new montauk versus 17 outrage - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  new montauk versus 17 outrage

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   new montauk versus 17 outrage

seasicknes posted 12-28-2002 12:46 PM ET (US)
I know the new montauk is already getting a reputation about the ride quality (alot smoother than the old sytle), but how does it compare to the outrage 17 that was made in 1996 through 1999 ???

Jerry Townsend posted 12-28-2002 03:50 PM ET (US)
Seasickness - I can't tell you first hand - but a couple who had(have) an '98 Montauk have been in my '96 17 OR and were very much impressed and said that they were going to sell the Montauk and get an Outrage. That was two years ago and I haven't seen them since. ------ Jerry/Idaho
lakeman posted 12-30-2002 05:52 PM ET (US)
I am looking for an outrage or will buy a new 170. Went to see a 1998 OR yesterday for it has been recomended highly and was disapointed in the boat for several reasons such as the back seat hatch covers that let water in to those areas, I cannot beleive whaler would not build a solid hatch cover. The boat seamed craped as compared with other 17 boats including 170, however the cc was larger by some measure,and it has a bit more storage, the built in gas tank is nice, the fish box in the floor had to be bailed while in the water with a bilge pump. The boat might ride better than 170, but I'm not sure which one is better in all situations. Considering price I, at this point, would opt for the 170 and it is brand new. I might change my mind if I had a chance to ride in the OR and the 170.
lhg posted 01-08-2003 08:02 PM ET (US)
Whaler marketing has been outsmarting most buyers, and many here besides, by clever use of the familiar names. Let's drop the names for a minute, and compare just the BOATS.
Dry Weight: 1400 lb
Beam: 6'-10"
Length: 17'-0"
HP rating: 90
vs
Dry Weight: 1020 lb
Beam: 6'-8"
Length 17'-3"
HP Rating: 120
I think most would agree these are fairly closely sized boats, except the latter is
is 400 lb more efficient and carries more HP, a double advantage.
Based on these specifications, most here would buy the latter, the 1991-1996 17' OUTRAGE. This is the best comparison to make with the new 170, the first set of specs.
Comparing either one of these boats to the original Montauk is NOT apples-to-apples, but is what the Company wants the consumer to do, so it looks like "improvements" were made. In reality, all they did was increase the boat's size, moving it up a notch, making it a small Outrage.
Let's take another one:
Dry Weight: 900 lb
Beam: 6'-2"
Length: 16'-7"
HP Rating: 100
vs
Dry Weight: 900 lb
Beam: 6'-6"
Length: 15'-5"
HP Rating: 60
Here again, most would think these to be similar specs, with the top looking favorable because of it's longer length and much higher HP rating. The top is the famous Classic 17 Sport/Montauk, and the latter the new 150 Sport. So when comparisons are made, these are the two that should be compared. The older 15 Sport is not a fair comparison at all, and it should be compared to the new 130 Sport instead. Length alone does not define a boat.
So this is the "Name Game" being used these days. In all three cases mentioned here, I would seriously doubt if the new outperforms the old, in any category, and certainly not interior space & speed performance. Designing a better mousetrap is not all that easy, so the "Name Game" helps. It's being used thoughout the new
Whaler line, such as when a 28 Outrage (a boat the size of a 27 Center Console Cuddy) changed it's name to a 295 Outrage, etc etc.
whalersman posted 01-08-2003 08:59 PM ET (US)
I get confused without names... Sorry..
Montauk 170
Dry Weight: 1400 lb
Beam: 6'-10"
Length: 17'-0"
HP rating: 90
Outrage 17 (1990-1995)
Dry Weight: 1020 lb
Beam: 6'-8"
Length :17'-3"
HP Rating: 120
Outrage 17 II (1996-1999)
Dry Weight: 1700 lb.
Beam: 7'
Length: 17'-6"
HP Rating: 150
I believe all 3 of these boats are great and they all have their differences. My main gripe I have always had with any Montauk was the Fuel Tanks. I prefer having the Fuel Tanks Built into the Hull and this gives way to more storage under the seat.
lakeman,
The Fish Box on the 1996 to 1999 Outrage II does have a Bilge Pump inside. The only way water gets in there is by leaving the plug out, Rain, Wave, or if the Scuppers aren't doing their job and they let water in. If you do not have any of the above, the Fish Box should stay relatively Dry and the bilge pump would not cycle.
Sal DiMercurio posted 01-08-2003 11:20 PM ET (US)
Lakeman, the fish hold in the Outrage is self bailing when under way, if you don't want water in it, put the plug in & it won't come in.
Theres no way your going to compare the Montauk to the Outrage, the Outrage is the backbone of Whaler & will allways outdo the Montauk.
The Outrage is a bluewater boat, the Montauk isn't, even though I do see some guys 35 miles out in Montauks.
Yes, I own a 20' Outrage.
Sal
prm1177 posted 01-11-2003 08:36 PM ET (US)
I got hooked on getting another whaler (after 25 years) by seeing reports on the Montauk 170, but have come across a lightly used 99 Outrage 17 with an Optimax 135. The boat has been in dry storage since the summer of 2000. Waiting to hear on how the engine is (unused for 2 1/2 years), so we'll see. The thread on the Outrage makes me more confident in my decision to go with the used boat.
Sal DiMercurio posted 01-12-2003 02:41 PM ET (US)
That engine thats been sitting un-used for a couple years is going to need a water pump for sure, as the blades get set in the direction their bent, but loose their elasticity & don't pump squat.
Sal
lakeman posted 01-13-2003 02:21 PM ET (US)
I misspelled cramped in my earlier post. I was wondering is the 18 OR layout is different than the 17 OR. Since I have never owned a whaler, and I have not followed the history of Whaler boats, I do know that this site has made me want to own one.
Back to the Montauk, ON the other hand, I have fished offshore in the older Montauk and have had many a boat load of Dolphin. I might agree the Montauk, old or New, is not a true offshore boat but in S Florida where the stream is with in 20 miles and on a nice day 1 to 3 it can be a fun boat to be in and not too many people like to fish on bad days anyway.
I will still consider the OR if one comes my way. I have time to think and shop: My Grady has not sold yet.

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: new montauk versus 17 outrage
seasicknes	posted 12-28-2002 12:46 PM ET (US) I know the new montauk is already getting a reputation about the ride quality (alot smoother than the old sytle), but how does it compare to the outrage 17 that was made in 1996 through 1999 ???
Jerry Townsend	posted 12-28-2002 03:50 PM ET (US) Seasickness - I can't tell you first hand - but a couple who had(have) an '98 Montauk have been in my '96 17 OR and were very much impressed and said that they were going to sell the Montauk and get an Outrage. That was two years ago and I haven't seen them since. ------ Jerry/Idaho
lakeman	posted 12-30-2002 05:52 PM ET (US) I am looking for an outrage or will buy a new 170. Went to see a 1998 OR yesterday for it has been recomended highly and was disapointed in the boat for several reasons such as the back seat hatch covers that let water in to those areas, I cannot beleive whaler would not build a solid hatch cover. The boat seamed craped as compared with other 17 boats including 170, however the cc was larger by some measure,and it has a bit more storage, the built in gas tank is nice, the fish box in the floor had to be bailed while in the water with a bilge pump. The boat might ride better than 170, but I'm not sure which one is better in all situations. Considering price I, at this point, would opt for the 170 and it is brand new. I might change my mind if I had a chance to ride in the OR and the 170.
lhg	posted 01-08-2003 08:02 PM ET (US) Whaler marketing has been outsmarting most buyers, and many here besides, by clever use of the familiar names. Let's drop the names for a minute, and compare just the BOATS. Dry Weight: 1400 lb Beam: 6'-10" Length: 17'-0" HP rating: 90 vs Dry Weight: 1020 lb Beam: 6'-8" Length 17'-3" HP Rating: 120 I think most would agree these are fairly closely sized boats, except the latter is is 400 lb more efficient and carries more HP, a double advantage. Based on these specifications, most here would buy the latter, the 1991-1996 17' OUTRAGE. This is the best comparison to make with the new 170, the first set of specs. Comparing either one of these boats to the original Montauk is NOT apples-to-apples, but is what the Company wants the consumer to do, so it looks like "improvements" were made. In reality, all they did was increase the boat's size, moving it up a notch, making it a small Outrage. Let's take another one: Dry Weight: 900 lb Beam: 6'-2" Length: 16'-7" HP Rating: 100 vs Dry Weight: 900 lb Beam: 6'-6" Length: 15'-5" HP Rating: 60 Here again, most would think these to be similar specs, with the top looking favorable because of it's longer length and much higher HP rating. The top is the famous Classic 17 Sport/Montauk, and the latter the new 150 Sport. So when comparisons are made, these are the two that should be compared. The older 15 Sport is not a fair comparison at all, and it should be compared to the new 130 Sport instead. Length alone does not define a boat. So this is the "Name Game" being used these days. In all three cases mentioned here, I would seriously doubt if the new outperforms the old, in any category, and certainly not interior space & speed performance. Designing a better mousetrap is not all that easy, so the "Name Game" helps. It's being used thoughout the new Whaler line, such as when a 28 Outrage (a boat the size of a 27 Center Console Cuddy) changed it's name to a 295 Outrage, etc etc.
whalersman	posted 01-08-2003 08:59 PM ET (US) I get confused without names... Sorry.. Montauk 170 Dry Weight: 1400 lb Beam: 6'-10" Length: 17'-0" HP rating: 90 Outrage 17 (1990-1995) Dry Weight: 1020 lb Beam: 6'-8" Length :17'-3" HP Rating: 120 Outrage 17 II (1996-1999) Dry Weight: 1700 lb. Beam: 7' Length: 17'-6" HP Rating: 150 I believe all 3 of these boats are great and they all have their differences. My main gripe I have always had with any Montauk was the Fuel Tanks. I prefer having the Fuel Tanks Built into the Hull and this gives way to more storage under the seat. lakeman, The Fish Box on the 1996 to 1999 Outrage II does have a Bilge Pump inside. The only way water gets in there is by leaving the plug out, Rain, Wave, or if the Scuppers aren't doing their job and they let water in. If you do not have any of the above, the Fish Box should stay relatively Dry and the bilge pump would not cycle.
Sal DiMercurio	posted 01-08-2003 11:20 PM ET (US) Lakeman, the fish hold in the Outrage is self bailing when under way, if you don't want water in it, put the plug in & it won't come in. Theres no way your going to compare the Montauk to the Outrage, the Outrage is the backbone of Whaler & will allways outdo the Montauk. The Outrage is a bluewater boat, the Montauk isn't, even though I do see some guys 35 miles out in Montauks. Yes, I own a 20' Outrage. Sal
prm1177	posted 01-11-2003 08:36 PM ET (US) I got hooked on getting another whaler (after 25 years) by seeing reports on the Montauk 170, but have come across a lightly used 99 Outrage 17 with an Optimax 135. The boat has been in dry storage since the summer of 2000. Waiting to hear on how the engine is (unused for 2 1/2 years), so we'll see. The thread on the Outrage makes me more confident in my decision to go with the used boat.
Sal DiMercurio	posted 01-12-2003 02:41 PM ET (US) That engine thats been sitting un-used for a couple years is going to need a water pump for sure, as the blades get set in the direction their bent, but loose their elasticity & don't pump squat. Sal
lakeman	posted 01-13-2003 02:21 PM ET (US) I misspelled cramped in my earlier post. I was wondering is the 18 OR layout is different than the 17 OR. Since I have never owned a whaler, and I have not followed the history of Whaler boats, I do know that this site has made me want to own one. Back to the Montauk, ON the other hand, I have fished offshore in the older Montauk and have had many a boat load of Dolphin. I might agree the Montauk, old or New, is not a true offshore boat but in S Florida where the stream is with in 20 miles and on a nice day 1 to 3 it can be a fun boat to be in and not too many people like to fish on bad days anyway. I will still consider the OR if one comes my way. I have time to think and shop: My Grady has not sold yet.