Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  New Montauks

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

Author Topic:   New Montauks
compounder posted 08-03-2001 02:25 PM ET (US)   Profile for compounder   Send Email to compounder  
As most of us here, I am generally more interested in older Whalers. However, when I stopped by the local Whaler dealer this morning I noticed he had just gotten in a new shipment. Took a close look at the 2002 Montauk. Decal on the side says" Montauk 170." Haven't seen that designation before. Only real changes I could discern were an apparently standard equipment bilge pump. The pump was plumbed to the splash well. This was the first time I had seen this also.
The rub rail seemed much larger and softer....looks a little too bulky to me but probably is more functional. The SS rails seem somehow "cheaper".......more crudely assembled. The large BW insignia near the stern is some sort of thick,maybe foam-filled decal that has an extremely high gloss and doesn't feel like it would be very durable.

I don't want to sound negative because it's a nice boat, but I didn't seem any real improvement over my 1980 model.

Dick posted 08-03-2001 03:28 PM ET (US)     Profile for Dick  Send Email to Dick     
I haven't seen a 2002 yet but on my 1999 the bilge pump was standard and plumbed into the splash well, the Whaler decals on the aft sides are the real decal. It had the Montauk 17 graphics on the side, self adhesive backing that doesn't last long. Sounds like that is what they are using instead of the aft decals.
GAwhale posted 08-03-2001 04:36 PM ET (US)     Profile for GAwhale  Send Email to GAwhale     
On my 2001 Montauk the bilge pump is the same as you are describing. It has a float switch. (will kick on when you dump in a bucket of water and then shut off when the water is gone - no way to turn this off unless you pull a fuse)

I have the same graphics you are describing. So far they have held up fine. The graphics look very good in contrast with the shiny black Mercury Saltwater Series Engine.

Whaletosh posted 08-03-2001 05:03 PM ET (US)     Profile for Whaletosh    
This is one of the changes for 2002. Whalers will be named with 3 number ala. Sea Ray.

So the Montauk 17 is now the Montauk 170, the Outrage 23 will be an Outrage 230. Sutpid is as stupid does, hopefully this is only a change in the name and not in the boats.

Dick posted 08-03-2001 05:23 PM ET (US)     Profile for Dick  Send Email to Dick     
The Whalers have been known by a 3 digit number for years in their price books, etc. Didn't think they would ever change the graphics though. 170 Montauk, just doesn't sound right.
Buckda posted 08-03-2001 06:09 PM ET (US)     Profile for Buckda  Send Email to Buckda     
If the folks at Brunswick were really PR savvy, they'd have a guy that checked out forums like this one regularly. He'd chat with us about our preferences, what we like and don't like, etc.
The key would be to keep your loyal customers (and potential - remember, I still have to buy my Whaler, and am still undecided to go the more economical route by purchasing a "pre-owned" whaler or buy a new one...but I digress) keep your loyal customers happy so all they have to say is positive (as much as is possible).
Maybe they should give me a job.
Problem is, you have to convince the decision-makers to cut into the profit margins a bit to keep the quality. Still, BW has survived for a long time being a low margin - high quality product...I don't see why that should change...
GAwhale posted 08-03-2001 06:39 PM ET (US)     Profile for GAwhale  Send Email to GAwhale     
Why do I get the feeling that the marketing department has something to do with the name Montauk 170? They are like sheep always watching what the other guy is doing.

Even though Boston Whaler employees are not supposed to participate in a forum like this (IE. Chuck Bennet); my gut feeling is that they are smart enough to monitor it and follow the trends.

My two cents.

Buckda posted 08-03-2001 07:12 PM ET (US)     Profile for Buckda  Send Email to Buckda     
It's a free Internet...someone who works for Whaler shouldn't be barred from the discussion.

My point is that I've been reading through this forum for a few weeks now, and have not seen any "official company line" from ANY BW employee.

And, more to your point, I am in the PR business - and believe me, you'd be surprised at how few companies / corporate execs would even think of monitoring chat rooms for misinformation / customer dissatisfaction. Hard to believe - I know, but it's true. Forums like this are such an easy way for a company to guage the reaction of it's "actively involved" customer base, yet very few companies do it. Why? It's kinda' hard to put a Dollar figure as to the value of such monitoring. Since it can't really be quantified, they have trouble justifying it in any budgets.

OK..enough PR 101...I just think that they should pay attention...that's all.

(That's my $.02)
Jeez....I'm starting to sound like Bigshot!



Kelly posted 08-03-2001 10:50 PM ET (US)     Profile for Kelly  Send Email to Kelly     
This is what I think. The only reason Brunswick bought Whaler in the first place was to add credibility to the Mercury outboards by association and to improve their saltwater visibility. That has been accomplished and they used the good name of Boston Whaler to do it. Now what I think you can expect to see is Burnswick basically squeezing all the value they can out of the "Unsinkable" legend without putting any real value back into the line. At some point, I think they will shift their emphasis to one of the other lines for saltwater and Whaler type boats, and sell the Whaler name while it still has value. Maybe we should get a group together and make an offer. Kelly
Peter posted 08-04-2001 12:09 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
On my way home from work today I heard a commercial on the radio by a Sea Ray/Whaler dealer. They were promoting their end of season clearance sale and it sounded like one of those cheesy car clearance commercials--you know the type where the announcer is nearly screaming "hurry on down....gota make room for the 2002s..... at these prices we're nearly giving them away and they won't last....". I thought to myself, is this what Whaler has been reduced to? I thought it was totally out of character for the promotion of a Whaler, Sea Ray maybe, but definitely not Whaler.
dgp posted 08-04-2001 07:13 AM ET (US)     Profile for dgp  Send Email to dgp     
Looking at BW's revised web site for 2002, the standard engine for the Montauk is now a 40HP two stroke. That's gotta be a typo or someone at Whaler has lost their mind trying to keep the entry price low. Options are for the 60 or 90HP four stroke.
I would have guessed they would make the 60 HP four stroke standard and 90HP either 2 or 4 stroke as options.
GAwhale posted 08-04-2001 08:14 AM ET (US)     Profile for GAwhale  Send Email to GAwhale     
I also took a look at the 2002 Whaler Website. The pictures of the Montauk are the same as last year.

They are still using the cheesy six gallon fuel tanks that slide all over the place. The rubbber mats are designed for steel tanks. Boston Whaler needs to come up with a better factory set up on the Montauk fuel tanks. I read in this forum that portable fuel tanks (above deck mounted) must be six gallon per Coast Guard(?). There simply must be a better way from the factory.

triblet posted 08-04-2001 08:35 AM ET (US)     Profile for triblet  Send Email to triblet     
You can have tanks bigger than six gallons
above deck, they just aren't considered
"portable" any more, so you gotta have a
fire extinguisher, etc.

I thought it was seven gallons, not six,
but I'd rather go prep the boat for today's
dive than look it up just now.


Bigshot posted 08-04-2001 02:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
Did'nt Brunswick try this with Mako back in 94 or so? Whaler still has a chance to keep its rep if they get out in the next few years. Seems all the big companys can ruin a boat reputation. OMC did it to Donzi, AMF did it to Harley and Hatteras before the employees bought them back,etc. Whaler already has the "new" budget 13' and I will hate to see what comes next. Boat/motor/trailer "deals" should be left to Bayliner, not BW.
Whaletosh posted 08-04-2001 02:27 PM ET (US)     Profile for Whaletosh    
Didn'r Brunswick own AMF at one time?
Kelly posted 08-04-2001 04:52 PM ET (US)     Profile for Kelly  Send Email to Kelly     
The last time I looked, it did not appear that any of the executive officers for Brunswick have any kind of boating background. Brunswick manufacturers and sells widgets. It just so happens that some of their widgets are caled Boston Whalers. That is fine if I am a stock holder. It doesn't serve me very well as a sentimental old fool that likes Whalers. Kelly
GAwhale posted 08-04-2001 05:46 PM ET (US)     Profile for GAwhale  Send Email to GAwhale     
I believe Chuck is correct, it is seven gallon tanks.

I double checked; my boat came with two cheesy 6.6 gallon (or 25 liter) red plastic quick silver fuel tanks that slid all over the place.

Dick posted 08-04-2001 06:34 PM ET (US)     Profile for Dick  Send Email to Dick     
You can't realy blame Boston Whaler for the funkey tanks. They are dealer installed, at least were up through last year. The Montauks came in with engine installed but no fuel tanks.
We had some good salesmen, prior to closing the deal the buyer was brought to the parts department and I was given the oppertunity to accessorize the boat, Electronics, fuel system etc.
GAwhale posted 08-04-2001 09:20 PM ET (US)     Profile for GAwhale  Send Email to GAwhale     
This is how the purchase of my boat went. I had stopped by TAL Marine in November of 2000 when I went to look at a used Newport at Lake Lanier. They had one new Montauk under shrink wrap for $21,995.

On Saturday January 6, 2001 at the Atlanta Boat Show. I had made up my mind to buy a Montauk and was hoping there would be one on display. Unfortunately they had a 13, 16 Dauntles, and one or two big Whalers on display. The Whaler Rep and the salesperson couldn't give me a better price on the Montauk. I sat down with one of the owners and she said they would come down $1,300 for a boat show price. The price was good until the next day (the last day of the boat show). I put down a credit card number and made an appointment for the following Saturday to test drive the boat. The following Saturday my wife and I test drove the boat, paid for her, and pulled her home.

The dealer (new to Boston Whaler) made the comment that the boat was delivered without fuel tanks. They said those were the tanks shown in the brochure and that's what they installed.

whalernut posted 08-05-2001 11:27 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
As most older members know I am not even close to a Newer designed Whaler fan or of Brunswick for that matter. I don`t like the new rubrails, then gauges are cheap, and the new Euro-styling is just awfull, and I also prefer the Dessert Tan gelcoat. But I believe as many of you do that Brunswick is Sea Raying the Whalers for profit and not Classic Whaler buyers and dodn`t really care if we buy them! I used to also like Sea Rays, but not since they Ero-Styled them and made them plasticy looking, as all boats seam to look like now, a plastic toy. Regards-Jack Graner.
jimh posted 08-06-2001 08:15 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
I think the model naming with three digits is a stupid move. They have changed forty years of tradition and practice. For what? So they are more like all the other little bow-riders on the market?

If the Montauk is now a "170" why isn't it a "167", since that is its real length.

Next on the larger boats they will spell out the name, like "Whaler One Seventy", as they do on the larger SeaRay boats. That is totally ridiculous.


Free Willy posted 08-06-2001 09:03 AM ET (US)     Profile for Free Willy  Send Email to Free Willy     
Sport 13.33, or do we round up ?? :?(
Bigshot posted 08-06-2001 09:41 AM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
That is good Jim. I have problems reading those SeaPigs.
Chesapeake posted 08-06-2001 09:59 AM ET (US)     Profile for Chesapeake  Send Email to Chesapeake     
First of all, my tastes are similar to what everyone else has better described in this thread. You can choose to think about it from another perspective... They cannot change the name / model number of our classic whalers, making them that much more original!!

While I don't agree with their monkeying around with the whaler tradition, I would think and hope that Brunswick understands the preferences and demographics of today's new boat buyers. Assuming that they do, perhaps, just perhaps, they will sell enough or more whalers to justify continuing to own the whaler franchise and prolonging its legend. Regardless of how quirky these birds seem to be, we should all hope they understand the consumer and are successful. The alternative isn't all that pretty for us or them.

BTW, someone should e-mail the VP of sales and marketing and give him the address of this site. While he may think we are dinosaurs or purists, they may get some valuable info to assist in product development. Dick, from your Whaler days, do you have a name or a contact?

Just my opinion.

Bob (Chesapeake)

Bigshot posted 08-06-2001 02:44 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
They have a place on their site for "Your Whaler Story" or something. Let them know how you feel, somebody has to read it. They have a phone number,E-mail or call them too. Gonna go home soon and pull my 'One Sixty Seven Classic' out today for a DEEP cleansing.
Bigshot posted 08-06-2001 02:50 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
One last thing...This is like when Mercury(also Brunswick but maybe not then)added a zero to their engines. I had the only 9' Squall with a 40 on it. They also called their 9.8hp a 110, 45hp a "classic fifty" Their 225EFI was closer to 250 and designated special names without hp displayed like the XRi, 2.5EFI, 2.4 Bridgeport,Laser, etc. Anyhow, they dropped the extra zero in 1978 I think so why do they think it will work now. Are the going to rebadge the 90 4stroke to a 900?
bigz posted 08-06-2001 03:02 PM ET (US)     Profile for bigz    
This site is monitored, not only by BW but also a heck of a lot of dealers!

This topic has been discussed since this forum opened a year ago Feb. and frankly never lead any where or will it.

Boston Whaler both divisions are successful period. They understand the consumer pretty darn well or they wouldn't be! To add to this BW was 2nd in consumer satisfaction in the latest JD Powers poll! They where tied with Scout and actually the top 3 were very close. In all real terms Grady White, BW and Scout all are on equal footing when it comes down to customer satisfaction. Now take a look at BW's competition boats --- see any similarities!!!

With some it's anything to nit pick like the number change! So who cares that it is called an Outrage 260. What meaning does that have on the older Whalers other than the Montauk, Cohasset, etc. which were the only ones to have actual "names", the older boats were know as an Outrage xx, even the 13 was an x name 13 - Revenge xx heck they could have named them xxx instead! Now for instance would that have stopped LHG or Clark from buying an Outrage 250 or a Revenge 210 heh heh back when or even used today !!

Sure we can state we have owned, do own, want to own, and will own an old Whaler then all swoon in unison, maybe even wax a little nostalgic just as say Porsche collectors do when the same type of statement is made! Cool! People in this group don't buy new boats for the most part, so why in the heck should Brunswick or BW cater to them? To keep the "legend" alive! --- I don't think so because the only "legend" was the original 13 introduced in 1958 and it's off springs which can include the newly designed 2001 version. During it's time changes were made continuely -- today's maybe more than a "little"

It boils down to why keep playing the same old song new vs. old since it just doesn't play very well when there ain't nothing wrong with either the old if it suits or the new if that fits one's needs. Tom

PS to a BS "One last thing..." certainly hope it is your one last thing -----

Bigshot posted 08-06-2001 03:45 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
For you BIGZ I will make an exception! Who loves you baby....probably nobody. Anyway the fact is they are #2 in satisfaction with 2 other respectable companies. We want to keep it that way. They have done little if nothing for Juris this year so maybe for 2002 they will be #10. Like you said, we are not the "new buying crowd" but one day we will be buying these used and want to make sure they are just as good. Is a 1980 better built than a 1970, probably not, if so only by a small margin, like product improvements such as non absorbing foam. Is a 1990 built better than a 1980, probably not. Are the 2000's better than the 1990, better not be any worse, that is what we are saying.
That new 13 at $8995 is probably not as well built as the 1998 13 at $13k. Whalers are soo expensive due to their manufacturing costs. How can a 13 boat drop $4k if the quality is still there? Hopefully they are loss leaders or the new style makes them that more efficient to build but I doubt it. That Montauk is the same boat as a 1976, it should get cheaper just because of lack of tooling costs. Has it, NO. Why because whaler is not stupid, they know people will pay for the name. So why cut the 13's price? People would have paid 12-13k if they named it a 13 Dauntless, oops a Dauntless 130. I believe most of what you are saying and yes it does not "really" matter as long as it is still a Whaler, but why rock the boat.
It will be sad if they redesign the montauk which they probably will someday, then they should rename it like in 76. Used to be a 16. Everyone loves the 911's still not sure why they changed the name.
Free Willy posted 08-06-2001 06:14 PM ET (US)     Profile for Free Willy  Send Email to Free Willy     
06/AUG/2001 Reuters, Brunswick Corp. NYSE BC today announced that the Boston Whaler line of boats will be renamed. A spokesperson for Boston Whaler boats, VonSchmidt VonGoink stated, "The new metric designation in metres will make worldwide recognition much easier and more marketable globally". He went on,"these silly Americans still don't know a Montauk 170 is only 16 feet 7 inches Das Boot has been made in America for over 25 years, this WILL clear things up make no mistake about it". BC was off 2.25 at the New York close.
lhg posted 08-06-2001 06:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for lhg    
Naming Whalers as SeaRay names theirs, is just another nail in the "independent Boston Whaler" coffin. Really bad judgement, as trivial as it may sound. Will the bow pulpits and engine platforms now be added to overall boat length for selling purposes? I have suspected this is being done already. Visually, BW's no longer stand out among the crowd (except for the MOntauks and CPD's), and this sure confirms it. The name "Montauk 17" must have been "broke", so some marketing idiot fixed it. Once they go to thee digits, any mathematician will tell you they loose the right to "round it off". The boat should now be a "Montauk 167"

Could it be they are migrating Whaler over to a model name under Sea Ray, as in the now defunct "Laguna"? When will the new Whaler jet boat reappear, to compete with the Yamaha and SeaDoo blobs?

Just got back from a 7 day boat trip in Canada. You know what we heard most? "Sure like these Whalers (mine and others with us) but don't like the new ones much".

Buckda posted 08-06-2001 06:33 PM ET (US)     Profile for Buckda  Send Email to Buckda     
Funny Willy...but they're only down .26 on the day. :)

LHG - I agree 100 percent with those folks...
The classics just look better.

whalernut posted 08-06-2001 10:02 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Well said Larry, I have been saying this for years and it seams it is finally getting more people upset, good maybee more people will speak up and e-mail Whaler and bust their balls like I do all the time. I bash Brunswick any time I can for what they have done to Boston Whaler and the Classics in general. They should be ashamed and people should stop buying them and teach them a lessen once and for all! And then that statement about Americans not being smart enough to know a Montauk is `16"7, that is rediculous at best! If they change the name of the Boston Whalers, I actually will not be that upset, because it will finally make them the Sea Rays that they really are! I say a new model from them or something that looks like a Scout boat-UGH! I hope Brunswick`s stock crashes like 2 trains colliding! Regards-Jack Graner.
Free Willy posted 08-06-2001 10:34 PM ET (US)     Profile for Free Willy  Send Email to Free Willy     
Please be advised that my previous post reflects my somewhat sick sense of humor and should not be taken seriously. It was a bad joke for which I apologize. Guess I should have remembered that "War of the Worlds" thing. Brgds Bill.
whalernut posted 08-06-2001 10:43 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Dood, be careful! Some of us take Classic Whalers very seriously and already are very upset with Brunswick! You really got my blood pressure up with that one! Actually in a sick way, I wish you were serious! I wish they would change the name of the Boston Whalers to something else, so Dick Fisher can rest in peace and me too! Regards-Jack Graner. Long live Dick Fisher!
triblet posted 08-06-2001 11:00 PM ET (US)     Profile for triblet  Send Email to triblet     
And some of us recognize that the world
moves on. I LIKE not having to take care
of wood. I'd rather go diving. The wood
looks great when it's cared for, but there
are an awful lot of whalers with ratty wood.

I do agree that I don't like the Euro
transoms, but that's functional -- they take
up space that's not useful for dive gear.
It's not an aesthetic opinion. Form follows


LarrySherman posted 08-06-2001 11:07 PM ET (US)     Profile for LarrySherman  Send Email to LarrySherman     
You all should read Brunswicks last annual report. They are not doing anything they didn't talk about. Improved sysnergy between divisions, Eye on the bottom line. Returns for shareholders. No mention of ensuring that the "Unsinkable Legend" stays afloat. As a matter of fact, if you look at the "Why Whaler" section of the Recreational part of the site, they show a picture of a dauntless being cut in half with a guy in the bow. This is obviously the before picture, with a few strands of glass left to hold the bow afloat. If they were confidant in their product (read: had not compromised it for the sake of profits), wouldn't the picture be ala' Dick Ficher in the 13?

Yup. Sure would. The "Unsinkable Legend" could use a little more foam...

Arch Autenreith posted 08-06-2001 11:25 PM ET (US)     Profile for Arch Autenreith  Send Email to Arch Autenreith     
I haven't heard anyone suggest the possibility that the euro transom might be a form of an Armstrong bracket or Whalerdrive. What got me thinking of it is someone's picture on Cetacea page 39 of a Edgewater 260 from the rear quarter showing the euro style topsides and the lower half cut so as not to create drag on plane while at the same time supporting the engines while at rest. The Whalerdrive isn't all that different in some respects: extending the engine further back while at the same time giving structural support at rest and while operating without having an 'added on' look the brackets can have. Form might indeed be following function here.
Dick posted 08-06-2001 11:57 PM ET (US)     Profile for Dick  Send Email to Dick     
Why is everyone bashing Brunswick and Sea Ray?
As a Montauk owner I like the classic Boston Whalers but if they do not sell changes have to be made. The bottom line is profit, with out it a manufacturer is not going to produce. You and I may not like the new models but if they sell it will keep the name alive. If you can't sell, say, a 15 Super Sport shelve it and make something that will sell.
Look at some of the great names like Austin Healey, MG & Sunbeam that are no longer around because they didn't change with the consumers demands.
Brunswick and Boston Whaler bashing is only going to scare potential Whaler buyers away. If this happens ther will be no Boston Whaler. Shareholders rule.
B Bear posted 08-07-2001 10:20 AM ET (US)     Profile for B Bear  Send Email to B Bear     
Let me agree that changing the number designation on the models is quite lame, there is no need for it nor does it make it easier to remember or refer to, it lacks the ring of a name that brings a certian positive image to mind. It is a bad idea. As I have expressed my feelings that the newest thing off the drawing board is not always the best in engines, it so with hulls too. I don't want to get into it with the Auccutrak hulls, since they now have been around long enough to show their worth, so lets keep all that stuff a non-issue.
This is something to consider, Henry Ford figured out if you can make enough of them you can lower the price. I don't think that a lower pice on a package deal is all that out of line considering the number made and sold with the benefits of buying in mass for a package.
Besides there is no need to justify the new whalers to most of you who are displeased with the new lines, unless you own stock in Burnswick or BW. How many of you will ever buy a newer Whaler? My guess is zero, so you pull your hair, increase your blood pressure and get upset about something you have no control over? Enjoy what you have and let the buying public dictate what happens to BW and their lines, if you want to infulance BW to increase production or expand the classic hull line you should be trying to have more people buy the Montauk, and buy some stock so you can bring these issues up at the stockholders meetings.
You know as well as I that if people do not like the new lines that they will change, remember what happened to Coca-Cola after they decided to produce the new coke and drop the classic to compete with Pepsi. The new is gone and the classsic is still here becuase people just quit buying Coca-Cola. Is that the plan here? It'll never happen, people want a smoother ride more women are infulancing the choices being made. There will always be a place for the Montauk and the classic hull, it's price will go up if its selling share is smaller, but it will still sell.
Buy some stock and really make a difference.
Bigshot posted 08-07-2001 11:29 AM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
You are correct! Change is good as long as it is for the better. Do not think people would still buy a Corvette with 1961 technology when compared to a 2001. I know I am happier with my 1998 Yamaha than a 1961 Johnson.
lhg posted 08-07-2001 03:20 PM ET (US)     Profile for lhg    
All this talk about "New Technology, which results in new Glitzy shapes" being better in Whalers is baloney. New hull design, shape and construction is not better just because it's new. And cheaper, to please Joe Q (uninformed) Public, is not always better either. Both applies to the new boats, unfortunately.

I would actually like to have a "new improved Technology" Boston Whaler to buy. I can afford it, and I would buy one. It's just that they don't exist, at least in the 18, 25 and 27' forms I'm interested in.

Trade in my mint twin engine, Offshore & Cruising capable 18 Outrage for a single engine "180" Dauntless with an Optimax + 20 grand? You've got to be kidding! In no way, under any possible criteria, including ride and sea keeping ability, is the new better than the old. I don't care what the marketing hype is. The 18 Outrage is superior technology and design.

Trade in my 25 Outrage with trouble free Merc EFI engines for a 260 Outrage with 3 liter Optimax's + 40 grand? Now you're REALLY kidding. Not for class, not for looks, not for ride and overall sea keeping, not for weight, economy and performance, not for trailering ability, not for yacht-like quality. The 25 Outrage is superior overall technology and design.

What am I missing here? A 2002 Chevy Suburban may be better than a 1989 Chevy Suburban, but BW has yet to convince ME the same applies in their boats.

There seems to be an underlying minority opinion that those of us who like the "Classics" are just nostalic, anti-technology, old fools. Hardly!
I think we're buying and holding on to the Classics because of what they are in comparison to the new offerings. They were years ahead of their time in design and technology, highly innovative for their time, and most current models have yet to catch up.

blackdog posted 08-07-2001 03:42 PM ET (US)     Profile for blackdog  Send Email to blackdog     
18 Daunltess, 1-150 opti I looked at stickered for $37,000. Yikes!

Bigshot posted 08-07-2001 04:05 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
True true true! Especially when they insult you on the trade. Oh Mr xyz, That 94 Montauk books at $7000, do we have a deal? Week later it is on their lot for $14,500. They have to make a profit of course there are many ways of hiding the profit. Yet boat dealers always seem to do it on the trade. Maybe they really don't want it. Whaler dealer in 1998 has a 17 Montauk for around $20k. Wants to give me $2,000k(book is only $1600) for my 83 15' CC with a 1990 70hp that is pretty mint and worth somewhere around $6k. Asks me if I have any questions, Just 1 I reply! "If everything you say about whalers is true, WHY would I spend $20k+ on a boat that in 15 years is worth only $2k"? He could not answer that at all and I walked. If he gave me a fair mkt value, say $4-5k, I might have REALLY considered it.
TampaTom posted 08-07-2001 04:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for TampaTom  Send Email to TampaTom     
What do you think of this...

Kind of has that classic Whaler feel.

GAwhale posted 08-07-2001 05:18 PM ET (US)     Profile for GAwhale  Send Email to GAwhale     
With commercial airplanes, technology is all about weight savings and fuel economy (two engines). They are built with thinner metal and lots more composite materials (gets waterlogged like old whalers and much more expensive to repair than metal). Will they last as long? I don't think so?

With pleasure boats technology is all about manufacturing savings and options. My impression is that the big whalers are luxury yachts. Will they last as long? I don't think so.

B Bear posted 08-07-2001 05:36 PM ET (US)     Profile for B Bear  Send Email to B Bear     
Gee I did not read anything about technology here. The manufacturing process is basicly the same, are you refering to the 6 axis milling machines, computer aided design?
I thought the jest of this thread in the begining was there is no great improvement in the 2002 Montauk compared to the 1980 model. Why would they want to change something that is proven and fine as it is except to make it less maintence?
There are more people that want Montauks than there are used Montauks. In the 18 to 30 foot range is it not possible to buy a new larger classic hull from the commercial divison and outfit it the way you want? I am sure that they are using that 6 axis milling machine that is computer contolled to make the hull forms for those too.
Using your example why would I buy a 2002 Chevy Suburban for $40,000 if a 1989 will do everything I want for $4500? The answer is how 1989 burbs are mint. Not many. But wait another 11 years and you can buy that 2002 burb for about $4500, thank goodness it is not the case for Whalers. So everything cost more new than old, and in current dollars compared to past dollars they are still about the same. Also it more prudent to sell than trade, unless it is a jet boat, when getting in the market for another boat.
Regaurdless, it seems that Boston Whaler has always followed form follows function. Boston Whaler is not a glitzy boat by no means. Leave that to Maxum, SeaRay, Wellcraft, Crownline and those other Boat biulders. In fact they are quite spartan compared to the others.
LHG, honestly noone has ever labeled you or others as you sated "There seems to be an underlying minority opinion that those of us who like the "Classics" are just nostalic, anti-technology, old fools." Contrary to this everyone here holds the older Classics in high regaurd and have an admiration for those who have taken the time to care and have them. Have you heard (or read) of anyone bashing the classics on these forums? Besides I know you like and keep up with new technology from your other posts.
compounder posted 08-07-2001 06:19 PM ET (US)     Profile for compounder  Send Email to compounder     
Hey guys, when I started this thread I did not mean to start a "new vs. old" controversy. I was simply stating what I observed and how I interpreted it.

I think the new Montauks I looked at are darned nice boats! But, this particular dealer is asking well in excess of $25,000 for a not-so-well-equipped package. Maybe it's just personal preference, but I think a brand new model which is IDENTICAL to my 1980 would be a "better" deal in every way.

Without looking at my old paperwork, from memory I'd say my 1980 with Evinrude 115 was less that $10,000 well-equipped. Some of you financial gurus out there can do the inflation math and tell us how that compares with today's prices. On the surface it seems that a 2002 Montauk would be a little less boat for a good bit more money. If I were in the market for a 17ft center console right now, and could not buy a used Montauk, I would have to give serious consideration to other brands. Wow, that sure was hard to say!
I probably would not be satisfied with any other brand.

I know I'm wandering here, but, as an aside, my 24 year old son thinks the 2002 is great and cannot understand why I still prefer the older boats. So, maybe it's just an "over 50" thing!

One last thing.....the Montauks were the only Whalers on the lot without Mercury engines installed. Are some models still shipped this way to allow dealers to install the customer's preferred brand outboard? All the 13's and all the very large boats that had just come in were still shrink-wrapped with the Mercury engines already installed.

GAwhale posted 08-07-2001 06:23 PM ET (US)     Profile for GAwhale  Send Email to GAwhale     

What technology did Boston Whaler use to lower the price of the 13 Footer?

I feel certain that they are not losing money or just breaking even on this model. I can picture the Marketing guys wanting a low priced intro Whaler. Perhaps targeting some buyer who was considerng a Personal Watercraft. The thinking is that once he's 'hooked' he'll move up to a bigger Whaler. That's where the big profit is.

dgp posted 08-07-2001 06:40 PM ET (US)     Profile for dgp  Send Email to dgp     
compounder, $10K in 1980 dollars is $23K in Y2K dollars. Source:
compounder posted 08-07-2001 08:15 PM ET (US)     Profile for compounder  Send Email to compounder     
Thanks dgp, that's interesting. Seems the new rig is priced just about right!
B Bear posted 08-07-2001 09:58 PM ET (US)     Profile for B Bear  Send Email to B Bear     
I believe the answer is, as I had posted above:

"Henry Ford figured out if you can make enough of them you can lower the price. I don't think that a lower pice on a package deal is all that out of line considering the number made and sold with the benefits of buying in mass for a package."
BW makes alot of 13 hulls, buys the package items; trailers, engines and rigging in volume. The more units the less per unit cost. Prerig at the factory. .
This cuts costs and reduces prices, maintains profit margins. Sorta like ordering the #3 on a menu instead of ala carte.This also why a unrigged bot will end up costing more, everything for it will be retail.
No technology is used to lower the price of a 13 footer.

lhg posted 08-08-2001 02:41 PM ET (US)     Profile for lhg    
Boston Whalers are now pre-rigged with engines at the factory for the following reasons, in order of importance: (order is MY guess)

1. To sell Mercury Outboards, by eliminating either the Dealer's or customer's choice.

2. To prevent a Brunswick boat from being seen with a non-Brunswick engine.

3. To protect Dealer's profit margins, by preventing a buyer from shopping around to other Dealers selling Mercuy or non-Mercury engines. Engines have HUGE markups, boats don't. This alone adds a lot to the cost of new Boston Whaler that can't be negotiated away. I have bought 3 Whalers new, and have never bought the engines from the selling Dealer, since I could find them for less elsewhere (an un-packaged deal).

4. To assure that BW's are properly rigged and eliminate potential call-back problems.
Also to assure they are not overpowered.

But, they forgot about one thing. Now BW and the Dealer are legally liable for engine problems (like Optimax), no matter what kind of disclaimers they try to use. Just like Ford has taken the hit on Bridgestone/Firestone tires.

Bigshot posted 08-08-2001 03:10 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
I did mention in Juris Optimax post that as of 2001 you could still order any whaler w/o power. You could get it pre-rigged for OMC or Merc(maybe Yamaha) or nothing at all. whaler dealer by my dad does this because he is a Johnson and Yamaha(& now Merc) dealer but prefers the Yamahas.
B Bear posted 08-08-2001 03:58 PM ET (US)     Profile for B Bear  Send Email to B Bear     
Bigshot you are correct about ordering a hull without prerig or power. I have talked to two dealerships one in Maryland and one in Delaware recently, both have stated I can get any engine make I wanted only it woould be more expensive due to rigging costs.
The prerig with engines is a package feature which reduces overall cost, I am sure they get a deep discount for the number of engine purchased. This in the end is to make the packaged model more competively priced and attracive to new buyers, how many times have we heard I could have bought brand x at the same LOA or bigger for less.
I hope that Burnswick and BW are not as sinister as LHG implied, I believe that his point number 4 and the liability statement are tue. Number 3 maybe true, but one and two cannot if you are still able to buy a hull without power as I have done with my 2001 Dauntless 16 rigged with a Honda 90. Blackdog's 2001 has a 115 Johnson. All this prerigging was already around when these boats were bought and Compounder's statement....."the Montauks were the only Whalers on the lot without Mercury engines installed. Are some models still shipped this way to allow dealers to install the customer's preferred brand outboard? " does not fall into the logic of points one and two. If they were true all BWs would be prerigged too.
To return to the orginal topic the new Montauks hull should be symetric as compared to the older hulls, that could be considered a techonological advance. Now that is has been confirmed that costs are sitll very close compared to now dollars vs past dollars.
lhg posted 08-08-2001 05:15 PM ET (US)     Profile for lhg    
Bear - I've got to stick with my points # 1 & 2. Brunswick bought an outboard boat company like BW so they could sell them exclusively with Mercs. Yamaha bought Centruy for the same reason, as is the team-up with Grady White. Yamaha is probably drooling for the opportunity to take over Grady. You can't get a SeaRay or Bayliner with a Volvo Sterndrive. What they didn't anticipate was Dealer backlash, since the new stategy bumped up against other Dealer profit centers, particularly Yamaha. They have even lost some Dealers because of this, but that's a price one has to pay for such a stretegy.
But on the other hand, the collapse of OMC probably helped them out. Mercury power on Whalers has probably saved a few OMC/Whaler dealerships also.

10 years ago, probably 90% of all new Whalers left Dealerships with OMC or Yamaha power on them. Just look at the used combo's out there. Few have Mercs. Now 90% leave with Mercurys on them. So I would say the business strategy is working. They have succeeded, or are close to succeeding, at converting the widely recognized name of Boston Whaler to a Mercury powered boat. The problems with the big Optimax's are now threatening this effort, however.

There will probably continue to be a few "maverick" new whalers out there with other brands, to keep Dealers with clout over BW happy, but most will have Mercs on them.

Chesapeake posted 08-08-2001 08:56 PM ET (US)     Profile for Chesapeake  Send Email to Chesapeake     
Larry: Now you've done it... Your tirade regarding old vs. new is going to send poor Jack Graner's blood pressure right throught the roof. He had been so successful in controlling his outrage (no pun intended) at Brunswick's bastardization of BW, and all he needed was to hear one of the "godfathers" of the site echo the same sentiment... Hang in there, Jack!!

I would tend to agree with you both though. I don't like the new boats the way I liked the old ones. I will buy another classic before I ever buy a current model year. While I wish the new boats got better and not worse, I also hope Whaler / Brunswick is successful enough to stay in business... or sells the business to one of Dick Fisher's grandkids.


whalernut posted 08-08-2001 09:08 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Hi Bob, whew, I`ll be o.k.! I haven`t been that excited in a while! I have sort of reserved myself to putting Brunswick to the side, in the hopes of one day seeing that they sold out to a small group of hardcore Classic Whaler enthusiests with the desire to bring back the spirit and looks and quality of the old Whalers. Oh, and by the way it seems they will need lots of money to, something I surely dodn`t have! Regards-Jack Graner.
GAwhale posted 08-08-2001 09:36 PM ET (US)     Profile for GAwhale  Send Email to GAwhale     
The Henry Ford theory and the Brunswick monopoly theory both sound reasonable.

Why then has the price of Montauks not come down? Why aren't they mass produced? The Whaler Rep at the boat show told me they sell about 500 Montauks a year.

Are the Marketing guys cleverly keeping the supply short and price high? Harley Davidson has been good at that.

GAwhale posted 08-08-2001 09:41 PM ET (US)     Profile for GAwhale  Send Email to GAwhale     
Something tells me the new 13 is not the same boat as the old 13.

I remember looking at the specs about two years ago. I believe the weight was different and the dimensions were just a little different.

lhg posted 08-08-2001 09:58 PM ET (US)     Profile for lhg    
For ten years now, I am convinced the Montauk is a boat BW management would have liked to get rid of. At least it seems that way. Catalog coverage was decreased on it, in favor of the new models. It is the last vestige of "old Whaler" and was not designed by the current guys. Designer's egos are huge, and they want to sell their new boats, and have them be a success, recovering their development costs, often at the expense of the Montauk. They have to keep their jobs.

Reebock/Meridian did this, pushing instead their new 16SL and Outrage 17's, and SeaRay has done this pushing the 14 & 16 Dauntless.

Pricing has been intentionally high, in comparison to the boats they are pushing, so the newer models would be selected by the buyer, and Dealer incentives are offered to further that situation. I was considering getting one 2 years ago. Dealer didn't know I was a fanactic, and says "for less money I can set you up with a much better & bigger boat, a Duantless 16 (or is it 160), with a bigger engine also". This is what the Montauk has been subjected to for the last 10 years.

How could they possibly have passed over the 40th anniversary of this famous hull? Because they don't want to make a big deal out of hull designs that aren't theirs, and don't look like theirs. Why give Dougherty's designs new found attention, when nothing else they have looks as much like a Whaler. It appears they would like it to die, but it just won't. The plug will probably be pulled soon, I'll bet, with a replacement along the lines of the new 13. But in these hard times of boat sales, they still can't justify canning a "seller", one that still keeps people coming into the showrooms. I, for one, am glad they are still making them.

LarrySherman posted 08-08-2001 10:02 PM ET (US)     Profile for LarrySherman  Send Email to LarrySherman     
Lets just say that BW for the 2003 model year released a best of series, based on the input of the readers of this forum. the question is will they sell the same volume of boats has they do now?

Proably not, and they proably know it, based on their CPD sales. You can never go back. When ever I release software, I never roll back a version. I'd rather die on the battlefield. The people at BW/Brunswick are probably damm proud of their product and their success in the market. and so the should be, even if you or I won't buy it.

Now, if opened a Ford Mustang site, perhaps we could get the ball rolling on a re-isseus of AC Cobra! Now that would be something!

GAwhale posted 08-08-2001 10:21 PM ET (US)     Profile for GAwhale  Send Email to GAwhale     
Very interesting! When my wife and I looked at the Whaler dealer in Charleston, SC the salesman also encouraged the 16 Dauntless. He stated:
1.) Nobody likes to sit on the fuel tank
2.) Deep V has a better ride
He is right for the same money it is more boat.

We got back to Atlanta and I measured my garage. The Dauntless was too high to fit(maybe could have removed SS rail on center console). I also wanted a shallow draft boat. My wife's Dad has a weekend house on a tidal creek. What really sold me was the sheer number of Montauks I had seen over the years in the Charleston area.

B Bear posted 08-08-2001 11:26 PM ET (US)     Profile for B Bear  Send Email to B Bear     
LHG, I just took a quick look at the 2002 Whaler web site.
I found it interesting that in the previous year prerig was an option for OMC and Mercury. Now the "Notable Options" are Mercury prerig and engine choices. I would not say this is conclusive, I will concede that it means the dealerships will be given a big incentive to push these packages. Even with this happening I know there are dealerships that pride themselves and advertise that they will provide your engine of choice, mostly of couse the other engine makes they have to offer. Not allowing a customer a choice in prerig or unrigged would be a big mistake on the part of BW. Time will tell, at this point in time the main incentive for a prerigged engine would be a lower overall price. Not bad for those who really like Mercury. I'll keeep an open mind about this, I may just be nieve.
Dick posted 08-08-2001 11:54 PM ET (US)     Profile for Dick  Send Email to Dick     
It's just common sense marketing. If you own the boat and motor company you promote the combination, not a competitors engine.
Have you ever been able to buy a new Ford pickup with a Chevy engine? The boating industry is slowly catching up with the automotive industry, which is still years ahead in dealer satisfaction & profitability.
This movement will not make some people happy, you are going to get the engine that the boat company is affiliated with, or pay a premium for a swap but in the long run it will make the manufacturer more profitable as well as the dealer and hopefully because of this both will be around for a long time.
Lighten up and accept changes.
B Bear posted 08-09-2001 05:04 AM ET (US)     Profile for B Bear  Send Email to B Bear     
Thanks Dick,
This thread strted off comparing a 2002 Montauk to an 1980 Montauk. This is what has been established:

1)There have been no major changes in hull design. In fact, no changes.

2)When comparing prices, 2001 dollars price is on par with 1980 dollars price. No increase in price.

3) Changes have been a bigger rubrail, no wood. The Decal has changed and designation number from 17 to 170.Hull symetery is near perfect due to the newer milling machines and computers.

4) A prerigged Mercury engine is a factory option. Not standard equipment.

Why did all the new vs old come in to it? We were talking about a classic hull that is still in production. And by all indicators will be around for a long time.

B Bear posted 08-09-2001 05:13 AM ET (US)     Profile for B Bear  Send Email to B Bear     
Let me add to number four.....

4) A prerigged Mecury engine is a factory option. Not standard equipment or a required choice.

Kelly posted 08-09-2001 09:08 AM ET (US)     Profile for Kelly  Send Email to Kelly     
It appears that some things that are visible by inspection have changed, and I expect that cost is the motivation. For example, I bought a new montauk console for my old 17' hull. The new stainless does not compare in quality with the old. It is suitable for an average price range boat. That kinda irritates me, but what really bothers me is that when I cut the hole for the control in the console, there was gap or void of 1/16" or slightly less between the plywood blocking and the outer built up layers of fiberglass. Maybe they just don't take the care with the consoles that they do with the boats, but I would have expected better. Will it be okay, yes, but in my opinion, one of the points of a Whaler is that it is better than okay. I guess in summary, if a manufacturer is willing to cut corners on things that are visible, what are they doing on the parts that are not visible after the boat is completed. I would be interested in knowing if they are using the same layers of fiberglass that they were when the classics were constructed. Anybody know? Kelly
hauptjm posted 08-09-2001 09:36 AM ET (US)     Profile for hauptjm    
These are some interesting comments regarding a boat that is this old and still eliciting such passion. One fact though, that has been miscalculated and may fan more flames: Cost. I'm not sure exactly how dgp calculated the cost of a 1980 at today's prices, but it was incorrect. Over the last 21 years, inflation, according to the CPI, has averaged 2.15%. Based on an even figure of $10,000.00 for 1980, this cost would be $15,631.68 in 2001 dollars.

If we were to use dgp's numbers (I'm not blasting you dgp), then the $23k for a new Montauk would be a 4.05% average inflation rate, or almost a 100% average increase. What we need to consider is that the cost to build the new version is actually cheaper than it was in 1980. Even if we totally discount any improvements in manufacturing processes, the simple cost of materials is less. Anyone price teak lately??

Conclusion: The Montauk is truly one of the great designs. Brunswick, to date, has decided to leave it alone. Its price has increased at ridicules levels, but it keeps getting purchased. Brunswick makes more profit on this design than probably any other if for no other reason than its costs of development were paid for 25 years ago. For these reasons, let's hope the design will remain a connection to the Whaler Co. we all seem to admire. And maybe someone will come along in the near future, and rescue this brand to our liking. Until then, at least we have access to a great boat.

Translation posted 08-09-2001 09:39 AM ET (US)     Profile for Translation    
Whaler gives a "PRE-RIGGED DISCOU" to its delaers who order the boat with Merc Pre-rigging.

Thus it appears to the customer as a factory option, but to the dealer it is really a margin-enhancer.

hauptjm posted 08-09-2001 09:39 AM ET (US)     Profile for hauptjm    
Ridicules is ridiculous.
JFM posted 08-09-2001 10:02 AM ET (US)     Profile for JFM  Send Email to JFM     
I like old Montauks and new Montauks. I think it would be nice to have a package deal like they put together on the 13 sport. The body did change, but not that much. The price came down by about $4,000. I think many of us would consider a new Montauk in a package deal if they could cut the price by that same %. When I became familiar with whalers about 4 years ago a new Montauk was about 18K with 90hp and trailer now it looks like 24K plus. This ecconomy will not support these kind of price increases if they want to sell more boats. Regards, Jay
Bigshot posted 08-09-2001 11:07 AM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
If they came out with a new "montauk" for $18k? I would shrug my head and keep walking. Can you guys say "sellout"? Walk right past that and get a Wellcraft or Aquasport because it is probably better quality and cheaper.
triblet posted 08-09-2001 11:19 AM ET (US)     Profile for triblet  Send Email to triblet     
hauptjim, something's wrong with your numbers.

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics, ,
the June 1980 CPI was 82.7 The June 2001
CPI was 178. That's 4.53% per year, and
the $10000 Montauk would be 21,523 today.


JFM posted 08-09-2001 11:19 AM ET (US)     Profile for JFM  Send Email to JFM     
Bigshot, what makes the montauk so expensive in relationship to other boats. The thing is the same boat for 30 years. It has to be the biggest profit margin for BW in a small boat. Look at the new Dauntless and tell me you can build that boat cheaper. No way! My local dealer won't stock a Montauk because he can't sell them sitting next to a Daunless for the same money. I think that most of us that want a Montauk are the minority of Whaler buyers these days. Regards, Jay
hauptjm posted 08-09-2001 12:07 PM ET (US)     Profile for hauptjm    
triblet, you are correct. I pulled the numbers from my database, but must have hit the wrong time frame. The early 80's do skew the numbers higher. I stand corrected. I do still stand with my comments regarding the state of the Montauk today. For the present, I believe Brunswick will leave it alone.
Bigshot posted 08-09-2001 12:51 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
Jay I meant a "NEW" montak like the "new"13' Not that the new 13 is junk but you can't compare it to a classic. I guarantee it probably handles the chop better but it is probably not as stable, needs more power to plane, etc. It is apples to oranges. Just like the Dauntless and Montauk. The Dauntless is far superior in some ways but inferior in others. On the other hand why would Whaler drop the price after all these years, did the skimp somewhere. Are the railing 306 instead of 316 stainless? Console made of cardboard, etc. Just like they said about "new" coke, it aint the same and sometimes not improved.

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.