posted 01-26-2003 02:55 AM ET (US)        

Kind of the same story with the Whalers. They have made some changes to arouse the interest of other boaters than the hard core and loyal Whaler fans. On the other hand, I think there is some benefits. Like the fact my wife like to fish offshore, but she likes the fact that the 295 Conquest has a shower and quaters so more can be done than just fishing. Heck I would not even be able to dream of a large purchase like a Conquest unless she was just as interested as I am. Moreover, the safety appeal also sold my wife and myself. Heck comparing the BW's with anything else out there I do not think any other boat even comes close.

What are some of your opinions on this?

posted 01-26-2003 08:06 AM ET (US)            

I am a Classic lover who has bad-mouthed the new generation.

I don't hate them, I just don't think they have what made Whalers great, aside from the hull construction.

The Dougherty (and predecessor) Whalers were small yachts, with yacht quality fittings. They were light, fast, utilitarian and, most important, distinctive.

The new generation have cheapened fittings, a glaring example is the flip-flop seat. They are heavy, styled rather than designed and loaded up with "comfort" features.

If you love CJ2s you feel the same about the Liberty as we Classic Whaler lovers do about the new generation.

posted 01-26-2003 12:51 PM ET (US)            

Do any of the last three posts address his question?

Why do so many dislike the new generation of Whalers? THAT is the question.

posted 01-26-2003 09:12 PM ET (US)         

Unlike your Jeep example, the ‘newer’ Whaler isn''t recognizable from a hundred yards away, nor does it perform as well. In many cases longtime Whaler lovers wait until the logo is visible to be sure it’s really a Whaler!

Whaler hasn't simply made refinements to a great product; they’ve done a poor job of re-designing it from the bottom up! Models are being changed or discontinued faster than most of us (or the market) can keep up with. People who buy these feeble attempts to make a "better mouse trap" are not getting what they expect, and in most cases are sitting on boats worth much less than they expected them to be.

Unlike the Whalers of yesterday, today’s whalers are neither the best in the fit and finish department, nor do they cost more than their competitors (ie Grady) who make refinements, but don’t forget WHO got them there in the first place.

Don't take my word for it. Open up any magazine (including this month's Boating), log onto JD Powers site, or talk to any long-term Whaler dealer. Better yet, take a "non-Sea Ray Whaler out for a ride when the wind is howling.

posted 01-26-2003 10:05 PM ET (US)            

I can't find a fault with either.

How many of us that own a classic hull would ever buy a new boat even though it was still a clasic hull design?
Probably very few, most would be looking for a great price on an older used one.

If you have no interest in buying a new hull why knock them. Whaler isn't building them for you they are building them for the market that is out there buying new boats.

posted 01-26-2003 11:41 PM ET (US)            

I see what you are saying and I know I do not have the experience that many of you have so I have to make analogies to what I do have a understanding and an opinion on.

For example, the CJ2 or CJ5 for that matter is not as well rounded vehicle as the new TJ's. Now there are things I like as with simplicity and the dash on the old CJ5 and CJ7 would be a nice retro touch for a new TJ design. Although, the new TJ is more reliable and it still has solid axils fron and back (Dana 44 back and Dana 44's front and back for the Rubicon).

Couldn't some of the same be said about the New Boston Whaler's? Like in my wife and I case. If I wanted a 13 foot or a 17-Montauk I would look for a Classic no doubt, but what is out there for my situation. A larger boat that we can sleep comfortable over night in and go on some long rendezvous safely. Also, that is unsinkable or at least harder to sink than anything else out there.

If someone has any suggestions I will list because God knows I am no boat authority. What else out there is as safe as the 295 / 28 Conquest? When I checked on Grady Whites and others they could not make the same claims. Moreover, things do change and again you have a point that people need to speak up and let BW or Brunswick know we will pay a premium for quality.

Louie Kokinis,

Thank you also for your post, but to show you all what a Virgin (I feel like I am visiting a Rock Horror Picture Show for the First Time. When they told the virgins to stand up I was both a virgin to the show and for my age justifiably so a virgin concerning sex) what does the acronyms CGP stand for. You all are thinking boy this guy needs help right now. Kind of like being on a Corvette forum and asking what does the acronym LS1 stand for? That is how I am probably coming off.

Thanks, and teach this boy to see the light,

posted 01-27-2003 12:31 AM ET (US)         

The 8 track broke :( but the AM radio still works :)

Dick

I have a real love for these boats.

Like many others here, seaworthiness not a vanity or queen berth is most important to me. I looked.. drove.. looked some more, and ended up factory ordering a Commercial Whaler a few years ago. I bought it after test-driving all models and only because it was IMO more seaworthy.

As for buying a new hull, I am interested and have driven most the new ones in an effort to buy one. My challenge is that the 27 Vigilant (like my current boat) is made for Law Enforcement and Military applications. There is little attention paid to detail, comfort, and storage. Everything takes a second seat to seaworthiness and durability. This is great until you want some creature comforts :(

When Whaler comes out with a comfortable – seaworthy boat, I will buy one. I will not settle for a semi-unsinkable or sinkable boat unless it is over 30’ with diesels and crash pumps.

Rbyrd

posted 01-27-2003 01:44 AM ET (US)         

I haven’t driven the new Montauk (yet). I think the old Montauk was one of the best little boats ever made, but from what I’ve read here; the new one is probably a winner.

I’ve driven all hulls with the exception of the Defiance and new Regulator/Contender looking Outrages (but have been on them).

I’ve found that the new hulls are:

· Not as efficient:. They require more power to get on plane, have a reduced ability to stay on plane at lower speeds (in rough water), carry more fuel, require larger motors, and in most cases a larger tow vehicle.
· Have a pronounced ‘Dead zone’ (since I don’t know any other word for it) is what I refer to as the time where the boat is between displacement and planning speeds – usually pointing at the sky, and sluggish. All new styles except the Dauntless do this.
· Bow Steer: All new styles especially the Conquest Bow steer in heavy seas – the Dauntless IMO was better than the rest
· Lack Performance: I like to compare the newer styles to a luxury sport car vs a sports car. Like comparing a Lexus to a Porsche)
· Less Fishability: The euro-transom and high freeboard make for a different experience while fishing. The closed transom limits the room available inside the boat and makes fighting a feisty fish a nightmare while around the motors! (I also feel more comfortable knowing any water entering my boat will be out the transom faster than any bilge pump can get it out – but that’s another issue) The high freeboard makes the boat susceptible to winds while drift fishing, and makes catch and release next to impossible for everyone except for professional basketball players - I don’t like it.
· Ability to add a kicker directly to the transom seems to be a thing of the past :(

Other little items that come to mind are: The ability to drive without the window frame or grab rail getting in my line of sight, batteries below the waterline, hatches inside the splash well, white gel vs the easier on the eyes and to maintain beige, wimpy pumps, cheap fittings, A LINER!, and I shouldn't leave out the EZ loader (crap) trailers they package under the boats.

These are my observations, and my reasons for not buying a new style Whaler. If I were forced to purchase a larger boat tomorrow morning, I would buy a Grady :(

posted 01-27-2003 02:16 AM ET (US)            

The new Whaler 170 should not have been a direct replacement for the 17' classic design. If we were drawing a comparison for Jeeps then it would be like replacing the CJ-5 with the Grand Cherokee, a very illogical step to say the least.

The new 170 is underpowered. It is more than %50 heavier, 5" longer and 8" wider yet is rated for a motor 10% less powerful? And again I think someone goofed when they only put the draft at 9" for the 170, maybe without a motor or gas. Granted the boat is 8" wider and 5" longer but the vee hull is deeper and the outside sponsons are shallower. If you look at a 17 Outrage and a new 170 they are very similar. Yet the OR is 400lbs lighter and drafts 4" more than the 170? It does not really add up.

This whole comedy of errors is what happens when you have multinational conglomerate try and make something that they have no idea about. There are enough strictly play boats on the market, BW (Brunswick) has enough room for the hull that kept BW at the top for 40+ years. I am not saying there is not a place for the 170 but there should still be a non-CGP classic 13, 15 and 17. I don't think sales would be an issue.

posted 01-27-2003 03:21 AM ET (US)         

I don’t know if only CGP availability is a bad thing. Personally I have nothing but good things to say about all of them! CGP are semi-custom, built tougher, and you still have your choice of power. They will even make them beige with stainless rails – if you want the classic look! IMO CGP makes a better boat; a much better alternative to an old boat with a new motor (in most cases).

posted 01-27-2003 07:34 PM ET (US)         

Another reason for the limited number of used boats is that most dealers are not offering new CGP boats to their customers. I think this is because they don’t really have the expertise, or because they want to sell the recreational boats sitting in stock. Some dealers however do stock them, and factory orders are usually shipped within 6 weeks (not bad considering it’s a semi-custom boat).

Unlike the new Whalers, I think today’s (performance) cars are better than yesterday’s. Most deliver more power than their predecessors, they are faster, corner better, stop better, and are all-round safer vehicles. The best part is that the manufacturers have made them very reliable, so reliable that cars producing over 400 HP are currently used as ‘daily drivers’. I would also think that 20 years from today an SS Camaro, ZR1 or Z06 Corvette, Hummer, and Viper will be very collectible, and very desirable own.

posted 01-27-2003 08:20 PM ET (US)            

Hey you might like this. I put a new LS1 into my new Jeep Wrangler Sahara. It has taken ten months to get to the point I haveit now. That is runs great, but need to replace the S10 gauge panel with new panel that resembles the original. Also, need to hook oup the cruise control. The Jeep now gets 22 to 24 mpg on the highway and 17 in the city. Thats from 16/14 with the original engine. Raced it once at the track and ran mig 13 quarter without a tach so I did not shift at optimum rpms. IT was fun doing a wheelie in a stock looking Jeep.

Regards,

posted 01-27-2003 08:27 PM ET (US)            

The newer hull design is, or was recently, available in "commercial trim" via the Justice Class. There must be some of the justice class baots in service, but I've never see the Coast Guard running one. (I have seen law enforcement agencies running the 19' Justice - but only in inland water.)

I see the comparison between the old and new whalers as an "apples and oranges" sort of thing. The classics are like an ocean-going version of a Marin Corps "deuce-and-a half". It takes you whereever you need to go and gets you back again - but you're not traveling in the lap of luxury with quilted leather and soft suspension. The new generation whalers are more like a loaded 2003 Subaru wagon: they look kinda nice, have all the bells and whistles, and run pretty quietly but, with all the padding and upholstery, there's no room left in the passenger compartment - and they don't have the heavy duty contruction or ground clearance to go off road; they just aren't designed for it.

None of these feelings constitute "hatred" - or even dislike - for the new whalers. I just don't need or want that kind of boat.

posted 01-28-2003 03:18 AM ET (US)            

First off, if the classic Whaler was such a recreational success, why did they change them? Companies do not usually try to fix something if its not broken. One can only assume that there weren't enough people buying them although I could be wrong. Despite some opinions, classic Whalers weren't supernatural beings to everyone. In fact, quite to the contrary, their reputation was that of a "pounder" that would knock the fillings out of your head while compressing your spine two inches. Add to that the fact that the classics were butt ugly, with no creature comforts so you were left with a boat with low recreational demand. Anyway, Whaler must have heard this complaint because they modified the classic design and came up with the "post classic" design which has a much more forgiving ride but still maintained excellent stability, added some comforts and improved the looks. Maybe this didn't work well enough either, because as of this year, the brand new Whalers have even a more forgiving ride and are even sleeker in design. Only time will tell if they are a bigger hit or not. (I do know for a fact that my dealer sells a ton of post-classic Whalers so who knows)

Now to compare the current Whaler recreational boats with their parents I will use the same list of criteria others have used above. To me a Whaler is an open ocean boat designed to deal with harsh salt environment in rough water in remote areas.

Performance: It does take more horsepower to run a Post Classic. But for people who can spend 70K+ for a boat, a few extra dollars for gas isn't an issue.

Handling: Some have said that classics are like taut sports cars and the Post classics were like luxury sedans. Last time I checked there weren't any hairpin turns in the Pacific Ocean. In fact the ocean isn't analogous to a nice smooth curvy racetrack at all. If it were, a sports car would be cool. Unfortunately, The ocean is much more analogous to an endless expanse of lousy pavement full of potholes and irregular surfaces. If I had to drive straight on that kind of road for four hours, I would much rather be in a comfortable luxury sedan than a sports car any day.

Fishability: Some complain about the high freeboard on the post classic. This is purely a matter of choice. All I know, is when the water is rough my passengers sure appreciate it and it makes them feel much more secure. It makes falling overboard much more difficult also. As far a making it more difficult to fish, I don't know about others, but we use a net. I'm don't know much about catch and release. I'm not into fish torture for my pleasure. I like to take home my catch and eat it. Also Post classics come with a live well so you don't have to rig up some goofy looking thing.

The Infamous Euro transom: If you like to dive or enjoy water sports it is a must. With the fold up ladder it makes getting on and off the boat so much easier. I'm not even sure how you can even get back on a notched transom boat. It only makes a post classic more versatile.

Cramped deck: For the life of me I'm not sure what you all are talking about. My 23 post-classic Outrage has plenty of room for 6 to fish plus they all have a place to sit when underway. Plus, I can even store their dive gear in the console totally out of the way.

Toughness: the post classic is every bit as tough as a classic. It's not a Subaru, it's a new Hummer. They are still constructed the same except that now the foam is closed cell. Now you don't have to sacrifice comfort for durability anymore.

posted 01-28-2003 10:17 AM ET (US)         

Since WWII, an awful bunch of American's, on average, have become a race of fat consumptives. Yeah, that's mah generation and the next. In mah opinion, Brunswick's done what it could to appeal t'that market. Grandpa loved his early 1960's Whaler, because it was built for his generation's sensibilities. Improve an idea, make it lean, make it functional and make it t’last. That basic appeal carried forward from long ago, somethin’ wrapped up in the idea that from functionality also derived beauty. People actually grew to t'think their Whalers were good lookin'; can you imagine? To grandpa’s great, great grandpa, the 18th century's Windsor chair reflected as much about the country’s values then, as that overstuffed reclinin' easy-chair says about many of today's race of Americans. Like good capitalists, Brunswick's just doing what it can to appeal to the average modern American with some extra dough. Take an old idea, make it heavy, make it wide, cover it with Naugahide, make sure it takes a ton o'gas t'move it around, you gots the picture.

posted 01-28-2003 11:52 AM ET (US)            

You missed the point I was trying to make with the commercial boats. I'm not comparing the new recreational line with the commercial line. I mean to compare only HULL DESIGNS. Since both the new and old designs have been available, side by side, through the commercial/government division, I thought we might learn from the choices that have been made by the folks who consistently put the boats through the worst of the worst.

Isn't the Justice hull the same as the new Outrage hull? And isn't the current Guardian hull the same as the classic Outrage hull? If that's the case, and both are equally reinforced and prepared for commercial use, why don't we see the Coast Guard and the other military and rescue organizations running the Justice series much? I'm assuming that the sea-keeping, durability, and interior space of the older design are superior, and concensus on that point is forcing Whaler's government/commercial division to retain a number of the older hull designs - in spite of the fact that it is otherwise more cost-effective to build the same hulls for both divisions.

Whaler's design and marketing changes, like those of most manufacturers, are profit-driven. For example, the Whaler Drive disapeared from the recreational line not because it was ineffective or otherwise inferior, but because it was too expensive to build and they couldn't charge enough to make up for the added cost. But their engineers still concede that the Whaler Drive is a superior way to mount outboard motors for many applications.

For an example on a larger scale, consider the changes made by Bayliner over the last fifteen or twenty years. Bayliner has, obviously, correctly identified their market, and they have sold a zillion boats - but that doesn't mean they are making better quality boats. And I don't like many the manufacturing decisions they've made.

When I see a new Whaler at the ramp I inevitably stare at it and appreciate it. If I lived on a lake and wanted a family/ski/fish boat I would probably already own a new Montauk - I can't think of a better small boat for that purpose. But for the ocean, I prefer the characteristics of the older design. I have not noticed the teeth-jarring ride that diveorfish speaks of. But it's fine with me that others like the newer boats. I'm not disparaging of Subaru owners either. (We owned one of those too and liked it a lot.)

You say TomAto, I say Tomoto...

posted 01-28-2003 01:05 PM ET (US)            

This whole thread and related predecsssors rekindles a thought that I have had for a long, long time - that those that trash the newer designs, in general, have no expertise or even experience in design, in safety or in manufacturering management or economics. In short, many of the "trashing" or "hate" comments are strictly subjective and then, with commensurate merit or value. Of course, anyone can feel and state anything they want - and that is what we have here - personal thoughts, but hopefully thoughts that are objectively founded.

For example, lets look at some of the discussions regarding just one of the issues made - the higher freeboard of the newer Whalers. Some point out the added area is detrimental for those drift fishing, others point out that the high freeboard is detrimental for catch and release enthusiasts while others point out the higher freeboard is a safety feature in rough water.

Now, lets look at these three points. The first point is true - the higher freeboard does provide more wind bearing surfaces. The catch and release point is not really of significance - in view of the fact that long handled catch and release (fine mesh) nets are readily available - I have and use one - though I like to eat fish. The third point regarding safety is real and of merit. Now, which point is more important to the overall customer? I think that you will agree that safety is of more value than the drifting movement or the catch and release concerns. Therefore, in this evaluation and without other over-riding considerations, the design would incorporate a higher freeboard.

There are many reasons for changing a design - including better design techniques, improved materials, better equipment, improving something, economic considerations, making the product more appealing to the customer, incorporating desirable or safety features, improving safety considerations, meeting regulatory requirements, et.al.

Face it, we - you and I - do not know what drives the design changes being made. We must realize that there is an objective, a real, a bona-fide reason for making the change - it was not made just for the sake of making a change. Also realize that economics and marketing play an important part - if you can't sell it - you can't make it very long.

There are advantages and disadvantages to each design - some designs appeal to some, others appeal to someone else - that is human nature.

But one thing that everyone can be assured of - the BW so-called classic or so-called post classic boat is well built, is unsinkable and will get you there and get you back. Some might tend to be safer, some more stable, some have so-called comfort features some might tend to go faster, some be lighter et.al - but they ALL will get you there and back. They are all Whalers! ---- --- Jerry/Idaho

posted 01-28-2003 02:19 PM ET (US)         

Nice post. It’s obvious that we are all equally passionate about our Whalers!

posted 01-28-2003 05:46 PM ET (US)            

Hooter: Every generation has its excesses. I'm not sure which "sensible" generation you were referring to. Was it the generation that nearly hunted to extinction nearly every wild critter on the land or in the sea? Or was it the generation responsible for all the pollutants in the fish we catch. I never got the idea that boating was frugal endeavor. Let's face it, not everyone can take up boating as a hobby so I figure, in for a penny, in for a pound.

Alkar: I was never offended by anything you said, in fact quite the opposite; I really enjoy everybody's different opinions. I think that's what makes this site so great. If agencies like the Coasties do pick the Guardians over the Justices, even though I've seen no evidence of that, it may be better for their application I suppose. I have no problem with that. My only point is that the new recreational Whalers are great for a recreation application. I know I never wear a crash helmet and a survival suit when I take my family boating like the Coasties do. Strangely enough though, in my area the sheriff's boats are aluminum now and our Coasties drive big RIBS. I don't see them in any Whaler. Go figure, I wonder if it is a cost thing? What does a 22 Guardian properly equipped cost these days?

Bigshot: I stand corrected, the 22 has a minuscule console therefore it provides a bit more deck. I forgot to mention that the newer Whalers have larger consoles that can accommodate a head. This may be their greatest feature. Surely you guys go to the bathroom. You can't tell me that after a heavy meal of whatever that occasionally you may have to go "number two" because something disagreed with you. Have any of you ever taken women on an outing? A head is mandatory for a woman. Surprisingly enough, this is no joke. I've had more than one man on my boat actually too shy to pee over the side and opt for the head. Heck I just stand on my Eurotransom platform and pee between the motors. No way to fall overboard either. The head is a godsend.

Jerry: Well said.

louie, Jb, lhg and all the others who contribute: I can't begin to tell you how much I've learned from all the excellent posts you all make. Keep the debate going, this is America for Christ's sake. Whalers are cool, all of them.

Anyway, I won't be posting for a few days because my wife and I are going to the hospital to have my first son later on today. Man I'm start'n to shake.

posted 01-28-2003 06:06 PM ET (US)            

All whalers old or new are great boats.

posted 01-28-2003 10:46 PM ET (US)         

In an effort to save bandwidth I will try not to repeat items from my above posts.

I think we’re both aware that our boats are similar in length, yours a 23 new style and mine a 22 old style. I also believe this to be a great start to a good debate since we are both passionate about our boats. I should mention that I’ve spent many hours (in very rough water) in a 23. It got me back to the dock safely, but I’m still having reoccurring nightmares from the experience :)

I don’t think it’s stupid to compare the Commercial Whalers with the Recreational Styles. My reasoning is they are both Whalers that are still available to the general public. The Commercial hull is identical to the old Classic design, and the Commercial Division evolved from the customization of regular Whalers for Commercial applications ie Military, Law Enforcement, Charter Companies etc. CGP boats are built a bit heavier, available with any power options, and IMO the same hull you consider a Classic. Today’s commercial Whaler design has however has seen many changes over the years. Most all of them where accepted with open arms, some hulls unfortunately failed. Jim has a great section on the history of the company and hulls evolution that IMO is a great read.

Classic designs were not discontinued, they are still offered by Whalers commercial division. Both styles are 2 pieces joined and injected with foam while still in the mold giving them the strength and un-sinkability we all love. The Classic design however takes more work during lay-up since all the compartments are actually part of the top (floor) piece. Because they aren’t rounded like the new styles they cannot be pumped out of the mold as fast, and lay-up is more complicated (it’s more difficult to get into all the corners). I think the bottom line is they cost too much to produce, really do have a limited recreational market these days (the decision isn't one persons anymore), and really belong in a semi-custom shop anyway.

‘pounder’ ‘knock the fillings from your head’ ‘compress spines’ ??? This is how myths start and are carried forward! Your comments lead me to believe that you’ve never taken a larger Classic Whaler out on a rough day. A deep-vee may be faster, a RIB may take rougher water, but NOTHING out there matches the overall sea-worthiness and fishability of these hulls! In an effort to keep this thread based on fact, I urge you to take a 22 or larger Classic hull out for a spin and report your findings.

There are now old deleted models, classic models, post classic models, post classic deleted models, and THE NEW shall we call them Post-Post Classic models (the new Outrages). IMO Whaler went from offering an unsinkable Sea Ray Laguna to offering an unsinkable Baja hull! I don’t know how it’s going to end up. Brunswick’s done a great job of moving the Sea Ray Crowd into Whalers, why not the Baja crowd too! I really wish them well, but until they (or someone else) can produce something better than what I have – I will keep developing my bladder control :)

I also carry a net. Torture is sometimes more fun than a straight kill, besides, it supports the local crab and seal population :) Dive doors are also a better solution to ladders, and open transoms are easier to pee or ship water from :)

We always wear full mustang suits, have strong bladders, and aren’t shy :)

posted 01-28-2003 11:14 PM ET (US)         

IMO low freeboard and open transom is truly a double edge sword.

Fishability aside, the low freeboard and open transom allow the boat to shed water fast! Lower freeboard equals less water in the boat, and the open transom drains it. High freeboard and an enclosed transom are great until water comes into the boat - no bilge pump will drain the water like an open transom.

All rough water boats prone to swamping including RIBS, Coast Guard MLB’s, racing sailboats and most Classic Whalers are designed to ship water fast. I personally love the low freeboard and open transom. IMO it makes for a more seaworthy better fishing boat.

If one never goes out in bad weather, carries kids, or people not used to boats, I can understand why both are unnecessary, and can be a liability.

posted 01-29-2003 12:32 AM ET (US)            

Congratulations diveorfish! My wife and I are expecting in March and I am very excited. Hopefully, the economy does well in the next few years and I can share my Boston Whaler experiences. Until then I will read, listen and learn.

Louie Kokinis, H1 and H2’s are good for desert, but for rock climbing or most other off road they are useless. I do not want to offend anyone here that bought one, but they are posure Vehicles. As I mentioned before nothig will touch the New Jeep Rubicon, but I bet there are a few Defender 90 fans that would argue (I have owned British and I want to know what are they thinking).

Finally, this is a great board. I have checked and read messages everyday since I found it. Also, everyone seems fairly civil even though they do not agree. I hope I am right because nothing is worse than someone flying off the handle over an opinion or just trying to be vulgar or start trouble on a forum. I always think there are kids who read post and they do not need to read some immature adult's tirade or warp way of thinking. I just think there is a different class of people who own Boston Whalers.

Regards,

rbyrd

posted 01-29-2003 12:41 AM ET (US)            

If either hull design takes on that much water, the draft increases because of the vast weight increase and you must first get your gunwales above the water level
to prevent more water from entering the boat. And of course, getting the gunwales above the water level means decreasing the water inflow and getting rid of water in the boat. In that light, a boat with a higher freeboard will have higher and drier gunwales that those on a boat with a lower freeboard.

Some speak highly of the self bailing features of the post-classic Outrages. In my opinion, and I have a '96 17 OR, the self-bailing 'flapper valves' (for want of their proper name) are really intended and designed for minor residual water. Further, in actuality the flapper 'valves' (for want of the proper name for them) don't really work all that well as any small item (a leaf, a twig, et.al.) will prevent them from closing. In that case, with an abnormal load (2 or more adults) on that aft side or a boat full of water will cause water to enter the boat via those 'valves'. I will have to design and build a valve system that really works.

And there are undoubtedly other factors that enter into the picture - for example, the extra width of the post-classic hulls affects the dynamics of the boat in many situations - and is not factored in here in the interest of simplicity. I have not looked at this aspect in detail, however I think that the wider hull would be of benefit in this case.

posted 01-29-2003 12:42 AM ET (US)            

If either hull design takes on that much water, the draft increases because of the vast weight increase and you must first get your gunwales above the water level
to prevent more water from entering the boat. And of course, getting the gunwales above the water level means decreasing the water inflow and getting rid of water in the boat. In that light, a boat with a higher freeboard will have higher and drier gunwales that those on a boat with a lower freeboard.

Some speak highly of the self bailing features of the post-classic Outrages. In my opinion, and I have a '96 17 OR, the self-bailing 'flapper valves' (for want of their proper name) are really intended and designed for minor residual water. Further, in actuality the flapper 'valves' (for want of the proper name for them) don't really work all that well as any small item (a leaf, a twig, et.al.) will prevent them from closing. In that case, with an abnormal load (2 or more adults) on that aft side or a boat full of water will cause water to enter the boat via those 'valves'. I will have to design and build a valve system that really works.

And there are undoubtedly other factors that enter into the picture - for example, the extra width of the post-classic hulls affects the dynamics of the boat in many situations - and is not factored in here in the interest of simplicity. I have not looked at this aspect in detail, however I think that the wider hull would be of benefit in this case.

posted 01-29-2003 01:19 AM ET (US)            

Most every thing has it's place.

posted 01-29-2003 10:57 AM ET (US)         

That was my point exactly.

It takes ugly conditions (or real carelessness) to fill either boat in the first place. But when it happens (and it does) scuppers, bilge pumps, along with buckets working together will not clear the boat like that beautiful open transom.

Jerry

You’re right about the uselessness of the scuppers, and your comment about removing the plug is the right solution for the 17, but I was comparing the larger Classic Designs that are usually operated without a plug (I lost mine and haven’t bothered to replace it).

My understanding is that a 3 –1 length to width or higher will split waves better, and that a lower ratio will provide better stability at rest – I really don’t know. I’m sure there is also a formula that adds draft and freeboard, but I’m a “show me” type and think the proof is in the pudding.

I’ve stated many times that my buddy’s Commercial Zodiac (Hurricane) is IMO THE BEST rough water boat I’ve ever been in or driven. The thing can take insane water – but it lacks fishability :(

rbyrd

You’ve got bigger B_lls most - 13 quarters in a jeep!

posted 01-29-2003 01:08 PM ET (US)            

The new Wrangler's (TJ) are quite the machine. They have coil suspensions instead of the leaf springs of old. Coil springs are great for towing and can be set up correctly with work, but the coils have their benefits to. The new TJ’s are pretty stable vehicles. They are longer than the CJ-7 or YJ (Wrangler with square headlights) and wider. Now I would not drive 55 and just turn to lock and expect the TJ to remain up right like say a Corvette, but in a straight line it handles pretty well. When launching it will squat down and hook. There is no fish tailing and it will stay straight, but get a little bent out in second and third, nothing that is really serious. Side note the old Grand Nationals would get real squirrelly because they would hop and the turbo lag were pretty bad. So the TJ’s are not that bad and on a good track they hook up real good do to the heavy squat even with the stock tires. Feels just like a boat when the front tires comes off the ground and the frame twists, scared me the first time.

Concerning H1’s and 2’s. The H1 was a great move by the military to prepare for pre cold war areas of conflict. Middle East you can afford larger platforms due to the lack of trees and vegetation. You now need wide tires to stand on top of sand and need different type of articulation from the suspension. You now don’t have to transport across water or fit into close spaces, just different functions as to a Jeep. Now you can use for the H1 for troop transport, gun ship or rocket launcher. Nice things to have in the desert. Now for off road use the H1 is just too wide. Try to fit between trees or boulders and they will get stuck. Plus, you really do not want to try to winch one of those things up a 60 degree grade.

Jeeps on the other hand are short and stubby. You can fold the windows down to fit under and between trees. They are light so they can be turned back over if they flip and pulled up large gradients. They are basic (The H1 suspension is not basic) and easy to work on and cheap to build. Finally, and most important they are or use to be in the military solid axles. Solid axles give you twice the articulation to keep a vehicle sure footed and traction. Before I have to go into basic geometry just look at the length of a solid axle compared to the half of a independent suspension. Also, independent suspensions hang down lower except for the H1 but they just don’t have the articulation. Solid axles are the heart and soul of a Jeep and Land Rovers as foam filled hulls are for the Boston Whaler. Jeep people the can deal with body changes (except for the Wrangler’s were a major change would stir up allot of controversy) and complain about them as BW people complain about the loss of the Classic hulls, but the removal of the solid axles under all the Jeep models (especially the Wrangler) would cause the repeat and loyal customer to revolt and stop purchasing Jeep products.

I know offroad vehicles even though I do participate myself and have my opinions as do the Whaler loyal about their Whalers. That’s probable why I have been smitten by the Whalers due to there toughness and history (kind of like the Jeep of the sea) they have as with the Jeeps (one of the most significant vehicles ever dreamed except for what Ford did with the Model T), which have a ton of history.

Regards,

posted 01-29-2003 01:26 PM ET (US)            

My buddy's Rover could definately go places.

posted 01-29-2003 05:49 PM ET (US)            

A Classic Whaler hull can be outfitted with the latest in electronics--Color Fish Finders, Color GPS Chart Plotter, RADAR, etc.--making it the equal of any 2003 model boat out there.

A Classic Whaler hull can be refitted with the latest in mechanicals and repowered with the latest outboard engines--4-stroke, Optimax, HPDI--making it the equal of any 2003 model boat out there. You can have Digital Throttle and Shift technology on you 1988 Whaler if you want. You can have Smart Craft Guages on your 1978 Whaler if you want. You can have a computer controlled ECM-555 run engine on your 1968 Whaler if you want. There is no limit to the extent with which you can make any older Whaler the equal of any newer Whaler in the mechanicals and electronics on board.

The unsinkable constrution technique remains the same. It is not an issue.

This leaves the hull design and interior accommodations as the real points of comparison.

In favor of the older boats:

Lighter: less power required; easier to trailer.

Narrower: better hull shape (not as wide for similar length), more trailerable.

Blunted bows: more room in front cockpit; can also be used for sleeping aboard. Also, no inflation of LOA due to pointy bow.

Vee-Hull: despite repeated attempts to cast the classic OUTRAGE hull as something other than a vee-hull, the hull is a moderate vee constant deadrise hull, extremely similar to the famous Bertram Mopie hull that revolutionize offshore boat design. Whaler used to tout this a a deep-Vee hull.

In favor of the newer boats:

posted 01-29-2003 06:44 PM ET (US)            

Glad to see you back, rested and in fine form - I nearly swallowed my tongue reading your analysis of classic vs. non.

posted 01-29-2003 08:33 PM ET (US)            

I have an OR22, and I built a teak deck for the floor of the live well to keep things I want to store in there up and dry. The livewell floor in a 22 is part of the drainage system for water that lands on the foredeck, or winds up in the anchor locker or side storage bins, as the water runs to the sump at the rear of the live well, so any thing like life jackets that are stowed directly on the livewell floor are just about guaranteed to be wet a lot of the time.

Anyway, I then anchored a porta-potti to the teak deck in the livewell. With the Mills forward shelter up and a drop curtain at the rear of the shelter (and the lid off of the livewell), it's just as cozy and private as you'd ever want. I developed that idea as a means to get my wife out in Outre' with me more frequently, but as of yet I'm the only one who has used it...

posted 01-29-2003 10:33 PM ET (US)            

"If you have no interest in buying a new hull why knock them. Whaler isn't building them for you they are building them for the market that is out there buying new boats."

It is my opinion that Whaler is building boats for me. I will most likely never buy a new Whaler. Somebody else will buy the new one and at some point in time, I will buy it used from that person. If Whaler builds a crappy boat, the resale price on that boat will be depressed and the original owner won't get alot of money from me for the used boat. This resale issue will have a direct effect on the price of the new boats because not many people buy new boats and keep them forever. The people that buy new are going to be genuinely interested in the potential resale value of their boat.

posted 01-29-2003 10:40 PM ET (US)            

Don't you just use the 'blue bucket'? The 2.5 gallon version of the 5 gallon pail - the kind that every hardware store on the planet gets their bulk chain in. They're perfect - and they usually sell for about a buck once the chain is gone.

They sit closer to the deck than a 5 gal. pail so they're more stable. For sit down business, the top diameter will fit the tush of a grade schooler as well as a 'big' adult. For stand up business, they're easier to hold - and there's no leaning over the gunwale. Safety first, you know. The blue bucket is what we use even on our 25' with the self enclosed head. They're great for clean up chores on the boat, too.

Look, I boat with my wife and three kids (2 are daughters) as well as a number of other couples/kids. It's not a big deal. Just look the other way. So no one sees - oh no!

posted 01-29-2003 11:41 PM ET (US)            

Look at the catalog for 2003 and only consider boats less than 8-ft 6-in beam. This cuts your choices quite a bit. Wider boats are difficult to legally trailer. Even the great classic 25-Outrage had only an 8-ft beam. You can trailer it in any state without over-wide permits.

Some of the larger new hulls are really beyond the weight and beam of recreational boat trailering. When your all-up weight is way over 7000# you are past the point of casual trailering on the highway. You will need special purpose trucks to haul these big monsters. You can drag a 25-Outrage around with a passenger car (properly equipped). You need a 3/4-Ton truck with special tow package to trailer a 270 OUTRAGE (which is a comparably sized boat in terms of usable interior space). Plus a permit, in most states.

There is no question that use of CNC tools to cut exotic plugs for molds has allowed designers to employ certain shapes that previously would have been difficult to loft and cut in a mold or plug by hand. The question is whether these shapes are functionally and aesthetically superior to the simpler shapes of the classics.

Look at the lines of some of these newer boats. Often they are quite complex curves when in the past simple straight lines were used. Does this mean they're better?

posted 01-29-2003 11:44 PM ET (US)         

Great example!

rbyrd, Chap

I’m currently towing with a 4x4 diesel dually which is probably (ok, is) overkill, but pulls great. One day, I thought it would be nice to have the ability to make my own launch ramp :)

I found the H2 didn’t have enough power for me - it would be maxed with the boat in tow. I’d be crawling up hills, and really wasn’t designed to, or capable of making a launch ramp:(

The H1 OTOH is diesel, has a higher ground clearance and is more than capable of pulling and launching my boat without a ramp (no trees on the beach to worry about)

Is the TJ or the Rover capable of making a ramp (launching and retrieving my 22 from a beach) without spending H1 $’s?

Jmarlo

Try no food or drink 8 hours before, with a mandatory potty-stop before departure :)

If that fails, it sounds like John has a working solution.

Another one I looked at was to replace or extend the console forward where the cooler is located. The floor under the cooler would make for a great spot to mount a head. I decided the cooler was more important.

posted 01-30-2003 12:16 AM ET (US)         

It’s the same latch used on a Bayliner and Sea Ray (Really) :(

Jimh

Some of the new models are too much for my 1-ton diesel to pull (comfortably). I also prefer for the boat to rest between the wheel wells (vs over) - It keeps the boats center of gravity lower while trailering, and makes launching and retrieving in shallow water easier.

Jerry

Whalers manufacturing technique is primitive compared to others who use high-tech materials and processes (ie Kevlar, vacuum bag). It is the foam sandwich that makes the boats strong - not advanced materials or processes. I’ve been to the factory, believe me It wasn’t high-tech.

It’s true that the computers help, but designers of airplanes (who are light-years ahead of the marine guys) ALWAYS use a wind tunnels to verify. Some boat manufacturers use test-tanks and follow-up with full size prototypes before anything is put into production - Whaler does not.

posted 01-30-2003 12:19 AM ET (US)            

What type of boat? I would not use a TJ for pulling boats, but they do have good torque (inline 6) at low rpms. Also, the new TJ Rubicon has a 4 to 1 transfer case that in comparison (this is not an exact figure) to the 2.73 to 1 transfer on the H1's.

I just mentioned Jeeps because when the topic of Hummers come up people automatically assume they are the best offroad vehicle there is made today and that is not true. Also, for the Classic Whaler guys it just points out the newer is not better. Think about it the old Jeep designs are still being manufactured today in some Asian countries and that design is over 60 years old.

posted 01-30-2003 12:31 AM ET (US)            

To this end, I recommend my REFERENCE article at:

posted 01-30-2003 08:43 AM ET (US)            

Saying "it's a widely known fact the older whalers used open cell foam and the newer ones use closed cell foam" parrots what has been said on this FORUM and among boaters everywhere for years. But because something is repeated often (regardless of where) does not make it true. Unfortunately the evidence indicates that this is not true.

While one 1970 Whaler does not represent a very good sample, it does suggest the foam then was clearly closed cell polyurethane foam. In fact, I have yet to even here of a open celled polyurethane foam.

If you review the significant threads that discuss wet foam here on the FORUM (I have listed them in a post above on 2/11) you will read all sorts of assertions and claims about how the foam changed. Nobody, including Whaler itself, has provided any proof of this however. Until I see evidence to the contrary, the talk of “old foam vs. new foam” and “Whaler foam can’t absorb water” will remain mere dogma to my ears.

posted 01-30-2003 09:30 AM ET (US)            

www.eastcoastrover.com/INFOD110.html

Your just going to have to pick up Arnold's left overs or buy new and send in a photo of the whole arrangement dumping the boat/making a ramp on the beach to Jim.

posted 01-30-2003 11:02 AM ET (US)            

And as you point out, and has been stated many, many times before, the real strength of the BW boats is the sandwich - the glass, foam, glass sandwich. As I have pointed out previously, this construction is akin to an "I" or wide flange structural beam.

But, improvements are being and have been made to many of the finer aspects of the entire process. That is, for example, a different composition of the resin, changes (composition and size) of the glass fibers, seemingly small or minor changes to the foam - all of which may improve the strength of the fiberglass and/or foam. Also, be assured that many fabrication changes were made between the first Whalers and todays - that is, an employee may have had a problem with a particular part of the process and suggested an improvement. And many of these changes and improvements have been worked out long ago. Their fab process today is, I would suspect, well established.

I would expect that computers are used extensively in the design of BWs today. My first Whaler was purchased in '76 and may have benefitted from perhaps limitied computer design capabilities. But today, there is a lot more research being done in research facilities and universities that can be applicable and incorporated into new designs. This research may be directed toward reducing drag, improving stability, improving rough water handling characteristics, et.al.

These are the areas of improvement that we benefit from today.

posted 01-30-2003 11:17 AM ET (US)         

Chap

It would be nice, but I’m not about to waste money on a new H1. A second, larger boat, with a head and ability to overnight is IMO is a better way to go. That said, most H1’s (like their SUV cousins) never leave the pavement, have low mileage, and there are good deals out there. The fad is fading :)

posted 01-30-2003 11:34 AM ET (US)         

You’re right, and I didn’t mean to imply that they are working with paper and slide rules. Whaler does use computers; they went so far as to send me CAD drawings my fabricator required to make the radar tower. They are great people to work with and I in no way intend to bash the company (regardless of ownership).

posted 03-26-2006 11:15 PM ET (US)            

I was on the other whaler site and made a few points to bring out the difference between the old classic hulls and the new " sea ray/Brunswick whalers" and I thought I burned a US flag or dissed a readers wife.

Facts are that Brunswick is NOT the little private company in Rockland Ma that built your old whaler. Brunswick, being the largest marine corp in the world, looks at the stock price and not quirky things like how the new high hulls will be blown on a windy day. The old whaler engineers understood that in boating everything is a COMPROMISE ( you want a more stable boat - then you need it to sit lower in the water like a Bertram or a raft) and were willing to explain to their customers that their low freeboards might mean they will get wet on a choppy sea but will almost be guaranteed to make it back to the dock

The new hulls are lacking identity ( sure this is killing many old whaler lovers like myself) as they don't have the pure fishing function as an old whaler while also lacking in their comparison to the competition. They are NOT as appealing as Regulators, Contendors, Yellowfins, or Grady's when it comes to pure fishing platforms - as they in some ugly way come closer to the look of the euro hulls of their cousins ( Sea ray) in the Brunswick family

posted 03-27-2006 12:23 AM ET (US)            

How about this:

Post your best thoughts in a new article, and see if anyone rises to the bait. But please stop reviving these old discussions.