Dauntless vs Montauk vs Outrage - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  Dauntless vs Montauk vs Outrage

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Dauntless vs Montauk vs Outrage

grossjas posted 03-09-2010 09:12 PM ET (US)
I am doing research on which is the right boat for me, but it seems like an impossible choice, my budget is 10K. Any help would be appreciated. Theres a 17 Outrage 96 with a 2000 150 evinrude for 13k that seems nice but not sure about an Outrage.
PeteB88 posted 03-09-2010 09:55 PM ET (US)
They are all great boats. Dig through the archives to find details and testimonials that have been posted over the years. My Outrage 17 (1995) is awesome.
Why don't you include more details about the boat you are considering, photo link and where you are.
Good luck
deepwater posted 03-09-2010 10:06 PM ET (US)
Montauk,,there is no better boat at the size weight or price It gos shallow its gos deep
masbama posted 03-09-2010 10:19 PM ET (US)
I had a well preseved 1977 Montauk. I loved it. May be the perfect 2-3 person boat. I came across a mint 1999 18' Dauntless and bought it; selling the Montauk. a totally different animal. Needs 135plus HP and is heavy. It is an eight foot beam and is wide. It does have tremendous storage and a much better ride in chop. Very roomy-I love it but I do miss my Montauk sometimes. Funny thing is; when i was thinking of my next Whaler after the Montauk my interests were a 1991-1995 17' Outrage or 1988-89 18' Outrage. My that will be my next Whaler purchase.
grossjas posted 03-09-2010 10:25 PM ET (US)
http://www.powerboatlistings.com/view/8609
theres the link to the ourage 17, why do you love it? What kind of layout does it have? This boat shows no interior photos so I am curious.
Jason
deepwater posted 03-09-2010 10:36 PM ET (US)
Montauk,,This boat with the proper motor and the right water conditions turn into the biggest ski doo on the planet,,Its the best when running a tight winding river full of known snags and stumps,,Just doing it smooth and easy like it was an everyday thing with someone new on board,,they know you done that river before
PeteB88 posted 03-09-2010 10:40 PM ET (US)
How can you beat a 17 foot boat that thinks it's at least a 22, accommodate up to six easy, probably has a bow locker cushion, two seats aft next to the motor, electronics, original bimini and canvas will ride super nice and handle big seas like no other, blows away all and hangs with the legends.
That boat is an Outrage II post 1995. Mine is a Clasic Outrage, probably lighter and less beam.
The Outrage you are looking at is probably heavier and has a bigger motor rating than my boat which has a 115. The whole package looks great and if the motor checks out it's a great price. I think Outrage is superior to Dauntless but others will argue.
No one can really say anything bad about the Montauk and I lusted after one for years before I happened on the OR 17. I bought it in the dead of winter, no sea trial and no real idea what I was getting. The previous owner had a Montauk and said the Outrage blew it away with smoother ride bigger sea capabilities. I believe the ride is better but not the big sea thing.
I think Montauk has flatter bottom thus pounds in chop as opposed to cutting through it. Montauk is also rock solid stable side to side because of flat bottom but no big deal for me. It is lighter and easy to ground handle and runs on smaller engine. They are incredible.
There are plenty of others more expert than I out there in Continuous Wave land - perhaps they will jump in.
One more thing - - another Classic OR 17 owner had Montauk before OR and says pretty much the same thing.
Good luck
deepwater posted 03-09-2010 11:03 PM ET (US)
A Montauk is the nearest thing to being 23 and a pro snow border than you will ever be
Jefecinco posted 03-10-2010 09:20 AM ET (US)
Jason,
That's a very nice looking boat. It should be a good performer with that engine. If it was closer to me I'd have to check it out.
I'm not sure the asking price is realistic because it has bottom paint which can hide some possible issues and the engine is, I believe, a FICHT. The 150 HP earlier FICHTs have a less than stellar reputation for reliability. However, if it has been in use for ten years I believe it should be trustworthy. However, the paint and engine can be a basis for some negotiation on price.
If you are seriously interested in the boat I recommend you have the engine carefully checked by an Evinrude Certified technician.
The boat is very well liked by the forum's contributors.
Butch
Matt F posted 03-10-2010 09:45 AM ET (US)
I have the feeling that this has all the makings of a sort of Civil War.
(Said the guy with a 17’ Edgewater -- it's kinda like being Canadian and watching The States go at it).
skred posted 03-10-2010 10:21 AM ET (US)
My only comparison is my former 1992 Montauk, and my former 2002 16 Dauntless. Both had 90 hp motors. The Montauk weighed about 950 lbs., The Dauntless 160 weighed 1,500 lbs.
Naturally, the performance of the Montauk was much "zippier", but the ride in "chop" was not as smooth as the Dauntless. Fuel economy was far better in the Montauk, and I never had a problem with room for 4-5 people on the Montauk or the Dauntless, however, the Dauntless was more sensitive to weight distribution. Overall, I liked the Montauk as an all-around boat. Not as impressive visually, perhaps, as the Dauntless, but classy in its own right.
DaveS posted 03-10-2010 03:39 PM ET (US)
I had a 1989 17' Newport that I pulled the console from and installed an OEM console from a Montauk. Great setup. I had a 90hp Evinrude on the back of her and it was a great package. I "moved up" to a 1991 17' Outrage and I have to say, it's a big improvement. It only weighs a few more pounds then my old Newtauk, but it has a few things that the Montauk doesn't, for starters, an interal fuel tank. Additionally, the hull shape provides a smoother ride and the super sized console gives even more storage. Rated for 120hp, there are members who have theirs powered by 90hp engines with no problems at all.
I like the Outrage better because it gives you a lot more of those "big boat" features we all look for while not breaking the bank for fuel/towing/etc. If weight is a concern, you can't do much better then the moneauk, a great design and one of my favorite layouts ever...
Phil T posted 03-10-2010 06:52 PM ET (US)
What do you plan to do with the boat? Fish, cruise, haul freight?
How many people on average will be aboard?
Where will the boat be used, lakes, near coast, offshore?
Water ski or tow a tube?
Plan to trailer, if so what is the towing limit of your vehicle?
There are pluses and minuses to each model. Your answers will help us help you.
grossjas posted 03-10-2010 07:03 PM ET (US)
I am seriously considering the Outrage 17, I found one in Baltimore that seems great and the guy seems legitimate. Its a 99 with a 135 optimax in great shape, has all the bells and whistles for 10K. I think I am going to find a surveyor to take a look at it. I have pics, but not a link to show. All input would be very helpful.
grossjas posted 03-10-2010 07:06 PM ET (US)
What is the total weight of the Outrage 17, engine and trailer. I have a full size truck, but would rather conserve gas and use my wife small suv if I were to buy it and pick it up.
Jerry Townsend posted 03-10-2010 08:05 PM ET (US)
gross* --- I have a '96 17 Outrage with a 115 Johnson which I love. This works well for me - at 5000 feet altitude, with 3 - 4 people fishing or dinking around, 2 - 3 people pulling a couple of tubes.
Mine has only been in salt water once - whereas the photo you provided showed the boat had been bottom painted suggesting that it has normally been in salt water.
You asked the weight - 1700 lbs. Swamp capacity 2600 lbs (boat, engine, contents), draft 12 inches, max HP 150 - min HP 90.
The gunwales are a bit higher - which I like - but others may have different feelings - well I like the higher gunwales in a bit nasty weather, and with small kids. The boat weighs a bit more - which works both ways - it takes more power and fuel - but it is more stable and provides a smoother ride in rough water. The design is BW's Accutrak which a bit different from the "classic" design. But there are several inprovements incorporated into the design - including a built-in 56 gallon aluminum gas tank - a drain from the gas tank cavity - scoupers on each side.
I pull mine with a 3/4 ton pickup - but the weight doesn't make much difference - when one is talking of a couple hundred pounds. A couple of thousand or tons - yes. I don't know the terrain you are dealing with - but use your pickup - it will do the job. --- Jerry/Idaho
Stevebaz posted 03-12-2010 11:39 AM ET (US)
I have a 1983 Montauk as everyone says its a great boat but to solve your delima all I can add is its easy to tow and doesnt hurt my milage much, Its cheap to maintain and registration and insurance is cheap. And even with the old 75 2 stroke Evinrude I have it costs me 10 bucks to launch the boat and $20.00 in gas to play all day. If gas goes back up to its high prices this really matters to me. For me once I had the boat it costs me about a grand a year to use and enjoy it barring expensive issues. Knock on wood for me those issues have been minimal. Now things get much more expensive when you start adding toys and frills.
http://s654.photobucket.com/albums/uu262/harmoneybaz/1983%20montauk/?start=0
fluke posted 03-16-2010 12:00 AM ET (US)
I just want say that the montauk is the best looking whaler ever built, but they are all beautiful!
Mark
fluke posted 03-16-2010 12:00 AM ET (US)
I just want say that the montauk is the best looking whaler ever built, but they are all beautiful!
Mark
fluke posted 03-16-2010 12:04 AM ET (US)
i just want to say that the montauk was the best looking whaler ever built, but they are all beautiful!
mark
grossjas posted 03-18-2010 04:35 PM ET (US)
Well, I bought my 1st whaler, I opted for a 99 Outrage 17, it seemed to fit my needs perfectly since I often go out in big water. Any input on the boat is great. I had a mechanic and a surveyor check it out they both had nothing to say but great things. My one concern was it had a 135 optimax on it, but it only has 225 hours. The mechanic said it looked great and had full compression. Opinions?
prj posted 03-18-2010 04:57 PM ET (US)
Congratulations. That post-classic 17' Outrage is a GIANT small boat and will treat you right on your local waters.
ConB posted 03-18-2010 05:06 PM ET (US)
Congratulations. Were did you find it?
I'll watch for you on Grand Traverse Bay.
Con
grossjas posted 03-18-2010 05:35 PM ET (US)
I found it in Maryland, it has seen a little salt water, but the surveyor reassured me that it was well taken care of. Looking forward to splashing it in the Bay.
southshore fisherman posted 03-19-2010 09:10 AM ET (US)
Hi Jason, Would you mind telling us what you paid and what was included in your package. I too am thinking about a 17 and am not sure on which model. I'm trying to get ideas on prices of boats actually sold.
If you don't want to make it public I understand. Thanks.
lakeman posted 03-21-2010 01:22 PM ET (US)
Grossjas, Congratulations on your purchase.
Southshore fisherman, maybe this will help
I am retired, fishing all my life and owned many boats. I have owned a 18 Dauntless for the last 5 years, and it is big roomy and heavy and serves me well. Having said that, I would gladly trade it for a 17 foot Mauntauk(Newer version) for the sake of not having to have a big truck or a V8 powered SUV to pull it around, not that a V6 could not do it but prefer the better power of the V8. The weight of the Dauntless boat/trailer/gear/motor is around +-(probably +) 3000 pounds, very close to the 3500 pound limit for a single axle trailer.
At this time of my life other thing are more important than a boat of this type and my fishing and boating are, well limited by choice and chance.
K Albus posted 03-21-2010 04:52 PM ET (US)
Lakeman, you're probably underestimating the weight of your 18 Dauntless and its trailer. My 2002 Dauntless 180 weighs over 3,800 lbs. on its trailer. See: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum8/HTML/004048.html
lakeman posted 03-22-2010 05:51 AM ET (US)
K Albus,
Thanks for the thought on the weight of the boat, I have often though about having it weighed, maybe now I will, I also though that, it should have a tandem trailer under it, and tried add a tandem setup when I had some repair work on it a couple of years ago, and they said there was not enough room for the extra tires. I keep looking for a tandem trailer, but the new ones are super expensive(for the good ones) so I will go out of my way and weigh the boat. Funny most all 18 Dauntless boats come with a single axle trailer.

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: Dauntless vs Montauk vs Outrage
grossjas	posted 03-09-2010 09:12 PM ET (US) I am doing research on which is the right boat for me, but it seems like an impossible choice, my budget is 10K. Any help would be appreciated. Theres a 17 Outrage 96 with a 2000 150 evinrude for 13k that seems nice but not sure about an Outrage.
PeteB88	posted 03-09-2010 09:55 PM ET (US) They are all great boats. Dig through the archives to find details and testimonials that have been posted over the years. My Outrage 17 (1995) is awesome. Why don't you include more details about the boat you are considering, photo link and where you are. Good luck
deepwater	posted 03-09-2010 10:06 PM ET (US) Montauk,,there is no better boat at the size weight or price It gos shallow its gos deep
masbama	posted 03-09-2010 10:19 PM ET (US) I had a well preseved 1977 Montauk. I loved it. May be the perfect 2-3 person boat. I came across a mint 1999 18' Dauntless and bought it; selling the Montauk. a totally different animal. Needs 135plus HP and is heavy. It is an eight foot beam and is wide. It does have tremendous storage and a much better ride in chop. Very roomy-I love it but I do miss my Montauk sometimes. Funny thing is; when i was thinking of my next Whaler after the Montauk my interests were a 1991-1995 17' Outrage or 1988-89 18' Outrage. My that will be my next Whaler purchase.
grossjas	posted 03-09-2010 10:25 PM ET (US) http://www.powerboatlistings.com/view/8609 theres the link to the ourage 17, why do you love it? What kind of layout does it have? This boat shows no interior photos so I am curious. Jason
deepwater	posted 03-09-2010 10:36 PM ET (US) Montauk,,This boat with the proper motor and the right water conditions turn into the biggest ski doo on the planet,,Its the best when running a tight winding river full of known snags and stumps,,Just doing it smooth and easy like it was an everyday thing with someone new on board,,they know you done that river before
PeteB88	posted 03-09-2010 10:40 PM ET (US) How can you beat a 17 foot boat that thinks it's at least a 22, accommodate up to six easy, probably has a bow locker cushion, two seats aft next to the motor, electronics, original bimini and canvas will ride super nice and handle big seas like no other, blows away all and hangs with the legends. That boat is an Outrage II post 1995. Mine is a Clasic Outrage, probably lighter and less beam. The Outrage you are looking at is probably heavier and has a bigger motor rating than my boat which has a 115. The whole package looks great and if the motor checks out it's a great price. I think Outrage is superior to Dauntless but others will argue. No one can really say anything bad about the Montauk and I lusted after one for years before I happened on the OR 17. I bought it in the dead of winter, no sea trial and no real idea what I was getting. The previous owner had a Montauk and said the Outrage blew it away with smoother ride bigger sea capabilities. I believe the ride is better but not the big sea thing. I think Montauk has flatter bottom thus pounds in chop as opposed to cutting through it. Montauk is also rock solid stable side to side because of flat bottom but no big deal for me. It is lighter and easy to ground handle and runs on smaller engine. They are incredible. There are plenty of others more expert than I out there in Continuous Wave land - perhaps they will jump in. One more thing - - another Classic OR 17 owner had Montauk before OR and says pretty much the same thing. Good luck
deepwater	posted 03-09-2010 11:03 PM ET (US) A Montauk is the nearest thing to being 23 and a pro snow border than you will ever be
Jefecinco	posted 03-10-2010 09:20 AM ET (US) Jason, That's a very nice looking boat. It should be a good performer with that engine. If it was closer to me I'd have to check it out. I'm not sure the asking price is realistic because it has bottom paint which can hide some possible issues and the engine is, I believe, a FICHT. The 150 HP earlier FICHTs have a less than stellar reputation for reliability. However, if it has been in use for ten years I believe it should be trustworthy. However, the paint and engine can be a basis for some negotiation on price. If you are seriously interested in the boat I recommend you have the engine carefully checked by an Evinrude Certified technician. The boat is very well liked by the forum's contributors. Butch
Matt F	posted 03-10-2010 09:45 AM ET (US) I have the feeling that this has all the makings of a sort of Civil War. (Said the guy with a 17’ Edgewater -- it's kinda like being Canadian and watching The States go at it).
skred	posted 03-10-2010 10:21 AM ET (US) My only comparison is my former 1992 Montauk, and my former 2002 16 Dauntless. Both had 90 hp motors. The Montauk weighed about 950 lbs., The Dauntless 160 weighed 1,500 lbs. Naturally, the performance of the Montauk was much "zippier", but the ride in "chop" was not as smooth as the Dauntless. Fuel economy was far better in the Montauk, and I never had a problem with room for 4-5 people on the Montauk or the Dauntless, however, the Dauntless was more sensitive to weight distribution. Overall, I liked the Montauk as an all-around boat. Not as impressive visually, perhaps, as the Dauntless, but classy in its own right.
DaveS	posted 03-10-2010 03:39 PM ET (US) I had a 1989 17' Newport that I pulled the console from and installed an OEM console from a Montauk. Great setup. I had a 90hp Evinrude on the back of her and it was a great package. I "moved up" to a 1991 17' Outrage and I have to say, it's a big improvement. It only weighs a few more pounds then my old Newtauk, but it has a few things that the Montauk doesn't, for starters, an interal fuel tank. Additionally, the hull shape provides a smoother ride and the super sized console gives even more storage. Rated for 120hp, there are members who have theirs powered by 90hp engines with no problems at all. I like the Outrage better because it gives you a lot more of those "big boat" features we all look for while not breaking the bank for fuel/towing/etc. If weight is a concern, you can't do much better then the moneauk, a great design and one of my favorite layouts ever...
Phil T	posted 03-10-2010 06:52 PM ET (US) What do you plan to do with the boat? Fish, cruise, haul freight? How many people on average will be aboard? Where will the boat be used, lakes, near coast, offshore? Water ski or tow a tube? Plan to trailer, if so what is the towing limit of your vehicle? There are pluses and minuses to each model. Your answers will help us help you.
grossjas	posted 03-10-2010 07:03 PM ET (US) I am seriously considering the Outrage 17, I found one in Baltimore that seems great and the guy seems legitimate. Its a 99 with a 135 optimax in great shape, has all the bells and whistles for 10K. I think I am going to find a surveyor to take a look at it. I have pics, but not a link to show. All input would be very helpful.
grossjas	posted 03-10-2010 07:06 PM ET (US) What is the total weight of the Outrage 17, engine and trailer. I have a full size truck, but would rather conserve gas and use my wife small suv if I were to buy it and pick it up.
Jerry Townsend	posted 03-10-2010 08:05 PM ET (US) gross* --- I have a '96 17 Outrage with a 115 Johnson which I love. This works well for me - at 5000 feet altitude, with 3 - 4 people fishing or dinking around, 2 - 3 people pulling a couple of tubes. Mine has only been in salt water once - whereas the photo you provided showed the boat had been bottom painted suggesting that it has normally been in salt water. You asked the weight - 1700 lbs. Swamp capacity 2600 lbs (boat, engine, contents), draft 12 inches, max HP 150 - min HP 90. The gunwales are a bit higher - which I like - but others may have different feelings - well I like the higher gunwales in a bit nasty weather, and with small kids. The boat weighs a bit more - which works both ways - it takes more power and fuel - but it is more stable and provides a smoother ride in rough water. The design is BW's Accutrak which a bit different from the "classic" design. But there are several inprovements incorporated into the design - including a built-in 56 gallon aluminum gas tank - a drain from the gas tank cavity - scoupers on each side. I pull mine with a 3/4 ton pickup - but the weight doesn't make much difference - when one is talking of a couple hundred pounds. A couple of thousand or tons - yes. I don't know the terrain you are dealing with - but use your pickup - it will do the job. --- Jerry/Idaho
Stevebaz	posted 03-12-2010 11:39 AM ET (US) I have a 1983 Montauk as everyone says its a great boat but to solve your delima all I can add is its easy to tow and doesnt hurt my milage much, Its cheap to maintain and registration and insurance is cheap. And even with the old 75 2 stroke Evinrude I have it costs me 10 bucks to launch the boat and $20.00 in gas to play all day. If gas goes back up to its high prices this really matters to me. For me once I had the boat it costs me about a grand a year to use and enjoy it barring expensive issues. Knock on wood for me those issues have been minimal. Now things get much more expensive when you start adding toys and frills. http://s654.photobucket.com/albums/uu262/harmoneybaz/1983%20montauk/?start=0
fluke	posted 03-16-2010 12:00 AM ET (US) I just want say that the montauk is the best looking whaler ever built, but they are all beautiful! Mark
fluke	posted 03-16-2010 12:00 AM ET (US) I just want say that the montauk is the best looking whaler ever built, but they are all beautiful! Mark
fluke	posted 03-16-2010 12:04 AM ET (US) i just want to say that the montauk was the best looking whaler ever built, but they are all beautiful! mark
grossjas	posted 03-18-2010 04:35 PM ET (US) Well, I bought my 1st whaler, I opted for a 99 Outrage 17, it seemed to fit my needs perfectly since I often go out in big water. Any input on the boat is great. I had a mechanic and a surveyor check it out they both had nothing to say but great things. My one concern was it had a 135 optimax on it, but it only has 225 hours. The mechanic said it looked great and had full compression. Opinions?
prj	posted 03-18-2010 04:57 PM ET (US) Congratulations. That post-classic 17' Outrage is a GIANT small boat and will treat you right on your local waters.
ConB	posted 03-18-2010 05:06 PM ET (US) Congratulations. Were did you find it? I'll watch for you on Grand Traverse Bay. Con
grossjas	posted 03-18-2010 05:35 PM ET (US) I found it in Maryland, it has seen a little salt water, but the surveyor reassured me that it was well taken care of. Looking forward to splashing it in the Bay.
southshore fisherman	posted 03-19-2010 09:10 AM ET (US) Hi Jason, Would you mind telling us what you paid and what was included in your package. I too am thinking about a 17 and am not sure on which model. I'm trying to get ideas on prices of boats actually sold. If you don't want to make it public I understand. Thanks.
lakeman	posted 03-21-2010 01:22 PM ET (US) Grossjas, Congratulations on your purchase. Southshore fisherman, maybe this will help I am retired, fishing all my life and owned many boats. I have owned a 18 Dauntless for the last 5 years, and it is big roomy and heavy and serves me well. Having said that, I would gladly trade it for a 17 foot Mauntauk(Newer version) for the sake of not having to have a big truck or a V8 powered SUV to pull it around, not that a V6 could not do it but prefer the better power of the V8. The weight of the Dauntless boat/trailer/gear/motor is around +-(probably +) 3000 pounds, very close to the 3500 pound limit for a single axle trailer. At this time of my life other thing are more important than a boat of this type and my fishing and boating are, well limited by choice and chance.
K Albus	posted 03-21-2010 04:52 PM ET (US) Lakeman, you're probably underestimating the weight of your 18 Dauntless and its trailer. My 2002 Dauntless 180 weighs over 3,800 lbs. on its trailer. See: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum8/HTML/004048.html
lakeman	posted 03-22-2010 05:51 AM ET (US) K Albus, Thanks for the thought on the weight of the boat, I have often though about having it weighed, maybe now I will, I also though that, it should have a tandem trailer under it, and tried add a tandem setup when I had some repair work on it a couple of years ago, and they said there was not enough room for the extra tires. I keep looking for a tandem trailer, but the new ones are super expensive(for the good ones) so I will go out of my way and weigh the boat. Funny most all 18 Dauntless boats come with a single axle trailer.