posted 09-16-2004 04:55 PM ET (US)        

Our much beloved 20 year old whaler 15' was injured in Hurricane Isabel and we are considering upgrading to a center console whaler. Does anyone have advice on the Dauntless versus the Montauk?
Someone said that the Dauntless rides better however there seems more standing room, especially behind the drivers seat, on Montauk.
We use it from our dock mostly to explore, show people around and water ski.

Thanks,

posted 09-16-2004 05:24 PM ET (US)            

Sorry to hear about your Whaler but Welcome aboard here.

There are 3 distinct Montauk hulls.

1. The original Montauk 17 Smirkless hull up until 1975
2. The Montauk 17 Smirkless hull up until 2002
3. The 170 Montauk with the Accu-Track hull fromm 2002 to present

The Montauk 17's have a much different ride from the newer Montauk 170.
The 170 Montauk has the same style of hull as the Dauntless 16'.

The main thing that the Dauntless has over any versions of the Montauk's is the Dauntless has a built-in fuel tank. The Montauk 17 and the 170 Montauk have above deck, external fuel tanks. This to me is a big plus for the Dauntless.

Other then that, it depends on whether you prefer the Classics or the newer models. The newer model 170 Montauks and the Dauntless have a better ride than the older Classics.

posted 09-16-2004 08:46 PM ET (US)            

- 45 gallons of built-in fuel
- much more storage (under the pilot's seat, under the aft seats)
- arguably a better ride from the deeper V, maybe offet by the shorter length
- 115 HP engine available

Some of the advantages of the 170 Montauk over the 160 Dauntless:

- somewhat more room, particularly in the bow
- planes off faster with less horsepower
- possibly higher resale value if it turns out to be the timeless classic that the earlier Montauk is
- Mills canvas available
- much lower list price, though it's not clear that actual sale prices differ by all that much

Both the 160 and the 170 have significantly more space, particularly in beam, than the classic Montauk 17.

I'm sure that other folks will kick in some additional points. I chose the Dauntless and don't regret it, though I sure wish I could get some canvas for it. Ultimately I don't think you can go wrong either way.

posted 09-17-2004 08:41 AM ET (US)            

http://www.engr.udayton.edu/staff/lriggins/Whaler/smallerWhalers.gif

As mentioned above, the 2002 and later Montauks are MUCH larger than prior Montauks. The beam is a whopping 8" greater. The new 170 hull, while not quite the same Accu-Track as the Dauntless, rides MUCH better than previous Montauks. The 170 has the largest factory cooler (72 quart) where other Whalers have a 54 quart. Compared to the 160, the 170 has much more deck area that lets you arrange the boat to suit you. There's room for an additional 54 quart cooler, a bait bucket and a Porta-Potti in the stern, while maintaining room to walk all the way around the boat.

The 2003 and later 150 Sport is huge compared to your Classic 15 Whaler, a coupla inches longer and 10" wider, as well as with greater freeboard. In fact, the 150 Sport has about the same total deck area as Classic 17 Montauks, being 4" wider than them. The 66" wide main seat has plenty of room for 3 adults, while the 33" removable middle seat has room for one adult with room left for those aft to step forward between that adult and the console. The 150 Sport hull is identical in design to the 170 Montauk, with 2" less freeboard, 4" less width, and 19" less length. The 170's extra length over the 150 is mostly taken up by the motorwell, with the rest used for the bow deck and the longitudinally mounted 8" cleat. The length of the cockpit sole is about the same.

Comparing list prices on the Whaler website, with a four-stroke, boarding ladder, cooler, bow railing with all cushions, the 150 Sport with 60HP is $17,XXX, the 170 Montauk is $23,XXX and the 160 Dauntless is $30,XXX, the latter two prices with 90HP.

We're very pleased with our 150 Sport, especially for the price, which was a major factor for us. My wife has a ruptured disk and I have a pinched nerve in my hip, so both of us need a sit-down boat with a good ride in chop. We've used the boat in steep chop as high as 3-5' in Lake Erie comfortably. The center consoles provide the better position of standing, which is even better than sitting in chop, but that isn't an option for us, and their narrow seats are wide enough for the two of us to be comfortable. The 160 and 170 are also much heavier and cut through chop better.

The major difference between the 150 Sport, and the 170 and 160, is power to weight ratio and speed. The 150 Sport cruises at 3/4 throttle at about 23-25 mph, while the 90HP boats run about 30-32 mph at 3/4 throttle. The 150 Sport has to run wide-open just to keep up with them at their cruise speed. While the 150 Sport has enough power to pull a tube or a skier on two, the 90HP boats are much better for pulling up a heavy adult on slalom ski.

posted 09-17-2004 10:09 AM ET (US)            

http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum8/HTML/000509.html