Montauk 170 - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  Montauk 170

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Montauk 170

majcap posted 12-19-2012 11:10 AM ET (US)
I am contemplating the purchase of a Montauk 170, but there are very few reviews. Anyone have experience with this new design? Also, what happened to the self-bailing feature? Thanks!
jimh posted 12-19-2012 11:21 AM ET (US)
I would not characterize the 170 MONTAUK as a new design. It first appeared in 2002, over ten years ago. At that time it received a great deal of attention and comment. See
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/170Montauk/
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/cetacea/cetaceaPage58.html
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000107.html
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/002035.html
If that is not enough pictures, text, and commentary, then try:
http://continuouswave.com/cgi-bin/sw.pl?Search=%22170+MONTAUK%22
which lists over 3,000 articles about the 170 MONTAUK.
SC Joe posted 12-23-2012 12:05 PM ET (US)
Find a [newer than] 2008 model-year as it will have a four-inch-taller center console.
If you can find one that someone has replaced the huge Mercury FourStroke 90 for any other manufacturer's engine, buy that one.
Be aware the 170 has very little storage space. There is small amount of room in the front anchor locker, some space in the cooler seat if you don't use it as a cooler, and a little bit of difficult to access space under the console.
I would recommend a used Montauk 190 over a 170. The 170 doesn't ride much better than its older cousin, either, so anything more than small rolling waves is back breaking.
Jefecinco posted 12-23-2012 07:30 PM ET (US)
Good luck finding a good used 190 Montauk for less than $30,000.
If a used 170 Montauk will fit your needs go for it.
Butch
swist posted 12-24-2012 12:37 PM ET (US)
I think the 170 ride is noticeably better than the 17.
SC Joe posted 12-24-2012 10:40 PM ET (US)

quote:
I think the 170 ride is noticeably better than the 17.
Wow. That's horrible.
elenakagan posted 12-25-2012 10:17 AM ET (US)
You should look at a Pioneer boat, better ride and construction.
johnhenry posted 12-26-2012 09:56 AM ET (US)
Sc joe, you have had a wild hair about the 170 you sold a couple of years ago. Your opinion is biased by some bad experiences that you had. I have an 08 170 and have had very little problems with it. The motor is big, but reliable, quiet, and fast. Yes there is an air filter issue(disentegrates) and yes the harness grommet going into the engine has to be secured differently, but otherwise it has been trouble free. The 170 is a much more stable platform than the older Montauks, period. Yes there is very little storage, but not any less than an older one. The 08 has the raised console.
Are the newer ones built any better or worse than the older ones???? Don't know but I consider new and old to be very good boats. Did it bother me that Whaler only gave you the Mercury option, yes it did, but I got over that. The 170 is self bailing, just like the old ones it will fill only so far.
My biggest complaint was dealer service. I could not stand the Service Manager. He did not understand the concept of customer service. I won't go into details, the locals will all know who I am talking about. I resolved that by going somewhere else.
SC Joe posted 12-26-2012 11:55 AM ET (US)
I don't think telling someone who asks about the many shortcomings of the 170 Montauk is having a "wild hair". The boat is very expensive for what it is, and if someone is willing to pay that price, I would think knowing the problems with it would be important.
johnhenry posted 12-26-2012 03:32 PM ET (US)
The problem Joe is the fact that every post you have had in the last couple of years has been negative towards Whalers. You have an obvious bone to pick and I don't understand why you even post here. You don't own one and obviously don't have anything better to do than trash them. Do you work for a competitor or do you feel it is your duty to persuade everyone who is looking for a boat NOT to buy a whaler?
SC Joe posted 12-26-2012 04:42 PM ET (US)
I didn't tell him not buy a Whaler. I didn't even recommend another brand. In fact I told him to find a used 190 over a new 170. For the same or close to the same money, it's a better buy.
I do not, nor have I ever worked in the boat business.
Jefecinco posted 12-26-2012 07:27 PM ET (US)
Elenakagen,
I visited the Pioneer Boat site and didn't see anything to excite me in the 17 foot range. Nice looking boats but not a lot of information on the web site. Certainly there was nothing to make me think the construction is superior to that of a Boston Whaler. I did like it that they seemed to offer just about every engine option except Mercury although I really like my Verado.
Are Pioneer boats unsinkable and do they maintain an upright position allowing the engine to continue running and to get back on plane by powering forward. Admittedly weather can turn a swamped Whaler upside down as with all boats.
Nothing beats first hand knowledge so I assume you have some.
Butch
elenakagan posted 12-26-2012 09:28 PM ET (US)
How many people do you know that have been saved at sea attributable solely to the fact it was a Whaler, NONE in all probablity. Most boats today in this size if not all have positive flotation. However, if you prefer the 1/4" fiberglass shell with the foam filled hull, have at it. There are many other vendors that have nice boats in the 17-18' foot range that are far superior to the hard ride and extreme expense of a NEW Whaler. Yes, I own a 15' Sport, worst riding hull in anything over a 6" chop.
macfam posted 12-26-2012 10:28 PM ET (US)
Boston Whalers, new or used' are considered "expensive". However, over time, they may be the one of the least expensive in terms of "cost of ownership".
Very few brands hold their value as well as Boston Whaler.
macfam posted 12-26-2012 10:28 PM ET (US)
Boston Whalers, new or used' are considered "expensive". However, over time, they may be the one of the least expensive in terms of "cost of ownership".
Very few brands hold their value as well as Boston Whaler.
Jefecinco posted 12-27-2012 10:08 AM ET (US)
Elenakagan,
Although you didn't answer my questions about Pioneer boats I will answer your questions.
First, I know no one who has been rescued at sea from any boat and I rather doubt that you know anyone who has been rescued from a boat at sea.
Second, I do prefer to have a boat with an inner and outer fiberglass shell filled with foam to keep me afloat in the event the boat becomes swamped. I like the feature so much that I own two such boats and got rid of a single hull boat in order to buy a Boston Whaler almost fourteen years ago. I don't know how the ride of your 15' Sport compares with the ride of a 170 Montauk. Based on LOA and displacement I would assume the ride of the Montauk would be better than the ride of the Sport. I know the ride of my 190 Montauk is better than the ride of my 1981 13 Sport.
Yes, all 17 foot power boats are required to have positive flotation. Unfortunately only a few are able to maintain a level attitude when full of water. I wonder how many of them keep the power head above water so the engine can return on plane dumping the water from the hull in the process after being swamped.
Finally, I responded to your post to learn why you prefer the ride and construction of a Pioneer boat. I don't know the boats and assumed you did because you recommend them over Boston Whalers. I thought there might be some basis for your recommendation and, being a curious person, I asked the question. No offense intended.
Butch
froberts posted 12-27-2012 02:38 PM ET (US)
I have a 04 170 and love it. I bought the boat in 07 for 14,500,The boat new in nov 03 was 19500 on the invoice with a fishing package. I allway wonder why, when some one is looking for a used whaler do people allway bring up the brand new whaler price. The down sides of this boat is lack of storage if you use the cooler as a cooler (i use it as life jacket storage).No built in live well unless you buy 08 or newer. The good is easy to handle, can fish flats(1 foot of water)or go 6 miles off shore.I live in charleston sc and fish mostly in the inlets to 2 miles off shore, and the boat handles the 2 to 3 foot chop really well. I love this boat and would not trade for any other brand or model out there.
SC Joe posted 12-27-2012 07:45 PM ET (US)
I believe that the both the Pioneer 175 and the Key West 1720 are fully foamed boats, but with the added strength of having actual hull stringers the Montauk 170 does not have.
After selling a 2008 Montauk 170 2 years later (after purchasing at a steep discount due to the economy) I didn't find it to hold its value any better than a Grady White or a Sea Hunt I have purchased new and subsequently sold later.
Jefecinco posted 12-28-2012 10:04 AM ET (US)
Joe,
Lacking the engineering qualification to discuss the relative merits of the Pioneer or Key West stringer reinforced hulls vs a 170 Montauk hull I'll call it a draw.
It's not surprising that you found the Boston Whaler, Sea Hunt and Grady White to depreciate at a similar rate. Most of the depreciation of almost anything will occur in the first couple of years of ownership. When buying or selling your greatest enemy is anxiety over getting it done.
You do seem to get through the boats having bought and sold a Boston Whaler, Grady White and Sea Hunt since 2008. I feel like a piker having bought only four boats and sold two in 36 years.
Butch
SC Joe posted 12-29-2012 01:25 PM ET (US)
Those boats were bought and sold since 2005; each approximately 2 years apart.
L H G posted 12-29-2012 01:57 PM ET (US)
Jack (E.K.) For me, the answer is twice, and that is two times too many. Once over Memorial Day weekend in 1972, in my 1971 16' Nauset during an ill-advised run from Nantukcet Island back to Hyannis MA, seas rapidly building to 12'. Remember what other 16' outboard boats looked like in 1972?
Second, fishing for sailfish 3 miles off Boca Raton FL in late December 1987, in my Outrage 18 filled with sea water to the gunwales with 5 of us aboard.
In both cases, in any other similar sized boats we would hve been "goners", as there were no other boats even in sight.
elenakagan posted 12-29-2012 10:40 PM ET (US)
Larry, I still owe you a boat ride! I'm spending most time up here in Tequesta, was out yesterday and released one sail.

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: Montauk 170
majcap	posted 12-19-2012 11:10 AM ET (US) I am contemplating the purchase of a Montauk 170, but there are very few reviews. Anyone have experience with this new design? Also, what happened to the self-bailing feature? Thanks!
jimh	posted 12-19-2012 11:21 AM ET (US) I would not characterize the 170 MONTAUK as a new design. It first appeared in 2002, over ten years ago. At that time it received a great deal of attention and comment. See http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/170Montauk/ http://continuouswave.com/whaler/cetacea/cetaceaPage58.html http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000107.html http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/002035.html If that is not enough pictures, text, and commentary, then try: http://continuouswave.com/cgi-bin/sw.pl?Search=%22170+MONTAUK%22 which lists over 3,000 articles about the 170 MONTAUK.
SC Joe	posted 12-23-2012 12:05 PM ET (US) Find a [newer than] 2008 model-year as it will have a four-inch-taller center console. If you can find one that someone has replaced the huge Mercury FourStroke 90 for any other manufacturer's engine, buy that one. Be aware the 170 has very little storage space. There is small amount of room in the front anchor locker, some space in the cooler seat if you don't use it as a cooler, and a little bit of difficult to access space under the console. I would recommend a used Montauk 190 over a 170. The 170 doesn't ride much better than its older cousin, either, so anything more than small rolling waves is back breaking.
Jefecinco	posted 12-23-2012 07:30 PM ET (US) Good luck finding a good used 190 Montauk for less than $30,000. If a used 170 Montauk will fit your needs go for it. Butch
swist	posted 12-24-2012 12:37 PM ET (US) I think the 170 ride is noticeably better than the 17.
SC Joe	posted 12-24-2012 10:40 PM ET (US) quote: I think the 170 ride is noticeably better than the 17. Wow. That's horrible.
elenakagan	posted 12-25-2012 10:17 AM ET (US) You should look at a Pioneer boat, better ride and construction.
johnhenry	posted 12-26-2012 09:56 AM ET (US) Sc joe, you have had a wild hair about the 170 you sold a couple of years ago. Your opinion is biased by some bad experiences that you had. I have an 08 170 and have had very little problems with it. The motor is big, but reliable, quiet, and fast. Yes there is an air filter issue(disentegrates) and yes the harness grommet going into the engine has to be secured differently, but otherwise it has been trouble free. The 170 is a much more stable platform than the older Montauks, period. Yes there is very little storage, but not any less than an older one. The 08 has the raised console. Are the newer ones built any better or worse than the older ones???? Don't know but I consider new and old to be very good boats. Did it bother me that Whaler only gave you the Mercury option, yes it did, but I got over that. The 170 is self bailing, just like the old ones it will fill only so far. My biggest complaint was dealer service. I could not stand the Service Manager. He did not understand the concept of customer service. I won't go into details, the locals will all know who I am talking about. I resolved that by going somewhere else.
SC Joe	posted 12-26-2012 11:55 AM ET (US) I don't think telling someone who asks about the many shortcomings of the 170 Montauk is having a "wild hair". The boat is very expensive for what it is, and if someone is willing to pay that price, I would think knowing the problems with it would be important.
johnhenry	posted 12-26-2012 03:32 PM ET (US) The problem Joe is the fact that every post you have had in the last couple of years has been negative towards Whalers. You have an obvious bone to pick and I don't understand why you even post here. You don't own one and obviously don't have anything better to do than trash them. Do you work for a competitor or do you feel it is your duty to persuade everyone who is looking for a boat NOT to buy a whaler?
SC Joe	posted 12-26-2012 04:42 PM ET (US) I didn't tell him not buy a Whaler. I didn't even recommend another brand. In fact I told him to find a used 190 over a new 170. For the same or close to the same money, it's a better buy. I do not, nor have I ever worked in the boat business.
Jefecinco	posted 12-26-2012 07:27 PM ET (US) Elenakagen, I visited the Pioneer Boat site and didn't see anything to excite me in the 17 foot range. Nice looking boats but not a lot of information on the web site. Certainly there was nothing to make me think the construction is superior to that of a Boston Whaler. I did like it that they seemed to offer just about every engine option except Mercury although I really like my Verado. Are Pioneer boats unsinkable and do they maintain an upright position allowing the engine to continue running and to get back on plane by powering forward. Admittedly weather can turn a swamped Whaler upside down as with all boats. Nothing beats first hand knowledge so I assume you have some. Butch
elenakagan	posted 12-26-2012 09:28 PM ET (US) How many people do you know that have been saved at sea attributable solely to the fact it was a Whaler, NONE in all probablity. Most boats today in this size if not all have positive flotation. However, if you prefer the 1/4" fiberglass shell with the foam filled hull, have at it. There are many other vendors that have nice boats in the 17-18' foot range that are far superior to the hard ride and extreme expense of a NEW Whaler. Yes, I own a 15' Sport, worst riding hull in anything over a 6" chop.
macfam	posted 12-26-2012 10:28 PM ET (US) Boston Whalers, new or used' are considered "expensive". However, over time, they may be the one of the least expensive in terms of "cost of ownership". Very few brands hold their value as well as Boston Whaler.
macfam	posted 12-26-2012 10:28 PM ET (US) Boston Whalers, new or used' are considered "expensive". However, over time, they may be the one of the least expensive in terms of "cost of ownership". Very few brands hold their value as well as Boston Whaler.
Jefecinco	posted 12-27-2012 10:08 AM ET (US) Elenakagan, Although you didn't answer my questions about Pioneer boats I will answer your questions. First, I know no one who has been rescued at sea from any boat and I rather doubt that you know anyone who has been rescued from a boat at sea. Second, I do prefer to have a boat with an inner and outer fiberglass shell filled with foam to keep me afloat in the event the boat becomes swamped. I like the feature so much that I own two such boats and got rid of a single hull boat in order to buy a Boston Whaler almost fourteen years ago. I don't know how the ride of your 15' Sport compares with the ride of a 170 Montauk. Based on LOA and displacement I would assume the ride of the Montauk would be better than the ride of the Sport. I know the ride of my 190 Montauk is better than the ride of my 1981 13 Sport. Yes, all 17 foot power boats are required to have positive flotation. Unfortunately only a few are able to maintain a level attitude when full of water. I wonder how many of them keep the power head above water so the engine can return on plane dumping the water from the hull in the process after being swamped. Finally, I responded to your post to learn why you prefer the ride and construction of a Pioneer boat. I don't know the boats and assumed you did because you recommend them over Boston Whalers. I thought there might be some basis for your recommendation and, being a curious person, I asked the question. No offense intended. Butch
froberts	posted 12-27-2012 02:38 PM ET (US) I have a 04 170 and love it. I bought the boat in 07 for 14,500,The boat new in nov 03 was 19500 on the invoice with a fishing package. I allway wonder why, when some one is looking for a used whaler do people allway bring up the brand new whaler price. The down sides of this boat is lack of storage if you use the cooler as a cooler (i use it as life jacket storage).No built in live well unless you buy 08 or newer. The good is easy to handle, can fish flats(1 foot of water)or go 6 miles off shore.I live in charleston sc and fish mostly in the inlets to 2 miles off shore, and the boat handles the 2 to 3 foot chop really well. I love this boat and would not trade for any other brand or model out there.
SC Joe	posted 12-27-2012 07:45 PM ET (US) I believe that the both the Pioneer 175 and the Key West 1720 are fully foamed boats, but with the added strength of having actual hull stringers the Montauk 170 does not have. After selling a 2008 Montauk 170 2 years later (after purchasing at a steep discount due to the economy) I didn't find it to hold its value any better than a Grady White or a Sea Hunt I have purchased new and subsequently sold later.
Jefecinco	posted 12-28-2012 10:04 AM ET (US) Joe, Lacking the engineering qualification to discuss the relative merits of the Pioneer or Key West stringer reinforced hulls vs a 170 Montauk hull I'll call it a draw. It's not surprising that you found the Boston Whaler, Sea Hunt and Grady White to depreciate at a similar rate. Most of the depreciation of almost anything will occur in the first couple of years of ownership. When buying or selling your greatest enemy is anxiety over getting it done. You do seem to get through the boats having bought and sold a Boston Whaler, Grady White and Sea Hunt since 2008. I feel like a piker having bought only four boats and sold two in 36 years. Butch
SC Joe	posted 12-29-2012 01:25 PM ET (US) Those boats were bought and sold since 2005; each approximately 2 years apart.
L H G	posted 12-29-2012 01:57 PM ET (US) Jack (E.K.) For me, the answer is twice, and that is two times too many. Once over Memorial Day weekend in 1972, in my 1971 16' Nauset during an ill-advised run from Nantukcet Island back to Hyannis MA, seas rapidly building to 12'. Remember what other 16' outboard boats looked like in 1972? Second, fishing for sailfish 3 miles off Boca Raton FL in late December 1987, in my Outrage 18 filled with sea water to the gunwales with 5 of us aboard. In both cases, in any other similar sized boats we would hve been "goners", as there were no other boats even in sight.
elenakagan	posted 12-29-2012 10:40 PM ET (US) Larry, I still owe you a boat ride! I'm spending most time up here in Tequesta, was out yesterday and released one sail.