Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
17 Montauk: 200 Mercury 2.4L
|Author||Topic: 17 Montauk: 200 Mercury 2.4L|
posted 09-02-2004 08:45 PM ET (US)
I repowered my 1988 Montauk with a 1988 200 2.4L Mercury. The boat runs 64 mph on GPS. The boat is unreal. It has been a few years since I posted here, but I hope to offer some valuable input.
posted 09-02-2004 09:08 PM ET (US)
Ever consider going up against a "Cigarette"?
posted 09-02-2004 11:30 PM ET (US)
Why put a 200 hp motor on a Montauk?
posted 09-02-2004 11:37 PM ET (US)
It's like putting a 500 HP small-block into a 1970s Ford Pinto or a Volkswagon bug :-)
posted 09-02-2004 11:44 PM ET (US)
Well, it's not JUST like that. A properly powered Montauk is one of the best small boats ever built. A properly powered Pinto is a poor handling fire trap :-)
posted 09-02-2004 11:47 PM ET (US)
posted 09-03-2004 12:09 AM ET (US)
Now thats my kinda guy.
I never did swallow the BS that a Montauk is only a 45 mph boat.
I say put enough power on anything & she will get the speed you want.
I ran a 21' boat that ran 3-1/2 mph short of 200 mph with 2,600 hp twisting a 2 blade prop.
posted 09-03-2004 11:15 PM ET (US)
Speed is great in a boat designed for it. A Montauk at that speed is death waiting to happen.
I find it difficult to believe anything from a poster that doesn't fill out his profile. I rate it as a BS post.
posted 09-03-2004 11:18 PM ET (US)
200hp? Girlie man motor!!!!!!!!!
Look, just do what your heart is begging you to do. Mount a 747 jet engine on that baby and see what she's really made of!!!!!
"Thank you for flying Whaler airlines!"
posted 09-04-2004 01:25 PM ET (US)
I would say that is just about right for the speed. That 2.4 liter would be an excellent choice for v6 power for the 17 montauk hull because of the weight. The local bay constables around here had one with a 225 hp 3.0 liter mid 1990s Evinrude but said it handled like crap so they went to the 130 v4 Johnson which they love. I always wanted to see a whaler with the 175 carb 60 degree Johnson/evinrude at 376lbs. I think that weight is a big issue at any of these speeds. but set up right with Sea star steering and a good kill switch, I would say in the right hands that it would be a good fast multipurpose boat. But then again the 70 zuki 4 stroke getting 10mpg sounds pretty cool also. I have been knocking at 100mph in a 15 hydrostream viper with a 2.4 liter offshore Mercury back in the day so this doesnt seem too crazy to me at least. Just my 2 cents.
posted 09-04-2004 10:17 PM ET (US)
A friend of ours with more money than brains managed to squeeze a professionally built, blown 427 into a Gremlin, one of the world's goofiest, ugliest little cars. It was a VERY fast Gremlin, especially in the quarter mile.
I always thought it was a silly thing to do. Don't get me wrong. Building a hot rod sounds like fun - I just wouldn't want to make one out of a Gremlin, a garden tractor, or a Montauk.
|BOB KEMMLER JR||
posted 09-05-2004 12:39 AM ET (US)
alkar thats funny you said that.I had a friend in high school who took the factory 304 v8 out of his gremlin and dropped a built 401 out of a jeep right in.they were the same size externally and it looked bone stock.long story short,there were quite a few guys running around with very bruised egos.isn't that kind of the really fun part?thats why i built my glhs omni up,18 psi of boost and it will flat spank most cars.I'd love to have a Mischief with one of the older 115 6cyl mercs on it.
posted 09-05-2004 02:16 AM ET (US)
I think it would be neat to have a Mischief too Bob. That's a boat that SCREAMS for power. It's supposed to be a hot rod - sort of like a mini-Temptation.
There was a real beauty of a Mischief for sale about 18 months ago. It looked almost perfect. If I lived on a lake I probably would have bought it.
To me, the Montauk represents the pinnacle of practical small boat design. Mine was powered with a Mercury 100 horse motor, and it went like a scalded ape! If I bought another Montauk I'd probably power it with a 70 or, maybe, a 90. I guess I'm turning in to an old fuddy-duddy... :-)
posted 09-05-2004 11:00 AM ET (US)
200hp and only 64 mph....Please my fathers montauk with a 90hp mariner runs 50+ easy on a good day. Plus that big 200 would put the transom underwater on a montauk.
|BOB KEMMLER JR||
posted 09-05-2004 11:25 AM ET (US)
I knew of a very sweet mischief with a 100 merc on it.Now that i have our new home in Naples figured out,i may be able to see if it's still for sale.;o)
posted 09-07-2004 11:24 AM ET (US)
Seems like a Montauk would chine walk over speeds of 50mph to the point where it would not be controllable.
posted 09-07-2004 12:32 PM ET (US)
posted 09-08-2004 08:39 AM ET (US)
the boat has a # 17 on it and it lives in Boca Raton. The boat runs 64.5 on GPS.
Name: Ryan Haines
Careet: Midnight Express Sales
Hynautic HP Steering
22" 3-Blade Mercury Chopper
No Jackplate yet
Next addition: already bought a two person sit down bolster.
posted 09-08-2004 08:43 AM ET (US)
The motor only weighs 50 lbs more than my old 100 GT. I have two batteries under the console so it helps balance it out. The boat sits very nicely. When I nail it the whole boat can jump out of the water. In flat water with the motor trimmed level, the outer chines keep the boat very stable. I will go down to the warehouse today and take some pictures. It is really a fun little boat.
posted 09-08-2004 10:49 AM ET (US)
I was in a gray US NAVY Midnight Express in July and passed you. My boat had 4-250 Yamaha HPDI's. I think we were just north of 14th Street in Pompano. [Huh? I was in Michigan in July--jimh]
posted 09-08-2004 07:40 PM ET (US)
I wasn't doubting the fact that you might have been stupid enough to hang a 2.4L Merc on a Montauk.
Even after receiving your unwanted 338KB e-mail, with attachments, I still say it is a BS post and has no value to anyone other than you.
My e-mail is available to anyone on the forum that may have Boston Whaler questions that I may be able to answer. Your use of it is out of line.
posted 09-08-2004 08:00 PM ET (US)
A Mercury 90 4-stroke weighs 386# and Boston Whaler pre-rigged many of these before the new 170 came out.
An older 2.4 liter Mercury 150 or 200 carb weighs around 400#. That's a lot more HP for the same weight.
As a matter of fact, the 90 4-stroke and current 200 EFI share the same cowling part, just different decals.
I would think this Montauk would be more than 2 MPH faster than my big 'ol 25 Outrage with twin 200 EFI's.
posted 09-08-2004 08:52 PM ET (US)
How does she handle over 50 mph? I have always thought that would be a great calm water set up since its not that much heavier than a 90 or 115hp. Thanks
posted 09-08-2004 09:33 PM ET (US)
The boat is a fun project. I shared it because the site showed what different people do with their Whalers. I looked at your website and I was really impressed with the craftsmanship of your downrigger set up. I use my boat to run around down in the FL Keys to keep up with the other small hot-rod boats. I imagine you do more fishing. The beauty is we have the virtually the same boat! Please look at the big picture here and enjoy that someone in a different generation or two than you have something in common. I'll bet we probably drive the same brand of truck. Ford F-550 and a Dodge Hemi 1/2 ton.
LHG/CaptBone: I gotta tell ya, I think the boat is at the "hull speed". at around 50 if you try to trim it out above horizontal, it starts chine-walking bad. I mean it'll throw you easy. However, if you hold the trim in dead level, it runs very smoothly right up to 64. I really expected to get more speed out of it but I am satisfied.
posted 09-08-2004 09:39 PM ET (US)
17- 18 ' Checkmates were often rigged with 200's & they were around the same weight as Montauks but the Montauk's got to be real squirrely anything above 50 or so..
I bet the transom can handle the motor no problem..
Love to see some pictures.
posted 09-08-2004 11:28 PM ET (US)
I wonder if a flattened section or a pad on the last 2-3ft would help the ride at top end?
posted 09-09-2004 06:44 AM ET (US)
[Moved thread from another forum.]
posted 09-09-2004 12:50 PM ET (US)
To the doubters (Dick) , I happen to know this boat and owner.
It does exist and what has been stated on performance is 100% factual.
posted 09-09-2004 08:27 PM ET (US)
Captbone is on the right track. I have a Montauk with a 1985 inline 6 mercury 115hp and the thing can be a handfull as it approaches 50mph. I want to try a setback bracket and someday experiment with a pad. I have to agree I think hull speed as it stands now on this boat is somewhere in the low 50's. A guy on another forum put a pad on a pos Bayliner with an 85hp Force and broke 50mph actually think he got close to 60mph so it can be done.
If a guy wants to hang a 200HP on a Montauk, I say more power to him (pun intended) and thanks for sharing your experiences and performance numbers on the forum. How many old timers overpowered the Glaspar G-3's ?, I know a few of them that ended up with a mercury 150hp on the transom. This is a boat that most often came equipped with a 40hp. With a 70 OMC looper I have taken a G-3 past 50mph and had a blast doing it. OK so who is going to be the first to get a Montauk in the 70's? Hope we read about it here first.
posted 09-09-2004 09:52 PM ET (US)
Sorry I doubted you and for my comeback. The wife was in the hospital and I had a bad couple days.
You were close on the trucks but I just traded my 97 F-150 4.6L step side for an 04 Ranger Edge 4.0L 4X4.
Looking back over my 67 years I realize that I have done some things far stupider than hanging a 2.4L on a Montauk.
posted 09-10-2004 08:33 AM ET (US)
Hope your wife feels better. Believe me that 200 on a 17 is far from the dumbest thing I've done. How about three 260 2.5 Mercs on a 29 foot Velocity? That was pretty dumb. But for acceleration, the Whaler is the fastest thing ever, about 9 seconds to 60 mph. I probably won't put a pad in the boat because in theory the hull will be sitting lower and dragging the chines more. If anything probably I'll fill the hook when I redo the boat. Please check the "for sale" section for all my seats, rails, rps, and teak trim. I bought a two person sit-down bolster for the boat. I am going to try and make it a little safer. I'll keep you guys posted.
posted 09-10-2004 08:38 AM ET (US)
I didn't mean to put that the hull speed is in the 50's. I think it is around 65 though. The boat blasts to 60 then just falls off as far as acceleration is concerned. "Cap'n I'm giv'n er all she'z got!
posted 09-10-2004 04:18 PM ET (US)
Reading along this with fasination (this is the performance forum). My Nauset gets squirly just as it caps out at 50 with a 115 Merc L6, but I owned a small over powered bow rider a while back. It capped at 58, but at 50 it too got squirly, chine walking mostly, however it actually settled down at about 54.
I know the Montauk's have a better hull for speed but I have to expect your choice of a chopper is your saving grace (along with hydraulic). This size of Whaler seems to be afflicted with bow lift issues and a chopper tends to offer stern lift instead, maybe that is the balancing key? Have you tried a cleaver on this? More stern lift still and would allow a higher mount, just a thought.
Do though consider a nose wing when you get her closer to 70, I am sure the air lift of that nose will come into the scene sooner or later!
Also, I have used adjustable fixed tabs to cure chine walking in past on small boats. On the Whaler, probably about 10" wide buy 6" long with turnbuckle adjusters. I would expect placement about 10" from C/L and about 5d down intially. Kind of acts like training wheels. Have never lost more then about 0.5mph with them and always seemed to quell the walking almost totally.
posted 09-10-2004 07:58 PM ET (US)
Reading this thread, I ran across mention of my first three boats. First boat was a '63 Glasspar G3 with a '64 Evinrude 80 V4 that weighed a ton. Ran about 50 with a VW bug 10 Gal. tank in the bow. My second boat was a Hydrostream 15' Viper with a '77 Johnson 200V6 that ran about 80 with a 28 pith over the hub prop and no jack plate ( I was poor at the time! ). My third boat was an '84 Velocity 22' with a 220HP Yamaha thay ran 72 even in 3-4 footers. The engine blew and I had to sell it. Now I'm on my fourth whaler- an 87 montauk with a Merc 90. Haven't got it running right yet , but my other montauk runs in the 30's with a 60 mariner. If I ever had to repower, I would go with a 2 stroke Mercury 115. Good balance of speed and appearing normal in my relatively new role as a grown up with wife and kids.Good memories.
posted 09-10-2004 11:44 PM ET (US)
You guys must run these rockets on glass flat lakes or something.
Where I boat, anything over 20mph in a Montauk you'll get pounded to death.
posted 09-11-2004 09:24 AM ET (US)
I don't necesarily use full throttle very often. Usually, about 2500 rpm (28 mph) is enough to run around all day and not use too much fuel. That 200 Merc will use an entire tank of fuel in less than an hour if I crank it up. To run wide open does require dead flat water. It's fun to light the wick every once in a while and just blast some poor unsuspecting guy in a 30' Scarab with twin 250 EFI Mercs.
posted 05-03-2006 08:46 AM ET (US)
I was searching the web for some technical support when I ran across this page. I too own a 1973 17' montauk. the most power I ever put on it was a 1989 110 evenrude. No comparison to a 200 merc. never the less it ran at a comforting speed which I was proud of. ( faster is always better) I recently restored my whaler and transformed it into a practicle fishing boat with a small center console mounted foward to offset the waight of the motor. I repowered the boat with a 2001 johnson 90 ocean-pro which I purchased brand new in the manufacturers crate never before mounted or removed from origional package. It looks great on the boat and I am going crazy anticipating its performance. However I have run across some technical problem and would like to ask you all for any suggestions. The carbs are runnig out of fuel. I have eliminated any possibility of air entering the fuel lines or vapor lock. I removed the fuel pump and cleaned and replaced it and tested it. I ran a solid fuel line no clamps ,primmerball, or splices directly from a clear masson jar to the fuel pump. I removed one line from the fuel pump to the carb and turned over the engine, (the pump seems to work fine). The motor will run for about five minutes after priming the fuel lines and then suddenly lean out and run out of fuel. I came to this conclusion by removing the drain plug on the bowl and no fuel was pressent., If I replace the primmer ball and pump it periodicly I can keep the motor running indefinatly. I have no idea what to check next. The oil and gas is mixed internaly, everything is connected with manufacturers parts and accourding to the manual. Any suggestions
Please help me get this boat in the water
posted 05-03-2006 10:40 AM ET (US)
I would start a new thread but it could be 3 things.
1)Carbs are screwed up but I doubt that if it runs great when priming the bulb.
2)Bulb is bad and is letting the gas to flow back into the tank.
3)fuel pump is weak and is not pumping enough fuel...most likely your problem if not the bulb. These have a diaphram in them which the slightest pinhole will cause them to be weak. Being it has sat for 5 years, could be a tad dry rotted or stiff. Try a new diaphram. If she will run while priming the bulb, it is either a bulb or pump.
|VI Jamie 22||
posted 05-03-2006 09:06 PM ET (US)
Hi, Most auto stores carry fuel pump pressure guages for testing. They usually have vaccuum reading capabilities. Purchase some 3/8ths clear hose and a tee. Install this AFTER the vaccuum switch on the engine [if the 90 has one]. Run at high speed. The clear hose will let you know if you have an air leak, the vaccuum guage will let you know if there is a restriction. The standard allowable is 4 inches, but I do not find anything over 3 inches vaccuum is acceptable. If this does not show a problem, move the tee past the fuel pump and look for bubbles and/or low fuel pressure. Hope this helps.
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.