are contemplating what type and horsepower of outboard to purchase for your Montauk 17. The Yamaha F70 is, indeed, a great piece of machinery, but 70 horsepower is on the weak side of power for your boat. It is much more of an ideal candidate for an old Sport 15. You are not going to get the kind of performance out of your Montauk 17 with 70 horsepower unless your boat is going to be lightly loaded, and single handedly sailed a great deal of your recreational boating time.

I would make the 90 horsepower range your goal. Remember repowering is something you only want to do once, and the last thing you want to do is say I wish I would of got this motor.

Good Luck.

Paul
Last edited by PJMSport15MY1984 on Wed Jul 06, 2016 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

endus
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 10:20 am

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby endus » Thu May 19, 2016 5:25 pm

When we re-powered our 2004 Montauk 170, I was dead set on a [engine using a four-stroke-power-cycle] because of my experience with an older Montauk 17. It was used and abused commercially, but [its engine using two-stroke-power-cycle] had a tendency to be very difficult to start, even if you knew its quirks and preferred starting ritual. Eventually, they replaced the engine with a Honda four-stroke-cycle engine, and it was like night and day. Just flick the key and it was running - quiet and smooth. It stayed that way for as long as I worked at that place.

My old man, with whom I own the current boat, convinced me to go for the E-TEC and I am not sorry we did. Granted, we're super careful about maintenance, it has an additional inline fuel filter, etc. but it has been very smooth and reliable.

It's interesting that JimH says to decide on a dealer first and an engine second. My father was dead set on the standard 3 cylinder E-TEC 90 and I was, naturally, 100% sold on the high output version. The first dealer near where we now keep the boat said go for the H.O., no question about it. The old man went to every other Evinrude dealer within driving distance and every single one of them said to get the standard three cylinder. It got to the point where I was so tired of having the same discussion over and over again I told him to just go for the 3 cylinder.

Well, he brought the boat up to the first dealer we went to to get the engine installed. He called me that day and told me he got the H.O. version. He just really trusted and liked that dealer, and so went with his recommendation in the end. He is definitely happy with his choice now. In addition to the power, I am a big fan of having the separate oil reservoir in the center console. I see it whenever I go to turn the battery switch on so I never forget to monitor it...though it consumes very little oil.

So I guess I agree with JimH, find the dealer, then the engine.

I also agree with others who recommend a 90 HP engine over a 70 HP. On the older Montauk 17 a 70 was a decent, though not fast, choice. On the Montauk 170 I think 90 HP is right where you want to be. Even if you don't want to go fast, I think a standard 90 HP engine is well suited to the boat, and would probably help with resale value as well if that is a concern.

jimh
Posts: 6937
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby jimh » Sat May 21, 2016 9:21 am

My E-TEC engine consistently starts faster than any of the four-stroke-cycle engines in my automobiles. It starts with about one turn of the flywheel.

Pete Viking
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 4:10 pm

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby Pete Viking » Tue May 31, 2016 6:12 pm

Good luck with re-power. I vigorouslyresearched my last year's re-power of my 2004 170 before choosing my large investment. Original engine was a Mercury 90 saltwater. This was loud, crude, rough running, frequently stalling, environmentally a dangerous polluter, and mostly undependable. The magnificent hull was completely handicapped. It reminded me of some of my former cars of which brands I have avoided since being so badly betrayed. I used the same formula and criteria I choose in my family's vehicles:

--Dependability
--Dependable
--Reputation
--Warrantee
--Resale Value
--Dealer Reputation and support
--What do Government and Emergency First Responders use on their Whalers and their boats?
--Observation. I am a frequent traveler outside the US and I am a keen observer of what working fisherman use when service and parts can be hard to find, expensive and crippling to their livelihood.
--Do they Last?

My conclusion and choice: New Honda 90. The Coast Guard uses Honda. So does our Fire Department Rescue Whaler. They also use Stihl chainsaws for the same reasons. Best longest lasting most dependable. I only see Yamaha and Honda on work boats in the Caribbean and in Mexico. I know why.

I just bought a high performance SS Titan HR3 prop for even more giddy up.

[Engine running time is] 95-hours and zero problems to date.

Quiet to better [hear] the tunes and talk.

My second choice is Yamaha and third [choice] Suzuki.

Best of Luck.

Update on new Honda/Solas Titan HR3 19P propeller: Psyched! Gained performance from 15P aluminum prop to new stainless steel horsepower propeller: 37mph to 43. That is Serious Gain. Very Happy with my investment of high-tech, high-performance, and dependability.

Robbie7708
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:26 am

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby Robbie7708 » Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:32 am

I had an old 1986 VRO V4 Evinrude, which you needed to hop on one foot and flip the fuel line switch 7-1/2 times to start. Great theft deterrent but a pain when you just want to get up and go. I re-powered with a Yamaha 70FLA for a few reasons:

--the Yamaha dealer is right down the street from me;

--it's a 100-lbs lighter than most competitors; and,

--the boat still goes 35-MPH out on the water.

I have a 1972 Katama that is in pretty decent shape. I think after I re-paint the bottom and wax it and add maybe a stainless steel propeller, she'll go even faster. I think a 90 would just put me out of the water. (I'm also jumping waves in the ocean.). I think all the engines nowadays are great with the technology and all, but the Yamaha outputs NMEA 2000 signals which are easy to tap into. Put up a Lowrance 7Ti and bam, all the engine diagnostics on my screen.

Good luck. New motors are admirable when you're riding the waves, suck when you're paying the bill. Happy boating with your new motor.

PJMSport15MY1984
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2015 2:20 pm
Location: Marysville, WA

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby PJMSport15MY1984 » Wed Jul 06, 2016 3:17 pm

Hey Dan--How is the re-powering going? Have you made a decision yet?

Before even locating a dealer you want to do the job, I would do this first:

--make a file on your computer of all of the known variables you can possibly think of for this boat and new engine marriage;

--find out how much your current outboard weighs;

--go through the documentation of your boat to find the maximum horsepower, and maximum weight the transom can hold;

--examine how you use this boat;

--ask yourself these questions:

----how many people usually go boating with you?

----how much weight is in the boat as far as gear and people when you go boating?

----how long do you go boating on any particular day?

----how much fuel do you usually use in a day of boating, and

----how much fuel capacity do you plan on having in the boat at all times?

These are all things that will help you in purchasing your new outboard.

As I have said before, I would still make 90-HP the power range in your selection. I do think the Yamaha F70 is a great outboard, but it is more of an ideal candidate for an old classic Sport 15.

Good Luck.

Paul
Last edited by PJMSport15MY1984 on Wed Jul 06, 2016 8:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

jimh
Posts: 6937
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby jimh » Wed Jul 06, 2016 6:22 pm

If you recommend a 90-HP engine, why does Dan have to go through all that other stuff?

PJMSport15MY1984
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2015 2:20 pm
Location: Marysville, WA

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby PJMSport15MY1984 » Wed Jul 06, 2016 6:40 pm

All of the steps I listed are all very relevant when re-powering a whaler no matter what horsepower is chosen. They will make the re-power decision easier, and relevant to how the particular boat is being used--especially in this case where the amount of horsepower has not been determined.

Paul
Last edited by PJMSport15MY1984 on Wed Jul 06, 2016 8:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

jimh
Posts: 6937
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby jimh » Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:51 pm

They are all good questions, but I don't see how they lead directly to a choice of engine horsepower. A reader would have to make a lot of inferences about what each question's answer meant in terms of engine horsepower.

For example, you tell Dan he should find out how much his current engine weighs. How does knowing this help him select a new engine? Is he supposed to get a new engine that weighs the same? Weighs less? Weighs more? You need to include the instructions for how to proceed. Once he knows the current engine weight, what does he do with that fact?

Another example: you tell Dan he should find the maximum transom weight specified by the manufacturer for the hull. Again, what does he do with that data? Does he go for the an engine that weighs the maximum? Or weighs less? How much less? Can he consider an engine that weighs 5-lbs more than the maximum?

By the way, Boston Whaler has a habit of specifying the maximum engine weight to be the same as the weight of the engine they want to sell as a package in the boat-engine tie-in sale. And then they change the maximum weight the next year when a new model engine appears that weighs 15-lbs more than last year's engine.

I thought you gave a lot of advice, but at the very end said get a 90-HP engine. That seemed like a non sequitur, following all the steps you suggested.

But I agree with your direct recommendation to get a 90-HP engine for the 170 MONTAUK.

fireryan
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 5:36 pm

Re: 2003 170 Montauk Re-power with Four-stroke-cycle Engine

Postby fireryan » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:52 am

For the same model 2003 170 Montauk, I am awaiting the delivery of an Evinrude E-TEC 90 H.O. engine. I used some of the information found on this forum (and other forums) (which has already been stated) to make my selection. My proximity to dealer and the current promotion made the decision easier. My Evinrude dealer is four miles from my home, and they offered a promotion of free rigging and six-year warranty. Initially I went with the three-cylinder E-TEC 90, but after some discussion and guidance from the forum I chose the four-cylinder 90 H.O.