Purchase advice....Montauk 170 or Dauntless 160 or larger???

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  Purchase advice....Montauk 170 or Dauntless 160 or larger???

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Purchase advice....Montauk 170 or Dauntless 160 or larger???

SoCalSkipper posted 09-03-2012 09:35 PM ET (US)
Hello BW people!
Not much of a poster here on CW, but I really enjoy the information and good-natured people here!
I am at a crossroads on a boat purchase....
I am a long time sailor (sailboat sailor, that is) and have been saltwater fishing for the past 4-5 years. My last boat was a 24' Skipjack FB. Great boat, but with rising fuel costs and living 100 miles from the ocean, its use diminished greatly. I sold her last year.
My desire now for a boat will be......
NOTE: I am now a 50 years old and not as nimble as previous years!! I'm a big guy at 6'-275#. Not sure I want to be pounded in a boat or have to wear a kidney belt! I have considered a larger whaler (Nantucket 19, Dauntless 19, Outrage 20 but I am not convinced I need one based on my description of use.
I'm not a speed demon so ability to get up on plane with passengers, fuel, and gear and ability to handle my tasks below, are what I am looking for. I want to spend some boating/fishing time with my 13yo, involve him with the boat, as in a few years he will be off doing teenage stuff!
This may be my last boat so I am looking for something that will last, is of very good quality, safe, and has good resale value (should I need to sell). I enjoy working on my own boats so I can repair most anything (fiberglass, gelcoat, electrical, minor engine repairs/service... water pump, lower end service, plugs, etc).
I have a nice 24'W X 36'L X 10'H workshop/mancave so storage is not an issue.
Tow vehicle is a 2004 Toyota Sequoia SR5 with a 4.7L V8. To capacity is 5000#.
Those aboard for fishing trips (myself, friend, 13yo son).
1. 70%-80%...Fishing a local lake near my home for Striper and Trout
2. 20%-30%...Saltwater near shore fishing...primarily kelp paddies within 10 miles of shore, and an occasional trip to a local island offshore from Los Angeles....Catalina Island which is 26 miles off shore. The island trip would be 2-3 times per year weather permitting.
3. 3-4 times per year....family cruising/fishing on lake and in harbors, with my wife, 8yo, and 13yo. My 8yo has Autism so a safe boat and safety aboard is of primary concern. One day, my 8yo may be my primary fishing partner after my 13yo gets older and moves on to college and discovers girls.

I found the following boats for sale within 500 miles from my home. I have provide links for comparison. Both owners appear willing to negotiate within $1-3K.
Boat #1..... 2006 Montauk 170 with 2006 90hp Mercury 4 stroke (400 hours). Garaged kept. Galvanized trailer, no electronics other than VHF. $18,500
Link:
http://saltlakecity.craigslist.org/boa/3229236499.html
Boat #2......2003 Dauntless 160 with 2007 Mercury 115hp 4 stroke (80hrs) $17,200
Link:
http://sacramento.craigslist.org/boa/3245651117.html
I appreciate everyone's objective feedback!
Thanks
bretm1 posted 09-03-2012 11:07 PM ET (US)
Both great boats. You may be asked or this may be moved to post classic.
I have not owned or operated either a 2006 Montauk 170 or 2003 Dauntless 160. But I have dreamed. My feedback/opinion is based on what I have read, and have seen discussed here. Quite a few reviews of the 170 Montauk have left me with the impression that this boat, in it's hull design/overall design, combines a great combination of lateral stability as well as handling in chop. Some have gone as far to say that they are close in capabilty for ocean going to the classic Outrage/Dauntless hulls.
I'm currently cruising around over here in the "calm" areas of Buzzards Bay, MA. in a 1974 13 foot Boston Whaler (Dad's boat). I can't tell you how many times this summer I have embarrassed my wife and daughter by going up to these newer Boston Whaler 170 Montauk boats just to "check" to see if it is a 17 footer or 19 footer. They are "big" compared to the classic 17 foot Montauk.
I would not be put off, as my own personal choice, or in your requirements, by the fact that the tank in the 2006 Montauk 170 is above deck, that it is a 90 HP, and that it isn't as aggressive a hull design. I vote for the 2006 170 Montauk.
andrey320 posted 09-04-2012 01:29 PM ET (US)
I think the Dauntless has higher rails (my Dauntless 15 has high rails almost all the way around) - this would be a safety item to consider for your younger son.
By the way, when you get the boat, you should include Anacapa and Santa Cruz islands on your list of places to visit. I go to Anacapa (13 miles from Channel Islands harbor in Oxnard) pretty often in my Dauntless and enjoy every minute.
samwhaler posted 09-04-2012 05:34 PM ET (US)
My choice will be the Dauntless.
I have a 2004 Montawk 170, had it for 9 years, great boat. But I have also fished from my friends 2003 Dauntless 160.
The Dauntless rides and handles better, period. It has a 45 gallons under deck tank, very helpful in long trips to the islands. (After I turned 50, portable tanks are more of a hassle than convenience!) The fishing package with the front seat and trolling motor is a big plus. The jump seats are a plus for young children. This particular Dauntless has very little use, almost new. That Montauk on the other had appears to be well used.
Good luck with your choice.
Sam
SoCalSkipper posted 09-04-2012 09:48 PM ET (US)
I appreciate the replies.
With regard to the bow rail (or lack of one) on the D160....can a custom made bow rail be installed? If so, how would it mount? Is the gunnel built so as to access underside for through bolting and backing plate?
Thanks
lizard posted 09-04-2012 10:24 PM ET (US)
Re: the rare trip to Catalina, with either boat you are REALLY going to have to pick your days and I'm not sure I'd take your tween along. I know someone who has done it in a 13 footer (on the right day), but the same guys dives for lobster, around the Coronado islands, in Mexico, AT NIGHT. (The Coronado Islands are a group of four islands off the coast of Baja California, Mexico.) Great Whites have been spotted there. Sorry, but I am a coward, I can't imagine getting in that water, at night.
I have a friend, who had a 20-21 ft. Conquest, a regular traveler to Catalina (was married there). He knew how to pick his conditions. He had a harrowing return one Sunday, that his wife never recovered from. The boat was sold.
If you think about doing that crossing, I would recommend buddy boats. You will be departing early (still dark out) and returning early afternoon.
SoCalSkipper posted 09-04-2012 11:57 PM ET (US)
Thanks for the heads up Lizard. Yes, the times I would go would be with conditions permitting. I've been sailing, boating to island for past 32 years. I actually lived on the island for two years back in the 90's. I would not take my kids...it would be an early run with just two aboard and early return. Obviously, it would be based on reports of White Sea Bass or Yellows going off!!
I am still considering an 18-19....its just such a large boat for use on local So Cal lakes.
jimh posted 09-05-2012 12:08 AM ET (US)
Not long after the 170 MONTAUK was first introduced, I happened to visit a local Boston Whaler dealer's showroom. He did not have a 170 MONTAUK on the floor, but he did have a 160 DAUNTLESS. At that time the price of the 160 DAUNTLESS was many, many thousand dollars more than the new MONTAUK. I had already seen a new 170 MONTAUK and I was familiar with it. I looked over the 160 DAUNTLESS. I realized the dealer was not going to order a 170 MONTAUK to show on the floor until he sold the 160 DAUNTLESS. That is to say, in my opinion, the 170 MONTAUK was more boat for less money than the 160 DAUNTLESS.
Now the 160 DAUNTLESS does have a couple of features that are lacking in the 170 MONTAUK. The DAUNTLESS has an internal fuel tank, and the MONTAUK uses plastic on-deck tanks. Whether or not you consider a permanent internal fuel tank an asset compared to on-deck tanks is a matter of opinion, I suspect. I think the DAUNTLESS has nicer seating, more drink holders, more interior niceties than the MONTAUK.
For the two particular boats, I would investigate the MONTAUK's 90-HP engine. If it is not the electronic fuel injected engine you will want to keep in mind all the reported problems with the Mercury 90-HP four-cycle engine with carburetors.
When you buy a boat for the family, keep in mind that the family will probably be keen to use the boat in the first year of ownership, but, unless you grow your family into a really enthusiastic boating family, the allure of a boat can wear off rapidly on the family. After a year or two you might find that you yourself are the primary and almost only user of the boat. Get the boat you want, not the one that the kids like, unless you are certain the kids are going to be big on boating.
jimh posted 09-05-2012 12:23 AM ET (US)
Don't worry much about the model year of the hulls. The three-year difference in model years really means very little. These are boats that will last for 50 years if well cared for, and 2003 v. 2006 means little in the present value. Condition of the boat is more important. By the way, they both look very nice, almost perfect condition.
Many years ago I wrote an article about buying a Whaler and what is important. I think the article has held up well. Check it out at
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/buying.html
The accessories that are included in the deal can have a large influence, particularly the trailer and its condition. Electronics are nice if they are not too old.
andygere posted 09-05-2012 02:16 PM ET (US)
My dad has a Dauntless 16 (now called 160) and it has a much better deck plan in terms of seating and creature comforts vs. the Montauk. I just spent 2 weeks using the boat, and I'm always impressed with the layout, features and performance of this particular model. The built in fuel tank is an overwhelming advantage, and leaves a large storage locker under the pilot seat that is used to house the portable tanks on the Montauk. The built-in boarding ladder on the Dauntless is another nice feature. For a 16 footer, it handles chop very well, and is a nice handling boat. Ours has a 2-stroke 90, and I'd prefer the 115 that is on the boat you linked, if only to get it up on plane a bit faster. We use ours with a full load of people and beach gear most of the time, and the 90 is certainly adequate, but the 115 is the way to go. The linked boat has the trolling motor package, a big plus for fishing, but it's also why there is no bow rail. You could certainly have a custom bow rail made, or order one from Whaler (probably the more expensive way to go). Search the archives here for articles on how to modify the bow rail with a removable link that still allows use of the trolling motor.
One more thing: Looking at the photos, I realized that I've been aboard this particular boat. The owner has been a long time participant here and has participated in an number of the NorCal Whaler Rendezvous. He is meticulous in his care of the boat, and I know it to be in excellent condition. If I were to buy a Dauntless 16 on the used market, this is the one I'd want. It's a lot more boat for the money than the Montauk you've linked, and to me it's a no-brainer to grab this Dauntless while it's still around.
samwhaler posted 09-05-2012 02:43 PM ET (US)
SoCalSkipper, the bow rail can easily be added. Although from personal practical experience it makes little difference with children. They HAVE to sit on the cooler seat in-front of the counsel when you are underway. A child will jump over the railing while the boat is anchored, if they want to.
The idea of a larger boat should also be explored. A classic late 80's outrage 18 is an excellent choice. It helps also that you are good with restoration. Put a 150 hp new engine on it and you got yourself a nice setup for all your needs.
Jimh, I had the same experience in 2003 at the local boat dealer. The floor Dauntless was $10 K more than the anticipated Montauk. Everybody was waiting for the "cheap" new "improved" model. The Brand/model loyalty played a big role then. At that time I believed the Montauk was more boat for less money. Also the Dauntless would not fit in my garage. The boat on the trailer was 6 inches higher than the door.
Seeing boats in a show room and in pictures is not a good reflection on how they perform. As I mentioned before, after hours of using both, the Dauntless is an all around better boat, especially if you can get it cheaper, with all these extras and a bigger engine. As for the drink holders, sorry Jim, their number are equal. The two consoles, reversible pilot and cooler seats are identical in both models. If you consider removable fishing seats, front and stern, 2 jump seats, a stainless steel stern rod holders and a bow mount trolling motor "interior niceties" I have to disagree. These are very important and practical if you fish, well I realize you don't.
A hull with 80 hours of use, and an engine with less than 100 miles, is not the same as one with a 400 hours of use and bottom paint, no matter how they look good in the pictures.
The Montauk has the newer EFI Mercury.
Sam
jimh posted 09-05-2012 03:38 PM ET (US)
I think I gave the impression I didn't like the DAUNTLESS, but I need to clarify. I didn't like the DAUNTLESS compared to the MONTAUK at the price points they had back then in c.2002. The 170 MONTAUK at its introduction was given a very aggressive price. In the years that followed the price of the MONTAUK has risen by over $10,000. The initial price was only $17,655. Compare at
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/170Montauk/
Now the base price of a 170 MONTAUK is $28,339. That is quite a hefty price increase. The DAUNTLESS was a much more expensive boat back then than the new MONTAUK, and that is why I thought the MONTAUK was more boat for the money.
andygere posted 09-05-2012 04:41 PM ET (US)

quote:
Also the Dauntless would not fit in my garage. The boat on the trailer was 6 inches higher than the door.
Ours fits in a fairly standard sized garage (individual overhead doors for each bay), with enough overhead clearance, and no need for a folding tongue on the trailer. The motor must be tilted down for storage however. The total height is very much dependent on how the trailer is set up, so if that's an issue, make sure you take measurements on the actual boat and trailer that you are planning to buy.
jcdawg83 posted 09-06-2012 05:00 PM ET (US)
Not to be a Debbie Downer or anything but, in my opinion, neither of these boats are really large enough for 3 people to fish out of. A large adult, another adult, and a 13 year old who will only get bigger is a lot of people for a Montauk to fish comfortably and a 16' Dauntless is probably less roomy and less fishable than the Montauk.
I have a Montauk and it is fine for me, a reasonably large adult male, and a friend for fishing inshore or close offshore. I have tried fishing 3 before and we were generally in each others way most of the day and the seating was cramped at best. I've done some 20+ mile trips offshore on given days, but a Montauk is really not the boat to do that in.
A Montauk is a great boat for one or two people to fish out of, or spend a day on the water and is very comfortable and handles well inshore or in sight of land. For 3 or taking over the horizon trips, I would look for an 18 Outrage as a minimum.

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: Purchase advice....Montauk 170 or Dauntless 160 or larger???
SoCalSkipper	posted 09-03-2012 09:35 PM ET (US) Hello BW people! Not much of a poster here on CW, but I really enjoy the information and good-natured people here! I am at a crossroads on a boat purchase.... I am a long time sailor (sailboat sailor, that is) and have been saltwater fishing for the past 4-5 years. My last boat was a 24' Skipjack FB. Great boat, but with rising fuel costs and living 100 miles from the ocean, its use diminished greatly. I sold her last year. My desire now for a boat will be...... NOTE: I am now a 50 years old and not as nimble as previous years!! I'm a big guy at 6'-275#. Not sure I want to be pounded in a boat or have to wear a kidney belt! I have considered a larger whaler (Nantucket 19, Dauntless 19, Outrage 20 but I am not convinced I need one based on my description of use. I'm not a speed demon so ability to get up on plane with passengers, fuel, and gear and ability to handle my tasks below, are what I am looking for. I want to spend some boating/fishing time with my 13yo, involve him with the boat, as in a few years he will be off doing teenage stuff! This may be my last boat so I am looking for something that will last, is of very good quality, safe, and has good resale value (should I need to sell). I enjoy working on my own boats so I can repair most anything (fiberglass, gelcoat, electrical, minor engine repairs/service... water pump, lower end service, plugs, etc). I have a nice 24'W X 36'L X 10'H workshop/mancave so storage is not an issue. Tow vehicle is a 2004 Toyota Sequoia SR5 with a 4.7L V8. To capacity is 5000#. Those aboard for fishing trips (myself, friend, 13yo son). 1. 70%-80%...Fishing a local lake near my home for Striper and Trout 2. 20%-30%...Saltwater near shore fishing...primarily kelp paddies within 10 miles of shore, and an occasional trip to a local island offshore from Los Angeles....Catalina Island which is 26 miles off shore. The island trip would be 2-3 times per year weather permitting. 3. 3-4 times per year....family cruising/fishing on lake and in harbors, with my wife, 8yo, and 13yo. My 8yo has Autism so a safe boat and safety aboard is of primary concern. One day, my 8yo may be my primary fishing partner after my 13yo gets older and moves on to college and discovers girls. I found the following boats for sale within 500 miles from my home. I have provide links for comparison. Both owners appear willing to negotiate within $1-3K. Boat #1..... 2006 Montauk 170 with 2006 90hp Mercury 4 stroke (400 hours). Garaged kept. Galvanized trailer, no electronics other than VHF. $18,500 Link: http://saltlakecity.craigslist.org/boa/3229236499.html Boat #2......2003 Dauntless 160 with 2007 Mercury 115hp 4 stroke (80hrs) $17,200 Link: http://sacramento.craigslist.org/boa/3245651117.html I appreciate everyone's objective feedback! Thanks
bretm1	posted 09-03-2012 11:07 PM ET (US) Both great boats. You may be asked or this may be moved to post classic. I have not owned or operated either a 2006 Montauk 170 or 2003 Dauntless 160. But I have dreamed. My feedback/opinion is based on what I have read, and have seen discussed here. Quite a few reviews of the 170 Montauk have left me with the impression that this boat, in it's hull design/overall design, combines a great combination of lateral stability as well as handling in chop. Some have gone as far to say that they are close in capabilty for ocean going to the classic Outrage/Dauntless hulls. I'm currently cruising around over here in the "calm" areas of Buzzards Bay, MA. in a 1974 13 foot Boston Whaler (Dad's boat). I can't tell you how many times this summer I have embarrassed my wife and daughter by going up to these newer Boston Whaler 170 Montauk boats just to "check" to see if it is a 17 footer or 19 footer. They are "big" compared to the classic 17 foot Montauk. I would not be put off, as my own personal choice, or in your requirements, by the fact that the tank in the 2006 Montauk 170 is above deck, that it is a 90 HP, and that it isn't as aggressive a hull design. I vote for the 2006 170 Montauk.
andrey320	posted 09-04-2012 01:29 PM ET (US) I think the Dauntless has higher rails (my Dauntless 15 has high rails almost all the way around) - this would be a safety item to consider for your younger son. By the way, when you get the boat, you should include Anacapa and Santa Cruz islands on your list of places to visit. I go to Anacapa (13 miles from Channel Islands harbor in Oxnard) pretty often in my Dauntless and enjoy every minute.
samwhaler	posted 09-04-2012 05:34 PM ET (US) My choice will be the Dauntless. I have a 2004 Montawk 170, had it for 9 years, great boat. But I have also fished from my friends 2003 Dauntless 160. The Dauntless rides and handles better, period. It has a 45 gallons under deck tank, very helpful in long trips to the islands. (After I turned 50, portable tanks are more of a hassle than convenience!) The fishing package with the front seat and trolling motor is a big plus. The jump seats are a plus for young children. This particular Dauntless has very little use, almost new. That Montauk on the other had appears to be well used. Good luck with your choice. Sam
SoCalSkipper	posted 09-04-2012 09:48 PM ET (US) I appreciate the replies. With regard to the bow rail (or lack of one) on the D160....can a custom made bow rail be installed? If so, how would it mount? Is the gunnel built so as to access underside for through bolting and backing plate? Thanks
lizard	posted 09-04-2012 10:24 PM ET (US) Re: the rare trip to Catalina, with either boat you are REALLY going to have to pick your days and I'm not sure I'd take your tween along. I know someone who has done it in a 13 footer (on the right day), but the same guys dives for lobster, around the Coronado islands, in Mexico, AT NIGHT. (The Coronado Islands are a group of four islands off the coast of Baja California, Mexico.) Great Whites have been spotted there. Sorry, but I am a coward, I can't imagine getting in that water, at night. I have a friend, who had a 20-21 ft. Conquest, a regular traveler to Catalina (was married there). He knew how to pick his conditions. He had a harrowing return one Sunday, that his wife never recovered from. The boat was sold. If you think about doing that crossing, I would recommend buddy boats. You will be departing early (still dark out) and returning early afternoon.
SoCalSkipper	posted 09-04-2012 11:57 PM ET (US) Thanks for the heads up Lizard. Yes, the times I would go would be with conditions permitting. I've been sailing, boating to island for past 32 years. I actually lived on the island for two years back in the 90's. I would not take my kids...it would be an early run with just two aboard and early return. Obviously, it would be based on reports of White Sea Bass or Yellows going off!! I am still considering an 18-19....its just such a large boat for use on local So Cal lakes.
jimh	posted 09-05-2012 12:08 AM ET (US) Not long after the 170 MONTAUK was first introduced, I happened to visit a local Boston Whaler dealer's showroom. He did not have a 170 MONTAUK on the floor, but he did have a 160 DAUNTLESS. At that time the price of the 160 DAUNTLESS was many, many thousand dollars more than the new MONTAUK. I had already seen a new 170 MONTAUK and I was familiar with it. I looked over the 160 DAUNTLESS. I realized the dealer was not going to order a 170 MONTAUK to show on the floor until he sold the 160 DAUNTLESS. That is to say, in my opinion, the 170 MONTAUK was more boat for less money than the 160 DAUNTLESS. Now the 160 DAUNTLESS does have a couple of features that are lacking in the 170 MONTAUK. The DAUNTLESS has an internal fuel tank, and the MONTAUK uses plastic on-deck tanks. Whether or not you consider a permanent internal fuel tank an asset compared to on-deck tanks is a matter of opinion, I suspect. I think the DAUNTLESS has nicer seating, more drink holders, more interior niceties than the MONTAUK. For the two particular boats, I would investigate the MONTAUK's 90-HP engine. If it is not the electronic fuel injected engine you will want to keep in mind all the reported problems with the Mercury 90-HP four-cycle engine with carburetors. When you buy a boat for the family, keep in mind that the family will probably be keen to use the boat in the first year of ownership, but, unless you grow your family into a really enthusiastic boating family, the allure of a boat can wear off rapidly on the family. After a year or two you might find that you yourself are the primary and almost only user of the boat. Get the boat you want, not the one that the kids like, unless you are certain the kids are going to be big on boating.
jimh	posted 09-05-2012 12:23 AM ET (US) Don't worry much about the model year of the hulls. The three-year difference in model years really means very little. These are boats that will last for 50 years if well cared for, and 2003 v. 2006 means little in the present value. Condition of the boat is more important. By the way, they both look very nice, almost perfect condition. Many years ago I wrote an article about buying a Whaler and what is important. I think the article has held up well. Check it out at http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/buying.html The accessories that are included in the deal can have a large influence, particularly the trailer and its condition. Electronics are nice if they are not too old.
andygere	posted 09-05-2012 02:16 PM ET (US) My dad has a Dauntless 16 (now called 160) and it has a much better deck plan in terms of seating and creature comforts vs. the Montauk. I just spent 2 weeks using the boat, and I'm always impressed with the layout, features and performance of this particular model. The built in fuel tank is an overwhelming advantage, and leaves a large storage locker under the pilot seat that is used to house the portable tanks on the Montauk. The built-in boarding ladder on the Dauntless is another nice feature. For a 16 footer, it handles chop very well, and is a nice handling boat. Ours has a 2-stroke 90, and I'd prefer the 115 that is on the boat you linked, if only to get it up on plane a bit faster. We use ours with a full load of people and beach gear most of the time, and the 90 is certainly adequate, but the 115 is the way to go. The linked boat has the trolling motor package, a big plus for fishing, but it's also why there is no bow rail. You could certainly have a custom bow rail made, or order one from Whaler (probably the more expensive way to go). Search the archives here for articles on how to modify the bow rail with a removable link that still allows use of the trolling motor. One more thing: Looking at the photos, I realized that I've been aboard this particular boat. The owner has been a long time participant here and has participated in an number of the NorCal Whaler Rendezvous. He is meticulous in his care of the boat, and I know it to be in excellent condition. If I were to buy a Dauntless 16 on the used market, this is the one I'd want. It's a lot more boat for the money than the Montauk you've linked, and to me it's a no-brainer to grab this Dauntless while it's still around.
samwhaler	posted 09-05-2012 02:43 PM ET (US) SoCalSkipper, the bow rail can easily be added. Although from personal practical experience it makes little difference with children. They HAVE to sit on the cooler seat in-front of the counsel when you are underway. A child will jump over the railing while the boat is anchored, if they want to. The idea of a larger boat should also be explored. A classic late 80's outrage 18 is an excellent choice. It helps also that you are good with restoration. Put a 150 hp new engine on it and you got yourself a nice setup for all your needs. Jimh, I had the same experience in 2003 at the local boat dealer. The floor Dauntless was $10 K more than the anticipated Montauk. Everybody was waiting for the "cheap" new "improved" model. The Brand/model loyalty played a big role then. At that time I believed the Montauk was more boat for less money. Also the Dauntless would not fit in my garage. The boat on the trailer was 6 inches higher than the door. Seeing boats in a show room and in pictures is not a good reflection on how they perform. As I mentioned before, after hours of using both, the Dauntless is an all around better boat, especially if you can get it cheaper, with all these extras and a bigger engine. As for the drink holders, sorry Jim, their number are equal. The two consoles, reversible pilot and cooler seats are identical in both models. If you consider removable fishing seats, front and stern, 2 jump seats, a stainless steel stern rod holders and a bow mount trolling motor "interior niceties" I have to disagree. These are very important and practical if you fish, well I realize you don't. A hull with 80 hours of use, and an engine with less than 100 miles, is not the same as one with a 400 hours of use and bottom paint, no matter how they look good in the pictures. The Montauk has the newer EFI Mercury. Sam
jimh	posted 09-05-2012 03:38 PM ET (US) I think I gave the impression I didn't like the DAUNTLESS, but I need to clarify. I didn't like the DAUNTLESS compared to the MONTAUK at the price points they had back then in c.2002. The 170 MONTAUK at its introduction was given a very aggressive price. In the years that followed the price of the MONTAUK has risen by over $10,000. The initial price was only $17,655. Compare at http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/170Montauk/ Now the base price of a 170 MONTAUK is $28,339. That is quite a hefty price increase. The DAUNTLESS was a much more expensive boat back then than the new MONTAUK, and that is why I thought the MONTAUK was more boat for the money.
andygere	posted 09-05-2012 04:41 PM ET (US) quote: Also the Dauntless would not fit in my garage. The boat on the trailer was 6 inches higher than the door. Ours fits in a fairly standard sized garage (individual overhead doors for each bay), with enough overhead clearance, and no need for a folding tongue on the trailer. The motor must be tilted down for storage however. The total height is very much dependent on how the trailer is set up, so if that's an issue, make sure you take measurements on the actual boat and trailer that you are planning to buy.
jcdawg83	posted 09-06-2012 05:00 PM ET (US) Not to be a Debbie Downer or anything but, in my opinion, neither of these boats are really large enough for 3 people to fish out of. A large adult, another adult, and a 13 year old who will only get bigger is a lot of people for a Montauk to fish comfortably and a 16' Dauntless is probably less roomy and less fishable than the Montauk. I have a Montauk and it is fine for me, a reasonably large adult male, and a friend for fishing inshore or close offshore. I have tried fishing 3 before and we were generally in each others way most of the day and the seating was cramped at best. I've done some 20+ mile trips offshore on given days, but a Montauk is really not the boat to do that in. A Montauk is a great boat for one or two people to fish out of, or spend a day on the water and is very comfortable and handles well inshore or in sight of land. For 3 or taking over the horizon trips, I would look for an 18 Outrage as a minimum.