Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  E-mail BW and rebel against low HP rating on New Montauk

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

Author Topic:   E-mail BW and rebel against low HP rating on New Montauk
tabasco posted 02-19-2002 10:11 PM ET (US)   Profile for tabasco   Send Email to tabasco  
We should all email BW an show our discontent with the HP rating on the new Montauk. Lets tell them we are aware of there previous snake oil flam they did on the 13 ft.
lgh- your great at this.
How can they give a lower HP rating on a larger and heavier boat .......Please
Let let them know we are not stupid ...At least they should offer it with the Mercury 115EFI
Email their regional sales manager -Northeast

Mike Yauch

myauch@whaler.com

Actually if anyone knows the chairmans email address we should do a CC to him.
"The squeeky wheel gets the grease"

Richard Quinlivan posted 02-19-2002 11:42 PM ET (US)     Profile for Richard Quinlivan  Send Email to Richard Quinlivan     
Before everyone gets upset you should go to the Whaler website and see that the 170 Montauk is not changed a bit and carries a 100 hp rating just like my 1976 Montauk did.
http://www.whaler.com/REC/170_montauk.htm
triblet posted 02-20-2002 12:26 AM ET (US)     Profile for triblet  Send Email to triblet     
Check the specs and pictures on that 170
Montauk on their site. That's the old boat.
The new boat is different. Apparently both
are available for a while, or something.

Chuck

tabasco posted 02-20-2002 07:57 AM ET (US)     Profile for tabasco  Send Email to tabasco     
Richard-
Go to this link to see the new montauk . BW has not updated there web site.
http://pete.esquared.net/montauk-2002-fr.jpg
Bigshot posted 02-20-2002 10:02 AM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
Got a quick question....who is buying a new 170? I am not and probably never will so therefore I could care less if it had a 9.9 on it. I think it is wrong if they do that same thing as with the 13 but I don't own one of those either.

People always say..."never buy anything the 1st year out" Lesson learned.

Conrad posted 02-20-2002 11:15 AM ET (US)     Profile for Conrad  Send Email to Conrad     
Tabasco,

Thanks for the pictures. I agree that the horsepower rating is too low. I think the new Montauk will be slugish with the extra 450 lbs and no extra horsepower. I usually fish with 2 people in my boat (both 210+ guys: boat = 1984 17, with 1998 90 Johnson) and the boat feels nimble. But if I add 450 lbs (2 extra big people), the boat performs much differently. It gets on plane much slower and water skiing is almost out of the question.

On the plus side, the boat still draws 9 inches and looks like it will handle a chop better. The max engine weight, allows for the heavier 4-strokes. But, I would like to see max horse power at 135 or at least 115.

With the new hull design, I wonder if the boat is as stable when sitting at rest?

tabasco posted 02-20-2002 11:30 AM ET (US)     Profile for tabasco  Send Email to tabasco     
Bigshot-
Im buying it so I thought in the spirit of things you might help me out and send a email to BW. Maybe if enough people would complain they would at least raise the HP rating to 115
Thank you
Bigshot posted 02-20-2002 12:05 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
Wait a year...BW aint gonna change the tag on every 17 because 14 people from here think it is underpowered. Wait until next year and see what they do. 2003's come out in July.
tabasco posted 02-20-2002 04:57 PM ET (US)     Profile for tabasco  Send Email to tabasco     
BigShot-
I don't live in Florida and thus July is halfway through our boating season. I think there are hundreds of members on this forum not only 14. Would have hoped the members would be more interested in helping others. Since they just have produced the one boat for the miami show it wouldn't be such a big deal for them to increase the HP on the models that haven't been produced. Unless they receive flack they will do nothing. I thought helping others was what this forum was all about........maybe I am wrong
STEPHEN posted 02-20-2002 04:59 PM ET (US)     Profile for STEPHEN  Send Email to STEPHEN     
I BOUGHT THE OLD 170 NEW LAST MONTH.COULDN'T BE HAPPIER.40 YEARS OF PERFORMANCE SPEAKS FOR IT SELF.I CALLED BW AND THEY SAID THEY DID THIS TO GET IN LINE WITH THE OTHER STREAMLINE ASSEMBLY THE HAVE WITH THE DAUNTLESS.THE OLD MONTAUK WAS LABOR INTENSIVE.IN OTHERWORDS ALOT OF HANDS ON DETAIL.I LIKE THAT IN THE OLD MONTAUK
dchris2 posted 02-20-2002 10:01 PM ET (US)     Profile for dchris2  Send Email to dchris2     
I'm not so sure the 13' was a flim flam. I'm one of the customers that dissed the dealer about only offering the 30hp. When they came out with the 40 hp I bought. Opening it up scares the hell out of me. In retrospect I think 30 hp would have been just fine although the sport weighs more than a classic. I think its just a case of engineers deciding on optimal performance, but caving in to customer perceptions.
Bigshot posted 02-21-2002 10:20 AM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
This is ridiculous Tabasco. I have not made 2100 posts here because I do not want to help anyone. But do you think they are just gonna say "Ooops! Sorry, what HP would like sir? 125...ok. And Larry, you would like 250hp....ok. And JB, you want 70hp just to be safe...ok. You know what you'll here next? Laughter and then Click the phone goes dead.

EVERYONE PLEASE CALL 1-800-WHALER9 and tell them they are stupid and wrong for Tabasco's sake so he can be the first on his street with a new 170....There I helped.

PS now that my sarcasm is over, I called and am waiting for their marketing director to call me in reference to the hp rating. Maybe he can tell me why he or the US coast Guard only deemed this boat worthy of 90 ponies.

Salmon Tub posted 02-21-2002 10:57 AM ET (US)     Profile for Salmon Tub  Send Email to Salmon Tub     
I don't know about your neck of the woods, but out here we had 2 choices and only 1 now, either buy a bare hull and power it yourself as I did (can't do this anymore as per my dealer) or buy it with a packaged motor - Mercury, which out here you can only get a 4 stroke or DFI which Merc only makes in 115 or bigger (I think they make them that small). Anyway, the 90 hrs 4 strokes are huge and heavy thus equalling even a 130 horse engine of old. So they probably are a bit worried about that much wieght being hung on the transom (what else could it be? Even with a hot 90 the most you could squeeze out a montalk was maybe 50 mph. I think you will see them stop offering 2 strokes soon anyway (carbed or EFI).
tabasco posted 02-21-2002 11:10 AM ET (US)     Profile for tabasco  Send Email to tabasco     
Thanks bigshot-
I appreciate you calling. I know in your heart you are a great guy AND DO LOVE TO HELP PEOPLE and sometimes we just have to get your hairs up to tackle a problem. There is no one I would rather have on my side calling 1800 WHALER9.
YOU KNOW HOW TO GET THE JOB DONE AND I THANK YOU FOR THAT.
tabasco posted 03-04-2002 09:50 AM ET (US)     Profile for tabasco  Send Email to tabasco     
Still no word from BW on any HP change. BW if your reading this there are a lot of orders just waiting for you..........as soon as you up the HP to 135 where it should be.
tabasco posted 03-12-2002 03:16 PM ET (US)     Profile for tabasco  Send Email to tabasco     
Still waiting to hear from BW..........tick..... tock

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.