15-foot Inshore Fishing Boat: Whaler or Edgewater

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  15-foot Inshore Fishing Boat: Whaler or Edgewater

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   15-foot Inshore Fishing Boat: Whaler or Edgewater

Jkcam posted 08-04-2014 06:16 AM ET (US)
[Seeks readers'] experiences, thoughts, opinions on either a Boston Whaler 150 SUPER SPORT or an Edgewater 158SC boat for use inshore and [angling for] Tarpon [near] the beach. Edgewater has Yamaha F70 and a Karavan swing tongue trailer that is identical (almost) to the Whaler's trailer. Both new, both about the same price.
Peter posted 08-04-2014 07:11 AM ET (US)
I recently acquired an Edgewater 155CC which I believe is the same hull as the 158SC although the specifications show the 158SC to be several hundred pounds lighter. Mine is powered by a 70 HP Johnson which is adequate power although I wouldn't mind having a 90 Yamaha 2-stroke on the transom. Top speed is about 33 MPH with a nearly full fuel tank and one person. Comfortable cruise around 25 MPH. The 155CC rides like a much bigger boat in a chop. Very comfortable and very dry ride as you might expect from a Dougherty design. Also very stable at rest. I would expect the 158SC to have a similar ride but its several hundred pounds lighter according to the specification so it may bounce around a little more.
I haven't had any experience with the Whaler 150 Super Sport hull but judging by the higher top speed with less HP and significantly higher fuel economy of the Whaler, it's highly likely that the ride of the 150 SS will not be as smooth. The Edgewater is slower and less fuel efficient because it has a variable deadrise deep vee hull.
If I were you, I'd try to drive both in a chop and see which you like best.
Jefecinco posted 08-04-2014 09:04 AM ET (US)
Jkcam--for your stated use, a deep-V hull is less useful as it's an inherently less stable fishing platform. There is a reason inshore fishing boats (bay boats) are seldom deep-V designs.
I would think the better fuel economy of the 150 Super Sport and the more stable hull compared to the Edgewater would be important factors.
All other factors being more or less equal I would choose the Boston Whaler.
Butch
EJO posted 08-05-2014 07:05 AM ET (US)
The Boston Whaler would be more stable as mentioned but I would look at a Montauk 150 instead of the Super Sport if you are after fishing.
The 15 ft CC design and the front platform give you better fishing room compared to the SS. Also the Montauk 150 offers a live well which I don't think is an option on the 15ft SS
Hull/bottom being the same the Montauk is a better deal than the Super Sport and both are a better choice than the great Edgewater.
Peter posted 08-06-2014 07:29 AM ET (US)
I'd like to understand how one defines stability and then concludes how one hull is inherently more (or less) stable than another without actually having been in both hulls and conducted a stability experiment. The fact that a boat has a deep vee hull does not mean that its inherently less stable. There is much more to hull design than just whether the boat has a deep vee hull form or not.
For example, an Outrage 18 has a deep vee hull and a classic Montauk does not. Having spent considerable time in both hull forms, there is little doubt that the Outrage 18 is more stable at rest than the Montauk.
Having also owned both the Edgewater 155cc and the classic 15 Whaler hull, the Edgewater 155cc with its deep vee hull form is far more stable than the classic 15 Whaler hull.
Another example is the Whaler 27. It has a deep vee hull form yet it has one of the most stable platforms at rest for a boat of that size. In fact, the Whaler 27 is so stable at rest that it makes it more difficult to maneuver in close quarters than other hulls because the Whaler 27 does not lean over.
Again, my advice to Jkcam is to try both hulls out if you can in a variety of conditions and see which one you like best. They are very close in terms of their overall utility. Given the performance numbers, the ride of the Edgewater is likely to be softer and so that will extend the conditions upon which one can use the boat while still in comfort. I'm at the point where I will give up some top speed and fuel economy for better ride comfort.
Jefecinco posted 08-06-2014 07:51 PM ET (US)
Peter,
I agree with your advice to Jkam to try both boats before deciding.
I can understand why you take issue with my statement that deep V hulls are inherently less stable then modified V hulls such as are found on small Boston Whalers. Broad ranging statements cannot stand up to many specifics. But I continue to believe that the stability of the hulls mentioned are generally as I stated.
I've seen some deep V hulls on boats with wide flat surfaces outboard of the deep V portion that are in the water when the boats are at rest or "off plane" but are above the water and serve as spray rails when the boats are "on plane". I would not be surprised to learn that such boats are much more stable than the classic deep V which carries the hull shape much higher and has only very narrow or no spray rails.
I can positively state that my 24 foot deep V hull SeaRay was much less stable at rest and underway than my current Montauk 190 modified V hull.
So, I don't disagree with you.
Butch
Peter posted 08-07-2014 07:21 AM ET (US)
The reason I take issue with the generalization is that there is more to hull design and than just the category of the hull shape. Both my former Whaler 27 WD and a Regulator 23 center console, for example, have what is described as a deep vee hull. The former has a deadrise that is less than 20 degrees, the later a deadrise greater than 20 degrees. The Whaler 27 WD is super stable in static trim. The Regulator 23, not so. There is substantially no tilt or rocking when one traverses from the port to the starboard side in the Whaler 27. In contrast, if you do the same with a Regulator 23 at rest, it will tilt or rock pretty significantly particularly when the Regulator 23 isn't equipped with twin outboards because the extra weight of twin outboards helps bury the hard chines at the stern in the water to stabilize the boat. The classic Whaler deep vee hull design has "sponsons" that help stabilize the boat in static trim as well as provide better tracking as if the boat is attached to rails.
In my brief experience now with the 155CC, the boat runs exactly as Edgewater advertised and it is plenty stable for standing anywhere in the boat to cast a line and pull in fish. I would expect the same from the 158CS version of the hull. I would put its static stability on par with any classic Outrage/Revenge hull.
If I were in JKcam's position, besides ride comfort consideration, I think the quality and convenience of the outboard motor dealer that would provide the local motor service would have a significant influence on which boat I bought. The boats won't need service but the motors will at some point.

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: 15-foot Inshore Fishing Boat: Whaler or Edgewater
Jkcam	posted 08-04-2014 06:16 AM ET (US) [Seeks readers'] experiences, thoughts, opinions on either a Boston Whaler 150 SUPER SPORT or an Edgewater 158SC boat for use inshore and [angling for] Tarpon [near] the beach. Edgewater has Yamaha F70 and a Karavan swing tongue trailer that is identical (almost) to the Whaler's trailer. Both new, both about the same price.
Peter	posted 08-04-2014 07:11 AM ET (US) I recently acquired an Edgewater 155CC which I believe is the same hull as the 158SC although the specifications show the 158SC to be several hundred pounds lighter. Mine is powered by a 70 HP Johnson which is adequate power although I wouldn't mind having a 90 Yamaha 2-stroke on the transom. Top speed is about 33 MPH with a nearly full fuel tank and one person. Comfortable cruise around 25 MPH. The 155CC rides like a much bigger boat in a chop. Very comfortable and very dry ride as you might expect from a Dougherty design. Also very stable at rest. I would expect the 158SC to have a similar ride but its several hundred pounds lighter according to the specification so it may bounce around a little more. I haven't had any experience with the Whaler 150 Super Sport hull but judging by the higher top speed with less HP and significantly higher fuel economy of the Whaler, it's highly likely that the ride of the 150 SS will not be as smooth. The Edgewater is slower and less fuel efficient because it has a variable deadrise deep vee hull. If I were you, I'd try to drive both in a chop and see which you like best.
Jefecinco	posted 08-04-2014 09:04 AM ET (US) Jkcam--for your stated use, a deep-V hull is less useful as it's an inherently less stable fishing platform. There is a reason inshore fishing boats (bay boats) are seldom deep-V designs. I would think the better fuel economy of the 150 Super Sport and the more stable hull compared to the Edgewater would be important factors. All other factors being more or less equal I would choose the Boston Whaler. Butch
EJO	posted 08-05-2014 07:05 AM ET (US) The Boston Whaler would be more stable as mentioned but I would look at a Montauk 150 instead of the Super Sport if you are after fishing. The 15 ft CC design and the front platform give you better fishing room compared to the SS. Also the Montauk 150 offers a live well which I don't think is an option on the 15ft SS Hull/bottom being the same the Montauk is a better deal than the Super Sport and both are a better choice than the great Edgewater.
Peter	posted 08-06-2014 07:29 AM ET (US) I'd like to understand how one defines stability and then concludes how one hull is inherently more (or less) stable than another without actually having been in both hulls and conducted a stability experiment. The fact that a boat has a deep vee hull does not mean that its inherently less stable. There is much more to hull design than just whether the boat has a deep vee hull form or not. For example, an Outrage 18 has a deep vee hull and a classic Montauk does not. Having spent considerable time in both hull forms, there is little doubt that the Outrage 18 is more stable at rest than the Montauk. Having also owned both the Edgewater 155cc and the classic 15 Whaler hull, the Edgewater 155cc with its deep vee hull form is far more stable than the classic 15 Whaler hull. Another example is the Whaler 27. It has a deep vee hull form yet it has one of the most stable platforms at rest for a boat of that size. In fact, the Whaler 27 is so stable at rest that it makes it more difficult to maneuver in close quarters than other hulls because the Whaler 27 does not lean over. Again, my advice to Jkcam is to try both hulls out if you can in a variety of conditions and see which one you like best. They are very close in terms of their overall utility. Given the performance numbers, the ride of the Edgewater is likely to be softer and so that will extend the conditions upon which one can use the boat while still in comfort. I'm at the point where I will give up some top speed and fuel economy for better ride comfort.
Jefecinco	posted 08-06-2014 07:51 PM ET (US) Peter, I agree with your advice to Jkam to try both boats before deciding. I can understand why you take issue with my statement that deep V hulls are inherently less stable then modified V hulls such as are found on small Boston Whalers. Broad ranging statements cannot stand up to many specifics. But I continue to believe that the stability of the hulls mentioned are generally as I stated. I've seen some deep V hulls on boats with wide flat surfaces outboard of the deep V portion that are in the water when the boats are at rest or "off plane" but are above the water and serve as spray rails when the boats are "on plane". I would not be surprised to learn that such boats are much more stable than the classic deep V which carries the hull shape much higher and has only very narrow or no spray rails. I can positively state that my 24 foot deep V hull SeaRay was much less stable at rest and underway than my current Montauk 190 modified V hull. So, I don't disagree with you. Butch
Peter	posted 08-07-2014 07:21 AM ET (US) The reason I take issue with the generalization is that there is more to hull design and than just the category of the hull shape. Both my former Whaler 27 WD and a Regulator 23 center console, for example, have what is described as a deep vee hull. The former has a deadrise that is less than 20 degrees, the later a deadrise greater than 20 degrees. The Whaler 27 WD is super stable in static trim. The Regulator 23, not so. There is substantially no tilt or rocking when one traverses from the port to the starboard side in the Whaler 27. In contrast, if you do the same with a Regulator 23 at rest, it will tilt or rock pretty significantly particularly when the Regulator 23 isn't equipped with twin outboards because the extra weight of twin outboards helps bury the hard chines at the stern in the water to stabilize the boat. The classic Whaler deep vee hull design has "sponsons" that help stabilize the boat in static trim as well as provide better tracking as if the boat is attached to rails. In my brief experience now with the 155CC, the boat runs exactly as Edgewater advertised and it is plenty stable for standing anywhere in the boat to cast a line and pull in fish. I would expect the same from the 158CS version of the hull. I would put its static stability on par with any classic Outrage/Revenge hull. If I were in JKcam's position, besides ride comfort consideration, I think the quality and convenience of the outboard motor dealer that would provide the local motor service would have a significant influence on which boat I bought. The boats won't need service but the motors will at some point.