Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  20' Dauntless Impressions

Post New Topic  Post Reply
search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   20' Dauntless Impressions
Clark Roberts posted 08-15-2000 06:37 PM ET (US)   Profile for Clark Roberts   Send Email to Clark Roberts  
Today a friend, Tim Connolly, trailered his Dauntless 20 to my house and we tried to determine how water is getting into his gas tank! I had never seen this boat, which he bought new (with 200 Merc carb engine) about 4 years ago. I have owned a 13 Dauntless, along with my 40 + other classic Whalers, but had never driven or even closely inspected a 20 Dauntless ... later referred to as a "Ventura"... Tim's boat is white on white with green trim and the black commercial rub rail... the transom is straight and clean with no "Eurotransom" vestages... The bow-rider configuration fits his boating needs and his wife and family love it... I told Tim that it's an instant classic because it's not made anymore.. Folks, this is one solid , well layed out high quality boat! I went over all the hatches and bilge areas and quality seems very , very good! How does she perform and handle?! I'm very impressed! I tried to break it loose in a turn at varying speeds and it stuck like glue while riding over chop very comfortably... my route from dock to Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) is laced with narrow channels and oyster/sand bars which must me negotioated like a salom course and a hull that slips is doomed! The 20 Daunt ran it like on rails.. very fast)around 50mph)and accelleration is brisk and smooth!
Again, this is a very , very nice boat!!!
We decided that condensation in the big built in tank was the culprit... he is going to install a Rakor filter and keep a close eye on it.... Happy Whalin'... Clark
Alioop posted 08-15-2000 09:51 PM ET (US)     Profile for Alioop  Send Email to Alioop     
Clark, Does that dauntless have a combonation vent and fill pipe? I seem to remember reading somewhere whaler was replacing these on dauntless'due to water getting through them into the fuel tank. Mike
Clark Roberts posted 08-16-2000 07:04 AM ET (US)     Profile for Clark Roberts  Send Email to Clark Roberts     
This Dauntless has a plastic (flip-up cover) with the vent ! The boat came with a metal filler (separate vent) and was replaced by Whaler due to some defect (also it was leaking) ... Since the replacement all seems ok except for occasional water.. initially he had gallons of water in tank! He has had the boat back to Whaler once and to the dealer (Parker Boats near Orlando, Fla.) several times.. currently both vents are hooked up... note: my new 135 Optimax Merc has a "water-in-gas" alarm! How 'bout that! Happy Whalin'... Clark... Spruce Creek Navy
dgp posted 08-16-2000 08:04 AM ET (US)     Profile for dgp  Send Email to dgp     
Clark, when I had my Dauntless 17 it has the same fuel fill and seperate vent/overflow line. The vent line did not operate as it should and in the event of expanding gasoline due to temperature the gasoline would vent out of the fill cap, run down the gunnel and the down the side. Not only did this cause polution problems but blistered the BW logo decal on the hull. I lodged a complaint with the USCG but got no response.
In the two years of my ownership I never had water in the fuel problems and the boat came from the factory with a Quicksilver spin-on fuel filter.
BTW, I pick up my new 2001 Montauk w/ Mercury 50HP four stroke today.
Clark Roberts posted 08-16-2000 09:14 AM ET (US)     Profile for Clark Roberts  Send Email to Clark Roberts     
Don, you will absolutely "fall in love" with the Montauk/50hp combo!!! I have friends with Montauk/50 Evinrude, Montauk/50 Merc 2stroke, and Montauk/50hp Merc 4stroke.. All have good performance (around 35mph at WOT), all get exceptional economy, and best of all the lightweight engine makes for low overall draft and great handling... 4 adults and gear are no problem for any of the above.. Happy whalin' .... Clark
whalernut posted 08-16-2000 07:18 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Clark, I have a 1973 `16 Currituck and was thinking of repowering it because the 85h.p. Johnson is a gas hog and doesn`t troll very well and full throttle is a little too fast. I was thinking of a 60-70 h.p. OMC or Yamaha. I see alot of good used 50h.p. engines for sale cheap around me. What is the difference in speed and performance between the 50h.p. and 60/70 h.p. engines. Which engine would be better for overall use(fishing, tubeing, beating Lake Erie storms to my dock!, etc.) If the speed isn`t a whole lot of difference, I would consider a 50h.p. engine. I know the minimum is 35h.p. to plane satisfactory. Any comments would be very appreciated! Regards-Jack Graner.
Clark Roberts posted 08-16-2000 10:28 PM ET (US)     Profile for Clark Roberts  Send Email to Clark Roberts     
Jack, 70hp may be the ideal power for the 16'8" Whaler since it's sort of in the middle of the power range... a 70 of any make with trim & tilt and a stainless prop (all set-up properly) will run WOT at around 40mph plus or minus. With a 50hp with T & T and stainless prop set-up correctly will net about 35-36 mph at WOT... Some 50hp engines are actually about the same displacement at some 70hp engines... The current 50hp Merc 2 stroke is a 3 cyl with around 59 cubic inches displacement and the 70 hp OMC is about the same... so the 50 Merc has lots of torque compaired to smaller displacement 50hp like the 50 OMC with around 45 cubic inches.. I'm laboring the point here but simply put "the more cubic inches the better when load is high".. Is any of this making any sense??? Got to get a grip here,, heh, heh.... anyway, a 50 would serve you well but the 70 would probably be best for you... as the 35-36 mph might not suit you... only you can decide.. others my have differing advice... hang in there.... happy Whalin'... Clark

whalernut posted 08-17-2000 07:53 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Clark, thanks for the advise. David from Boston has a 1975 50h.p. Evinrude for sale on the forum. He sais with controls, freshwater only and is in great shape. Are these engines really weak from this year, or is it strong, is it enough to do the 30+ miles an hour. I love my 85h.p. top end, but it is a little strong for trolling and sucks up the fuel! Please comment. Regards-Jack Graner.
Lil Whaler Lover posted 08-17-2000 09:25 PM ET (US)     Profile for Lil Whaler Lover  Send Email to Lil Whaler Lover     
Keep in mind that a 1975 50 hp Evinrude was rated at the crankshaft not the propshaft. It would actually perform closer to a new 40 than a new 50 rated at the propshaft. Today the ratings have to be within 10% of the actual delivered horsepower at the prop. Most manufacturers are underrating, meaning a new 50 actually has more than 50 hp but less than 55. Bass and Walleye Boat magazine does very good comparison tests of outboards on identical hulls. They also give the rated HP and the actual HP, and provide in depth comparisons. I had a Currituck with an older (1969) 2 cylinder Johnson 50. Accelerated very leisurely up to an indicated 33 mph. Replaced it with a 3 cylinder Johnson 65 and got strong acceleration and an indicated 37-38 mph on the same speedometer. Both engines were propped to run at max rated RPM with 2 people in the boat. The 65 actually burned much less gas than the 50 at any comparable speed. I agree that a 3 cylinder 70 +/- hp is ideal for the original 16'7" hull. David
Clark Roberts posted 08-17-2000 09:29 PM ET (US)     Profile for Clark Roberts  Send Email to Clark Roberts     
Jack, I wouldn't buy any 1975 engine... just too much liability. A late model 50 with trim & tilt and stainless prop is what you need! The older are rated at crank and not at prop like current motors.. I would guess that the 1975 OMC 50hp put out maybe 45hp at prop at best.. Keep the 85 until you can get a bargain on a late model 50, 60 or 70hp and then make the leap... at least that is my advice! Again, you REALLY, REALLY need Trim & Tilt to realize the engines potential.. Happy Whalin.... Clark.. Spruce Creek Navy
whalernut posted 08-17-2000 09:42 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Thanks guys, I think I will wait and buy a late model-50,60,70h.p. engine. I have heard nothing but great things about the Tohatsu engines, but hard to find and it would seem even if I orderd one by mail order, how would I possibly get service satisfaction if something goes wrong. If under warranty, I might have to drive hundreds of miles for service! Any comments about this dilema, are Tohatsu`s all that good? Also did OMC make a 70h.p.SPL, I like their simplicity, and I know that they had a power tilt/trim option on the 88h.p.SPL. Did they have it for the 70h.p.SPL? Regards-Jack Graner.
Lil Whaler Lover posted 08-17-2000 11:18 PM ET (US)     Profile for Lil Whaler Lover  Send Email to Lil Whaler Lover     
OMC never had a 70 spl. They have 2 different series of 70's. The first ones were based on the original 3 cylinder 55 hp from the early 70's. these were about 49 cubic inches, revved quite well but were a little down on torque in comparison to the current series of 70's which have 56.1 cubic inches and are much stronger engines. If you go Tohatsu, get a triple not a twin which they built in rather high horsepower ratings (60 and 70) for a few years. David

whalernut posted 08-18-2000 05:23 AM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
David, do you know when OMC changed to the larger powerehead on the 70h.p. engines. When you say twin Tohatsu and triple. Do you meen 3cylinder and twin V 4cylinder or do you meen twin, just saying a 2 cylinder engine? Thanks-Jack Graner.
bigz posted 08-18-2000 05:57 AM ET (US)     Profile for bigz    
Jack G,

Try a Tohatsu dealer search here you might be surprised how many they have ---
http://www.tohatsu.com/dealersearch/index.html

Tom

bigz posted 08-18-2000 06:03 AM ET (US)     Profile for bigz    
Jack -- Dave means 2 cylinder and 3 cylinder----- they changed from 40hp up in around '98 or '99 to 3 cylinder set ups from 40hp up -- I think --- Tom
dgp posted 08-18-2000 07:02 AM ET (US)     Profile for dgp  Send Email to dgp     
Jack, based on all of your previous posts you seem to be such a pure-ist about Whalers that I can't believe your actually considering an off-brand, off-shore built outboard. What about all that Eastern pride stuff? What about parts, service and warranty and most of all what's the neighbors gonna say. Don
Lil Whaler Lover posted 08-18-2000 07:03 AM ET (US)     Profile for Lil Whaler Lover  Send Email to Lil Whaler Lover     
Jack and Tom,
OMC started building the 70 hp in the early 1970's and I think changed to the new powerhead using their "lost foam casting" technique in the early 1990's. I have the detail back in Maine and will be moving it here to Oneida Lake in New York at the end of next week. I will try to verify it then.
The Tohatsu (by the way Nissan's are exactly the same if you have trouble finding a Tohatsu dealer} build history is as follows: the 60 and 70 hp's were two cylinders up through 1991 models and became three cylinder engines in 1992. A huge improvement in this power range. The 40's and 50's were all twins up through 1990. In 1991 they built both 2 and 3 cylinders in both sizes. The fifty became all 3 cylinder in 1992, but the 40 came in both 2 and 3 cylinder versions right through 1998. Now they are all 3 cylinders. By the way I think that all the twins used pre-mix adn all the triples except manual start versions use oil injection.
Note this is a heck of a thread for this to be buried in. Hope it helps. Dave
bigz posted 08-18-2000 07:23 AM ET (US)     Profile for bigz    
Thanks Dave --- for the clarification on the dates these things happened --- because I just about purchased a '97 40hp LS Elect Remote -- passed since it was 2 cylinder and no t&t --- still would have been just ok for the 13 -- it only had a legit 20 or so hours on it --- would have to buy a CMC t&t at $450 which made the deal not such a good deal --- chuckle --- Tom
bigz posted 08-18-2000 07:32 AM ET (US)     Profile for bigz    
Don --- yikes your 100% right on!! I don't know what came over me (the devil must have made me do it)recommending Tohatsu sources to Jack of all folks with such a GREAT NEW ENGLAND pride for craftsmanship not to mention his strong conviction against anything not made north of the Mason Dixon Line --- chuckle --- gee I'm really sorry -- I'll go wash my mouth out with a little JD --- Tom
tbyrne posted 08-18-2000 10:01 AM ET (US)     Profile for tbyrne    
Jack, I can't believe you'd consider an OMC or Yahama product since they (just like Brunswick) both factory-rig their motors on lines of boats they own. Maybe you can find a used Homelite outboard.

Seriously though, why don't you look at a four-stroke in the 50 hp range. There's no oil to mix, exhaust to breatheand it'll troll better than any two-stroke. It should also provide you with enough speed for the occasional run from the weather.

My two cents - While you might pay more at a local dealer than you would via mail order or the Internet, you can expect better service if (when) you need it. I would expect a cool reception from a local dealer if you were looking for him to service a new motor that you bought online. My local lawnmower shop refuses to service mowers bought at Home Depot and I don't blame him, since they are trying to put him out of business.

Good luck with your decision.

whalernut posted 08-18-2000 05:34 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
O.K.-O.K., I am only a pureist with Whalers, not the engines. I am not happy with Brunswick with what they did with the Whalers, so I am against them. I just won`t buy a Mercury, not because of quality, but because to send Brunswick a message. I probably can`t hurt them alone, but every little bit counts. So you see, I would buy another brand of engine. I am very seriously looking towards the 4-strokes. The only thing that bothers me with them is the power to weight ratio. I really like the 70h.p. Evinrude, but it is as heavy as a tank. Maybee the 50h.p. Evinrude is enough. Please comment. Regards-Jack Graner.
Clark Roberts posted 08-18-2000 06:18 PM ET (US)     Profile for Clark Roberts  Send Email to Clark Roberts     
Jack, Mercury Marine, like Whaler, hasn't always been a Brunswick company! Would you buy an old Merc made before Brunswick took over? Guess I don't get the point of your apparent anger... hope you get a motor that serves you well! Clark.. The Old Man and the Sea
whalernut posted 08-19-2000 04:36 AM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Clark, I had a long response written out, but couldn`t get through last night. Well, basically I don`t like what brunswick has done to the styling and in my opinion the quality of the new Whalers. I don`t like that you can`t customize the recreational line anymore. I don`t like the fact that you have to take a Mercury engine with the boat. If I want a Whaler without an engine, then thats how I want it. There are dealers having to give up their Whaler sales because of this devious practice, just because the dealer sells and promotes other brands of engines. I really can`t stand Marine Max dealers, these guys are just Yuppy Sea Ray dealers. They look like Slick Willy used car salesman, and know very little, if anything about boats in general, let alone Boston Whalers. As for the older Mercury outboards, I may buy a used good one before Brunswick owned them, but definately a early nineties model as I don`t care for the quality of the older ones. Regards-Jack Graner.
Ger posted 08-20-2000 12:06 AM ET (US)     Profile for Ger  Send Email to Ger     
To Jack et al...Everybody here is a Whaler fan or we wouldn't own one but that doesn't mean that they were or are a perfect boat. My 72 Katama as all the classics is a rough wet ride,has the leaky drain tube, the silly stern light wiring, lack of stowage space etc. but I like it! I don't expect everyone to like it, and I don't criticize them for liking another type or year of boat. This line of harangue is getting old. Constructive threads are so much more interesting.
bigz posted 08-20-2000 07:24 AM ET (US)     Profile for bigz    
Ger--- I heartily second your notion --- then again sort of comic to listen to Jack rant and rave --- guess some of the newer members might not understand his "programming" and be turned off --- which certainly would be a shame --- because a little controversy is always good for the "soul" as I am learning --- heh heh --Tom
whalernut posted 08-20-2000 10:28 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Programing, what programing? "Danger Will Robinson-Danger". Dr. Smith Watch Out! Shut Up You Babling Fool! He-He! Regards to Ger.

Post New Topic  Post Reply
Hop to:


Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.