MONTAUK 17 Re-power with 115-HP - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  MONTAUK 17 Re-power with 115-HP

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   MONTAUK 17 Re-power with 115-HP

Pumpnhard posted 11-24-2006 08:12 AM ET (US)
I have a 1991 [MONTAUK 17] that I am going to re-power this winter. [Please give me] information about putting a 115-HP Mercury or 115-HP Yamaha two-stroke stroke on [a MONTAUK 17]. Any suggestions or helpful information would be great.
Thanks
Kent
blackdog54 posted 11-24-2006 10:59 AM ET (US)
I'd start with your insurance agent- you may not be able to insure it if it is over the recommended HP rating of 90 hp. Furthermore, consider the weight on the transom of the new motor versus your current motor. Since you are going with a two-stroke motor this may not be a concern.
Pumpnhard posted 11-25-2006 07:29 AM ET (US)
As far as insurance, I was going to rebadge it. Have others [re-powered a MONTAUL 17 with a 115-HP motor]? I am sure they have.
Thanks
Kent
Buckda posted 11-25-2006 08:24 AM ET (US)
Re-Badging the motor is not a solution to an insurance problem. It is a felony (insurance fraud).

Try talking to your agent first to see what he can do.
If you disclose it and they insure it (regardless of what the parent company says)..you're insured.
If the parent company doesn't cover it, your agent's malpractice insurance (errors and omissions) will.
I recommend against re-badging.
Dave
jimh posted 11-25-2006 09:16 AM ET (US)
The issue of re-powering a boat with more horsepower than shown on the rating placard is a frequently asked question. See:
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/FAQ/#Q6
The performance of a MONTAUK 17 with various motors has also been discussed in many prior articles. For a listing of expected results and an index to many prior articles see:
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/16-17/repower.html
Pumpnhard posted 11-27-2006 06:24 AM ET (US)
Thank you everyone for your afvice regarding the insurance stand point. It would be great if any now had any info regarding the repowerment..
jimh posted 11-27-2006 08:05 AM ET (US)
If you're thinking of the Mercury 115-HP two-stroke, there has been quite a bit of prior discussion about this motor. It is a four-cylinder motor but at low speeds it runs only on two cylinders and is known as a "2+2" motor. The consensus of opinion is that the motor has a lot of power but often runs somewhat roughly due to the unusual configuration. I don't think Mercury (or anyone else) used this technique in an outboard other than in this particular motor.
brisboats posted 11-27-2006 09:23 AM ET (US)
Kent,
I have bought several from our local DNR rigged with 140hp OMC's. I also ran a 74 with a 1987 115hp mercury not the 2+2 but an inline 6. The inline six weighs around 275 pounds and is a screamer(50mph +). I like the 140hp OMC motor better for my intended use and will be rigging a commercial hull with one this winter. The 140 engine block is very similar to the yamaha 115 and weighs around 325 pounds. Performance wise it should be a 50mph boat but it will never see that in my hands, well maybe once or twice ;-).
There has been lots of discussion about the performance of these hulls overpowered but it is not in the reference section. Fellow on here (Bocaskiff?) has a 200 v-6 on a Montauk, myself and lots of others have run 115 mercs and 115/140 OMC 's and posted numbers. I am not condoning overpowering, rebadging etc. everyone has different uses and needs for their boat. A pre smirk Montauk is a great all round boat with 70-75hp.
Brian
ratherwhalering posted 11-27-2006 01:05 PM ET (US)
Your Montauk is rated for a maximum of 100 horsepower. One thing you may want to consider is the cost of rigging a new engine. If your old engine is an Evinrude, changing to a Mercury/Yamaha will require a new wiring harness, instruments, control cables (you may get away with just adapters), key switch, warning horn, blah, blah, blah. From a cost perspective, you should investigate your current rigging adaptability.
Peter posted 11-27-2006 01:58 PM ET (US)
Rebadging the hood won't help in the event of an accident because the freeze plug on the engine block has the model number which includes a HP indication. Also the transom bracket bears the model number with the HP indication too.
The Judge posted 11-27-2006 02:00 PM ET (US)
I have owned with 90's and 115's and performance is not that much better with a 115. Try and keep the same brand so it will be cheaper to install. Installing a 115 is the same as installing a 50, just heavier. Bolt holes etc are all the same. If you really want better performance go with a jackplate and a great prop. If you have a 90 yamaha then you will see a bid performance upgrade being those 90's are more like 80's. If you really want a 115, then fine but I would stick with a 90 unless a 115 came up cheap. If you are serious about a 115 Yammie for performance reasons, go for the 130 and really juice it up.
tasos posted 11-28-2006 04:12 AM ET (US)
I own a 81 montauk with 115 mariner 1994 2s (2+2 config).
The boat with 2 persons, medium gear, battery and 30lt gas performs at wot 45mph.
This engine replaced a yamaha 90 2s. I'm 28 and i needed the rough racing sound and the extra hp and, and ,and, BUT!
Guess what, it was performing the same!45mph in GPS (and perfect hull and environment conditions).
But i think i must buy some BP or Shell stocks!Just extra weight and (a lot) extra gas!Not to mention $$$
Pumpnhard posted 11-28-2006 08:16 PM ET (US)
Thanks to all of you. Hopefully this winter I will be able to complete this repower. After all of this advise i think i should look for a 140 instead. This sounds like a great combo.
skookum point posted 11-28-2006 11:08 PM ET (US)
I had a 1998 Mercury 125 2-stroke on my Montauk for a couple of seasons and did NOT like it. I replaced it with a Mercury 90 and am much happier. Why did I switch? The 2+2 design has what I consider to be poor driveability for a lightweight boat like our 17 foot Whalers - there is no middle speed. It idles just fine, running on 2 cylinders and then when you reach about 1800 rpm the other two kick in and it goes like a bat-outta-hell. If you're not holding on it will throw you out of the boat. But if you want to cruise around at comfortable in-between speeds, say between 20 and 30 mph, the 125 motor just won't do it. The throttle acts like an OFF/ON switch. It was pretty fast though. It would go 49mph (according to two GPS's) with a Laser II prop and then the rev limiter kicks in.
The Mercury 125 might be a good match for a heavier boat, where it has to work harder, but I can't recommend it for a Montauk.
State Farm insured my boat knowing it was overpowered. When I repowered with the 90 the premiums dropped by about $40 per year.
Pumpnhard posted 12-07-2006 04:19 PM ET (US)
Just found an 130 jonny 2000 wiht 150 hrs on it so i picked it up. Hopefully this will work well.
Thank you all for your support and help with this process
Regards
Kent
contender posted 12-10-2006 08:33 PM ET (US)
My whaler has a 140 rude looper, runs great, love it...good luck
brisboats posted 12-11-2006 08:58 PM ET (US)
Very nice, she is going to roll. Once you get her rigged and dialed in post some numbers I am very interested in what that motor will do on your hull.
Brian
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 12-12-2006 03:25 PM ET (US)
Sounds like a ideal combination.I gave thought to putting a nice 140 looper on my 15,still might one day.
JayR posted 12-12-2006 04:41 PM ET (US)

quote:
If you're thinking of the Mercury 115-HP two-stroke, there has been quite a bit of prior discussion about this motor. It is a four-cylinder motor but at low speeds it runs only on two cylinders and is known as a "2+2" motor. The consensus of opinion is that the motor has a lot of power but often runs somewhat roughly due to the unusual configuration. I don't think Mercury (or anyone else) used this technique in an outboard other than in this particular motor.
My best friend has this motor on his 17 Outrage.
It has been a very rough motor at idle.
This past fall it started to run very poorly minutes before loading it on the trailer after a fishing trip. Mechanic told him the cam shaft is broken.... Told him $4K to fix.
He wasn't too happy but is looking forward to not having that motor any longer. He disliked it from the 1st day (won the boat in a tournament). I believe it is 1996. Was not enough power for the boat either. Three guys and it was a slob in anything but flat water.
Here's a pic of it so no one thinks I'm just trying to bash Mercury. I really am familiar with the boat and motor and it was a dog.
[IMG]http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/CopyofFile0003.jpg[/ IMG]
[IMG]http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/CopyofFile0002.jpg[/ IMG]
[IMG]http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/P9010149.jpg[/IMG]
I won't recommend a brand but I will say that 115 isn't even close enough for that hull.
JayR posted 12-12-2006 04:43 PM ET (US)
Sorry about that
http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/P9010149.jpg
http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/CopyofFile0003.jpg
http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/CopyofFile0002.jpg
fourdfish posted 12-12-2006 05:07 PM ET (US)
Nice prize Jay! We should all be so lucky! Did that Marina quote the rebuild for that engine?
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 12-12-2006 05:08 PM ET (US)
JayR There should be no cam shaft in that or any 2 stroke motor.I think your talking about the crankshaft and that particular motor is VERY sensitive to over revving much above 5200-5300 rpms(usually results in a cracked crankshaft).Never been in a 17 outrage,but i have seen one with a 175 Johnson Ocean Runner that seemed to move right on out nicely.
JayR posted 12-12-2006 07:37 PM ET (US)
You are correct Bob. Brain fart on my part. I was in a hurry to get supper made and.... well, let's just say my brain needed a "re-start" this afternoon. Duh!
JayR posted 12-12-2006 07:42 PM ET (US)
He won that boat after I insisted he join in on the fun. I had to give the entrance form to his brother who wrote the check and sent it in.
If not for my insistance, he would have been home hunting that weekend.
The story gets worse....
I came in second ( & 7th). Someone slap me.....
Thinking about it still hurts me to this day. Arghhhhh!
Sorry about only reading the thread as far as Jimh's post. I see now he already went with a 130 HP.
I think that too may be too small to be honest.
I'm trying to convince my friend to go with the Suzuki 140 at the very least.
The quote was from the top mechanic in our area as a side job. Me thinks they guy is getting a big head......
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 12-13-2006 12:57 AM ET (US)
No worries JayR,i figured thats what you meant.The person who started this thread has the 17 Montauk hull,so his 130 should make it fly pretty good.Tell your friend to get a 150-200hp motor of his liking and he should have PLENTY of power for 3 people and a full load. ;o)
JayR posted 12-13-2006 07:11 PM ET (US)
Why did I think it was an Outrage? Another brain fart?
Vicodin, flexeril and alcohol (in a small amount) must have played havoc on my grey matter :-(
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 12-13-2006 07:25 PM ET (US)
Thats my problem,i stick mainly to Gin on the weekends.i need to diversify ;o)
Pumpnhard posted 12-15-2006 07:25 AM ET (US)
Try some Patron Tequila it make the world nice........
Thanks for all of you for your support. I will let you know how it turns out. I will also be regelling the entire boat this winter. I was thinking of makeing the exterior flag blue like the new ones and suggestions on that color ???

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 17 Re-power with 115-HP
Pumpnhard	posted 11-24-2006 08:12 AM ET (US) I have a 1991 [MONTAUK 17] that I am going to re-power this winter. [Please give me] information about putting a 115-HP Mercury or 115-HP Yamaha two-stroke stroke on [a MONTAUK 17]. Any suggestions or helpful information would be great. Thanks Kent
blackdog54	posted 11-24-2006 10:59 AM ET (US) I'd start with your insurance agent- you may not be able to insure it if it is over the recommended HP rating of 90 hp. Furthermore, consider the weight on the transom of the new motor versus your current motor. Since you are going with a two-stroke motor this may not be a concern.
Pumpnhard	posted 11-25-2006 07:29 AM ET (US) As far as insurance, I was going to rebadge it. Have others [re-powered a MONTAUL 17 with a 115-HP motor]? I am sure they have. Thanks Kent
Buckda	posted 11-25-2006 08:24 AM ET (US) Re-Badging the motor is not a solution to an insurance problem. It is a felony (insurance fraud). Try talking to your agent first to see what he can do. If you disclose it and they insure it (regardless of what the parent company says)..you're insured. If the parent company doesn't cover it, your agent's malpractice insurance (errors and omissions) will. I recommend against re-badging. Dave
jimh	posted 11-25-2006 09:16 AM ET (US) The issue of re-powering a boat with more horsepower than shown on the rating placard is a frequently asked question. See: http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/FAQ/#Q6 The performance of a MONTAUK 17 with various motors has also been discussed in many prior articles. For a listing of expected results and an index to many prior articles see: http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/16-17/repower.html
Pumpnhard	posted 11-27-2006 06:24 AM ET (US) Thank you everyone for your afvice regarding the insurance stand point. It would be great if any now had any info regarding the repowerment..
jimh	posted 11-27-2006 08:05 AM ET (US) If you're thinking of the Mercury 115-HP two-stroke, there has been quite a bit of prior discussion about this motor. It is a four-cylinder motor but at low speeds it runs only on two cylinders and is known as a "2+2" motor. The consensus of opinion is that the motor has a lot of power but often runs somewhat roughly due to the unusual configuration. I don't think Mercury (or anyone else) used this technique in an outboard other than in this particular motor.
brisboats	posted 11-27-2006 09:23 AM ET (US) Kent, I have bought several from our local DNR rigged with 140hp OMC's. I also ran a 74 with a 1987 115hp mercury not the 2+2 but an inline 6. The inline six weighs around 275 pounds and is a screamer(50mph +). I like the 140hp OMC motor better for my intended use and will be rigging a commercial hull with one this winter. The 140 engine block is very similar to the yamaha 115 and weighs around 325 pounds. Performance wise it should be a 50mph boat but it will never see that in my hands, well maybe once or twice ;-). There has been lots of discussion about the performance of these hulls overpowered but it is not in the reference section. Fellow on here (Bocaskiff?) has a 200 v-6 on a Montauk, myself and lots of others have run 115 mercs and 115/140 OMC 's and posted numbers. I am not condoning overpowering, rebadging etc. everyone has different uses and needs for their boat. A pre smirk Montauk is a great all round boat with 70-75hp. Brian
ratherwhalering	posted 11-27-2006 01:05 PM ET (US) Your Montauk is rated for a maximum of 100 horsepower. One thing you may want to consider is the cost of rigging a new engine. If your old engine is an Evinrude, changing to a Mercury/Yamaha will require a new wiring harness, instruments, control cables (you may get away with just adapters), key switch, warning horn, blah, blah, blah. From a cost perspective, you should investigate your current rigging adaptability.
Peter	posted 11-27-2006 01:58 PM ET (US) Rebadging the hood won't help in the event of an accident because the freeze plug on the engine block has the model number which includes a HP indication. Also the transom bracket bears the model number with the HP indication too.
The Judge	posted 11-27-2006 02:00 PM ET (US) I have owned with 90's and 115's and performance is not that much better with a 115. Try and keep the same brand so it will be cheaper to install. Installing a 115 is the same as installing a 50, just heavier. Bolt holes etc are all the same. If you really want better performance go with a jackplate and a great prop. If you have a 90 yamaha then you will see a bid performance upgrade being those 90's are more like 80's. If you really want a 115, then fine but I would stick with a 90 unless a 115 came up cheap. If you are serious about a 115 Yammie for performance reasons, go for the 130 and really juice it up.
tasos	posted 11-28-2006 04:12 AM ET (US) I own a 81 montauk with 115 mariner 1994 2s (2+2 config). The boat with 2 persons, medium gear, battery and 30lt gas performs at wot 45mph. This engine replaced a yamaha 90 2s. I'm 28 and i needed the rough racing sound and the extra hp and, and ,and, BUT! Guess what, it was performing the same!45mph in GPS (and perfect hull and environment conditions). But i think i must buy some BP or Shell stocks!Just extra weight and (a lot) extra gas!Not to mention $$$
Pumpnhard	posted 11-28-2006 08:16 PM ET (US) Thanks to all of you. Hopefully this winter I will be able to complete this repower. After all of this advise i think i should look for a 140 instead. This sounds like a great combo.
skookum point	posted 11-28-2006 11:08 PM ET (US) I had a 1998 Mercury 125 2-stroke on my Montauk for a couple of seasons and did NOT like it. I replaced it with a Mercury 90 and am much happier. Why did I switch? The 2+2 design has what I consider to be poor driveability for a lightweight boat like our 17 foot Whalers - there is no middle speed. It idles just fine, running on 2 cylinders and then when you reach about 1800 rpm the other two kick in and it goes like a bat-outta-hell. If you're not holding on it will throw you out of the boat. But if you want to cruise around at comfortable in-between speeds, say between 20 and 30 mph, the 125 motor just won't do it. The throttle acts like an OFF/ON switch. It was pretty fast though. It would go 49mph (according to two GPS's) with a Laser II prop and then the rev limiter kicks in. The Mercury 125 might be a good match for a heavier boat, where it has to work harder, but I can't recommend it for a Montauk. State Farm insured my boat knowing it was overpowered. When I repowered with the 90 the premiums dropped by about $40 per year.
Pumpnhard	posted 12-07-2006 04:19 PM ET (US) Just found an 130 jonny 2000 wiht 150 hrs on it so i picked it up. Hopefully this will work well. Thank you all for your support and help with this process Regards Kent
contender	posted 12-10-2006 08:33 PM ET (US) My whaler has a 140 rude looper, runs great, love it...good luck
brisboats	posted 12-11-2006 08:58 PM ET (US) Very nice, she is going to roll. Once you get her rigged and dialed in post some numbers I am very interested in what that motor will do on your hull. Brian
BOB KEMMLER JR	posted 12-12-2006 03:25 PM ET (US) Sounds like a ideal combination.I gave thought to putting a nice 140 looper on my 15,still might one day.
JayR	posted 12-12-2006 04:41 PM ET (US) quote: If you're thinking of the Mercury 115-HP two-stroke, there has been quite a bit of prior discussion about this motor. It is a four-cylinder motor but at low speeds it runs only on two cylinders and is known as a "2+2" motor. The consensus of opinion is that the motor has a lot of power but often runs somewhat roughly due to the unusual configuration. I don't think Mercury (or anyone else) used this technique in an outboard other than in this particular motor. My best friend has this motor on his 17 Outrage. It has been a very rough motor at idle. This past fall it started to run very poorly minutes before loading it on the trailer after a fishing trip. Mechanic told him the cam shaft is broken.... Told him $4K to fix. He wasn't too happy but is looking forward to not having that motor any longer. He disliked it from the 1st day (won the boat in a tournament). I believe it is 1996. Was not enough power for the boat either. Three guys and it was a slob in anything but flat water. Here's a pic of it so no one thinks I'm just trying to bash Mercury. I really am familiar with the boat and motor and it was a dog. [IMG]http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/CopyofFile0003.jpg[/ IMG] [IMG]http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/CopyofFile0002.jpg[/ IMG] [IMG]http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/P9010149.jpg[/IMG] I won't recommend a brand but I will say that 115 isn't even close enough for that hull.
JayR	posted 12-12-2006 04:43 PM ET (US) Sorry about that http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/P9010149.jpg http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/CopyofFile0003.jpg http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h211/BigJayR/CopyofFile0002.jpg
fourdfish	posted 12-12-2006 05:07 PM ET (US) Nice prize Jay! We should all be so lucky! Did that Marina quote the rebuild for that engine?
BOB KEMMLER JR	posted 12-12-2006 05:08 PM ET (US) JayR There should be no cam shaft in that or any 2 stroke motor.I think your talking about the crankshaft and that particular motor is VERY sensitive to over revving much above 5200-5300 rpms(usually results in a cracked crankshaft).Never been in a 17 outrage,but i have seen one with a 175 Johnson Ocean Runner that seemed to move right on out nicely.
JayR	posted 12-12-2006 07:37 PM ET (US) You are correct Bob. Brain fart on my part. I was in a hurry to get supper made and.... well, let's just say my brain needed a "re-start" this afternoon. Duh!
JayR	posted 12-12-2006 07:42 PM ET (US) He won that boat after I insisted he join in on the fun. I had to give the entrance form to his brother who wrote the check and sent it in. If not for my insistance, he would have been home hunting that weekend. The story gets worse.... I came in second ( & 7th). Someone slap me..... Thinking about it still hurts me to this day. Arghhhhh! Sorry about only reading the thread as far as Jimh's post. I see now he already went with a 130 HP. I think that too may be too small to be honest. I'm trying to convince my friend to go with the Suzuki 140 at the very least. The quote was from the top mechanic in our area as a side job. Me thinks they guy is getting a big head......
BOB KEMMLER JR	posted 12-13-2006 12:57 AM ET (US) No worries JayR,i figured thats what you meant.The person who started this thread has the 17 Montauk hull,so his 130 should make it fly pretty good.Tell your friend to get a 150-200hp motor of his liking and he should have PLENTY of power for 3 people and a full load. ;o)
JayR	posted 12-13-2006 07:11 PM ET (US) Why did I think it was an Outrage? Another brain fart? Vicodin, flexeril and alcohol (in a small amount) must have played havoc on my grey matter :-(
BOB KEMMLER JR	posted 12-13-2006 07:25 PM ET (US) Thats my problem,i stick mainly to Gin on the weekends.i need to diversify ;o)
Pumpnhard	posted 12-15-2006 07:25 AM ET (US) Try some Patron Tequila it make the world nice........ Thanks for all of you for your support. I will let you know how it turns out. I will also be regelling the entire boat this winter. I was thinking of makeing the exterior flag blue like the new ones and suggestions on that color ???