I have a 2002 160 Dauntless. I fish up to 15 miles offshore in northern California for salmon, often in lumpy conditions. The Dauntless handles chop fairly well--much better than my prior Dauntless15--but I'm thinking about upgrading to something that will handle rough water better. There are a couple of boats available nearby, a 1996 OUTRAGE 19 and a 1997 OUTRAGE 17, both in good shape with low-hour E-TEC engines.
[What is the] performance of the Dauntless 160 compared to an OUTRAGE 17 or OUTRAGE 19 in rough conditions?
It would cost a fair bit to upgrade but might be worth it if it willll save my kidneys and get me out and back a bit faster. Appreciate any opinions!
New to the forum but have been reading and appreciating all the wisdom.
160 Dauntless v. Outrage 17 or 19
Re: Dauntless 160 vs Outrage 17, 19
While both Outrage 19 and Outrage 17 II's are great boats, LOA is king.
Go for the Outrage 19, it will give you the attributes you are looking for.
Go for the Outrage 19, it will give you the attributes you are looking for.
1992 Outrage 17
2019 E-TEC 90
2018 LoadRite 18280096VT
Member since 2003
2019 E-TEC 90
2018 LoadRite 18280096VT
Member since 2003
Re: 160 Dauntless v. Outrage 17 or 19
If you want to go 15-miles offshore into the Pacific Ocean on a regular basis, I'd get a bigger boat. Look for an OUTRAGE 22 or OUTRAGE 25 hull. And get twin engines.
The classic Boston Whaler OUTRAGE hulls are really very good at running downwind in big waves. On that basis, I would suspect that if the sea state were low enough to allow you to get 15-miles offshore into head seas when you left port, then you could get back to shore if the sea state increased.
The classic Boston Whaler OUTRAGE hulls are really very good at running downwind in big waves. On that basis, I would suspect that if the sea state were low enough to allow you to get 15-miles offshore into head seas when you left port, then you could get back to shore if the sea state increased.