Hull Comparisons - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  Hull Comparisons

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Hull Comparisons

VTfisherman posted 07-12-2002 11:05 AM ET (US)
Hi All
I wondering if anyone could give me an idea from their experience on the practical differences between the classic Montauk hull and the 1992 Outrage 17 hull. I know that the OR hull is 6" wider and 8" longer but how does that translate to on the water performance. Do you notice a big difference in interior room and a big difference in ride and handling. I guess what I really want to know is the OR 17 worth the extra 3 or 4k that it would cost over a Montauk.
Thanks
AnthonyT posted 07-12-2002 11:32 AM ET (US)
This is very interesting.... I don't have a 17' outrage but I do have the new 2002 170 Montauk which by chance is 5" longer and 8" wider than the Classic Montauk.
The 8" in width makes a huge difference in the interior space available, especially around the console.
Also with the additional 8" in width, BW then had the ability to make the sponsons a little smaller and more of a V up front and therefore smoother in a chop without sacrificing stability.
Hope this helps...
AnthonyT
James posted 07-13-2002 10:21 AM ET (US)
There is a 17 Outrage (circa mid 90s) for sale at Pelican Harbor Marina. It has a much deeper looking hull than any Classic Montauk, it has a built-in fuel tank and a tall console with a lockable cabinet suitable for mounting a lot of electronics. For a lot of big water or offshore work, I suspect that it would perform better than any Montauk. I do not know, since I have never ridden in one. However, if I was going to spend a lot of time in that type of water, I think that I would get a little bigger boat.
To me, the Classic Montauk is a great, inshore/bay boat with many potential other uses. Economical, easy to use and transport, fun for the family, and excellent for fishing.
If in doubt as to your choice, I would suggest that you consider AnthonyT's comments about the new 170 Montauk. It has an introductory price similar to the used Outrage. I have a 170 and I am impressed with its handling capabilities.
James.

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.

Author	Topic: Hull Comparisons
VTfisherman	posted 07-12-2002 11:05 AM ET (US) Hi All I wondering if anyone could give me an idea from their experience on the practical differences between the classic Montauk hull and the 1992 Outrage 17 hull. I know that the OR hull is 6" wider and 8" longer but how does that translate to on the water performance. Do you notice a big difference in interior room and a big difference in ride and handling. I guess what I really want to know is the OR 17 worth the extra 3 or 4k that it would cost over a Montauk. Thanks
AnthonyT	posted 07-12-2002 11:32 AM ET (US) This is very interesting.... I don't have a 17' outrage but I do have the new 2002 170 Montauk which by chance is 5" longer and 8" wider than the Classic Montauk. The 8" in width makes a huge difference in the interior space available, especially around the console. Also with the additional 8" in width, BW then had the ability to make the sponsons a little smaller and more of a V up front and therefore smoother in a chop without sacrificing stability. Hope this helps... AnthonyT
James	posted 07-13-2002 10:21 AM ET (US) There is a 17 Outrage (circa mid 90s) for sale at Pelican Harbor Marina. It has a much deeper looking hull than any Classic Montauk, it has a built-in fuel tank and a tall console with a lockable cabinet suitable for mounting a lot of electronics. For a lot of big water or offshore work, I suspect that it would perform better than any Montauk. I do not know, since I have never ridden in one. However, if I was going to spend a lot of time in that type of water, I think that I would get a little bigger boat. To me, the Classic Montauk is a great, inshore/bay boat with many potential other uses. Economical, easy to use and transport, fun for the family, and excellent for fishing. If in doubt as to your choice, I would suggest that you consider AnthonyT's comments about the new 170 Montauk. It has an introductory price similar to the used Outrage. I have a 170 and I am impressed with its handling capabilities. James.