posted 12-17-2004 07:17 AM ET (US)            

Hole shot (will you be using it primarily as a ski boat?)
Weight (how the boat sits in the water)
Ease of service (how easy will it be to find small-town mechanics to repair it)

If those factors are very important then go with the 2-stroke. On the other hand, go with the 4-stroke if you value

posted 12-17-2004 09:40 PM ET (US)            

Also, if a aux engine is also in your future, now is when to consider that. Even if it will be a while. Particularily consider weight. If you use up your weight allowance with the main engine then a aux may be out of the question or you will be limited to only very small ones.

If you have any areas you boat that might become four stroke only you need to consider that too.

I've a 85 Montauk powered by a F50 Yamaha four stroke. I'm adding a T9.9 Yamaha four stroke aux. For my uses that's probably close to ideal. The combo will get me into horsepower limited lakes, for instance.

posted 12-18-2004 07:19 AM ET (US)            

The boat will not be as quick and responsive as it would be with a smaller, lighter engine. But it will still be unsinkable and it will have plenty of power when you need it.

posted 12-18-2004 12:40 PM ET (US)            

A quiet and smokeless four stroke sounds great for harbor cruising but I don't want the trim of the boat to look funny or the boat to handle weird with all the weight.

posted 12-18-2004 03:23 PM ET (US)            

Legobusier has an 1986 ish Montauk with a recent year Honda 90 4 stroke. Search for threads.

The boat sits a bit lower due to weight but it is not a problem.

His website is

http://www.covingtonhendrix.com/Montauk_II/

There are more photos at that address but change the "montauk II to a single I.

posted 12-18-2004 03:27 PM ET (US)            

http://www.covingtonhendrix.com/Montauk/

posted 12-18-2004 11:33 PM ET (US)            

See:

posted 12-19-2004 04:37 PM ET (US)            

Easy, real easy .... Honda 90!

In 1996 Whaler even rigged a Montauk with this same combination. The review was in Saltwater Sportsman Mag.

posted 12-20-2004 12:24 PM ET (US)            

It definitely appears the Honda 90 is a bit too much weight in this photo:

http://www.covingtonhendrix.com/Montauk/images/Mvc-132s.jpg

Look closely at how much of the bow and the original bottom paint is raised out of the water.

posted 12-20-2004 12:42 PM ET (US)            

As Phil pointed out, I have a '98 Honda on my '87 Montauk and personally think it's fine. The splash wells are under water by about 1/2" or so but performance and handling are great IMO. It's certainly a heavy engine, but I don't think it adversly effects the performance of the boat.

There was also a article in Powerboat Magazine (or something similar..can't remember which) that reviews this exact setup - Honda 90 on a classic Montauk. They gave it very high marks as well. I have a copy of it at the office that I can fax to anyone that would like to see it - just email me if you want it. Another forum member here sent it to me a few months back.

Hole shot is good and top speed is about 42. I do have a stainless prop as David was wondering. I can post the specs of the prop if you like.

Also, fuel tank (Pate 24) is under the RPS and battery is under the console, so that helps the weight distribution.

I would not hesitate for a second on the Honda. If I still own this boat when it's time for me to repower, I'll most likely stick with the Honda.

Feel free to contact me directly with questions if you like as I may not be monitoring this thread due to my drug induced state :)

posted 12-21-2004 08:47 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

There was also a article in Powerboat Magazine (or something similar..can't remember which) that reviews this exact setup - Honda 90 on a classic Montauk. They gave it very high marks as well. I have a copy of it at the office that I can fax to anyone that would like to see it - just email me if you want it. Another forum member here sent it to me a few months back.

---

As clarity returns....David correctly pointed out above the article which I referenced was in Saltwater Sportsman - Feb 1996 - A Honda rigged by Whaler on a '96 Montauk. Again, if anyone is interested in it, let me know & I'll fax it out.

posted 12-21-2004 08:00 PM ET (US)            

And with the other engine (the Honda 90) the drains to the splashwell are underwater, even with the battery in the console and no setback plate!

For me, this would be of great significance, especially since there are times that you will be using a live bait well and you may be loaded down with even more weight, such as extra fuel, 3 or 4 crew members, ice and gear. For safety reasons and to avoid nasty scum etc, I like to keep the spash well unplugged and dry at all times.

posted 12-27-2004 11:07 PM ET (US)            

The classic MONTAUK 16-foot 7-inch hull is shown in the printed 2002 catalogue and is listed with a specified maximum engine weight of 410-lbs.

posted 12-31-2004 04:53 PM ET (US)            

I just read above that some of you use plugs in the splashwell is that correct ? And my second question is why ? Thirdly, Whaler when delivering a new boat in the 17 - 15 foot classic range would not send plugs for the splashwell. I am just cusrious as to why you would plug the well.

posted 01-05-2005 03:21 PM ET (US)            

I got my 2004 E-TEC (saltwater edition, without prop or controls) from Custom Marine in Georgia for $6,215.00, with no sales tax, including the 7 year warranty. I paid $318.00 for shipping to California, for a grand total of $6,533.00 with extended warranty. (or $6,173.00 with the standard 3 year factory warranty, had I elected the $360.00 cash rebate.)

The same package from Eds would have been $6,299.00, plus $360.00 for the warranty, plus $450.00 for shipping for a total of $7,109.00.

posted 01-10-2005 05:59 PM ET (US)            

So..I saw your post today. 2 years ago I repowered my 1989 Montauk and researched a ton. Here it is:

Had 1988 Yamaha 70 on boat. Sold it on the Internet for $1200.

For 2 stroke Japanese EFI:

Contacted Tohatsu, they would not sell a motor directly to a consumer w/o dealer install, so I dropped that.

Suzuki required new props and cables controls...Was costly and power would remain at 70, 90 too heavy.

Yamaha 90 4 stroke too heavy in my opinion. Too large for boat designed in the 70's.
Not interested in OMC or Merc...too many horror stories.

Honda same problem as Yamaha concerning weight.

So....I bought a Yamaha 90 hp 2 stroke from Ed's and picked it up myself. Installed it with a friend in an afternoon using old 70 control and new tach and wiring harness and kept my aluminum and SS props from the 70.

It has only 35 hours now and is just breaking in. Does 40mph+ weighs only 264 or so. Of course this is a non efi, non 4 stroke but is a tremendous amount of smooth power in a light, reliable, proven designed engine that has sold for as low as $4800 at Ed's. Tough to beat if you are ok with a rock-solid though 2 stroke carb design.

Crusing speed is at 3500rpm and fairly fuel efficient as long as you are not hitting 5500 often! (Though it does bring tears to my eyes at this speed in excess of 40mph!

Have fun...

FYI...Yamaha F60 with EFI now might be worth looking into (light and $5500 at Ed's) but still only a 60 anyway you slice it.

posted 01-11-2005 09:11 AM ET (US)            

I know many are running the classic with heavier motors, but I'd sure stick to the 90HP E-Tec, or lighter, and even at that, relocate the battery to the console if necessary.

I believe Mike Brantley found better overall pricing, including controls, at a source other than Ed's. Search for his E-Tec thread in the Performance forum archives.