posted 02-16-2003 04:06 PM ET (US)            

I haven't had the chance to look over this model in person, but the first things to catch my eye in the photos were the bow hardware and all welded stainless bow rail (7/8 or 1" dia.?).

I know there are a number of +/- factors for either the fitted or welded rails, but I've always preferred the welded for strength. The move toward welded rails in more recent years is one that I appreciate.

posted 02-16-2003 05:00 PM ET (US)            

I believe that doo-dad on the console is the cover for an electric horn.

posted 02-16-2003 06:48 PM ET (US)            

The 190-NANTUCKET looks like perfect move up kind of boat for a Montauk owner like myself (with a price that is not up with the moon and stars). I like the sturdy looking leaning post. The two stearn seats look like they might actually fit an adults posterior.

posted 02-16-2003 07:31 PM ET (US)            

Thanks,

posted 02-16-2003 09:41 PM ET (US)            

I was also told the boat is a "softer ride".

I asked about a 21' and the answer was no.

The boat was getting a lot of attention.

posted 02-17-2003 11:35 AM ET (US)            

I can't put my finger on it though of why I like this Nantucket vs. the Outrage(s). I wasn't too excited about them although they certainly are similar.

posted 02-17-2003 12:39 PM ET (US)            

In looking more closely at the photos, I noticed that some of the details of the previous 18-Outrage are missing. No stainless steel toe-rails, small handles by the stern jumpseats instead of a full stainless steel rail, no integral swim ladder, no in-deck fishboxes, no mounting location for ski-tow post or fishing "prep station", etc.

It is also 450 lbs. lighter than the 18-Outrage. My next-door neighbor has a 2000 18-Outrage w/135 Opti that is quite quick...the Nantucket with a 150 ought to fly!

posted 02-17-2003 12:58 PM ET (US)         

DIMENSIONS Nantucket O/R 18’/19’ Change
Length overall.....18’10” 18’6” +4” (+2%)
Beam...............8’ 7’2” +10” (+11%)
Draft..............12” 10” +2” (+20%)
Dry wt., no engine.2,050# 1,250# +800# (+64%)
Swamped capacity...4,000# 3,000# +1000# (+33%)
Person capacity....8 7 +1
Maximum capacity...2,200# 1,925# +275# (+14%)
Minimum HP.........115-HP 75-HP +40-HP (+53%)
Maximum HP.........150-HP 150-HP even
Int. Tank Fuel cap.60 gal. 63 gal. -3 gal. (-5%)

Nantucket vs. Outrage 18’, pros: Those 10 extra inches of beam are nice; From the photos it appears they’re not all taken up by insert gunwale walls; 64% Heavier hull, likely taller dead-rise, means “softer/better” ride characteristics.

Cons: Equivalent maximum HP rating for much heavier hull means lower MPH at any RPM. Smaller fuel tank plus lower MPH means considerably shorter range; Those extra 2” of draft move you farther out of the shallows where redfish play; 800 extra pounds makes it close to impossible to dislodge her once grounded in shoal water. Add trailer, fuel and engine(s) and you will likely exceed 3,000# behind the tow vehicle.

posted 02-17-2003 01:21 PM ET (US)         

The Nantucket, despite a liberal amount of power applied by its operator, appeared to require a long time to plane. The bow rise appeared a bit excessive as well, despite the engine's appearing correctly trimmed.

The boat looks nice, and it seems to have some of the features of the 20' Outrage that was made, I believe, in 1998. The console looks similar in proportion to the one that used to be used on the Outrage 17, 22, and 25 for a few years (circa 1994). Of course, it is now more rounded.

The rod holders on the front of the console, I'm afraid, will create business for me. If fishing poles are in those holders, cuts and abrasions of the lower legs when trying to navigate around the console appear inevitable.

The leaning post/livewell setup is similar to the one offered on the 19' Outrage built around 1995 or so. I like the idea (behind the console as opposed to in front of it), but can a comfortable seating position be obtained with this configuration? I forsee the helmsman's and the passenger's remaining standing. Is there a backrest or swivel seat option?

posted 02-17-2003 02:18 PM ET (US)            

PROS: moderated price, thoughtful details with the leaning post and tackle locker. Retro clues a plus and a pleasant form follows function layout.

CONS: This boat (and the 210-outrage) could use an enclosed electronics box. Maybe Boston Whaler could offer an electronics box as an option-it would seem logical if there was demand for it they would and should respond. The only other issue is the rated power. My current 1998 OR-20 weighs 2200 and is rated for 225 this model weighs 150lb less and can only carry 150HP max. A 175-200HP 2-stroke would weigh the same as the 150HP motor and not have to work nearly as hard.

posted 02-17-2003 02:20 PM ET (US)            

PROS: moderated price, thoughtful details with the leaning post and tackle locker. Retro clues a plus and a pleasant form follows function layout.

CONS: This boat (and the 210-outrage) could use an enclosed electronics box. Maybe Boston Whaler could offer an electronics box as an option-it would seem logical if there was demand for it they would and should respond. The only other issue is the rated power. My current 1998 OR-20 weighs 2200 and is rated for 225 this model weighs 150lb less and can only carry 150HP max. A 175-200HP 2-stroke would weigh the same as the 150HP motor and not have to work nearly as hard.

posted 02-19-2003 01:17 PM ET (US)            

240-OUTRAGE -> Is it just me? Or is there a complete lack of usefull space on that boat? It's look like to get to the front you have to litterally squeeze through the console. Not a lot of room behing the leaning post for fishing either. I think the NANTUCKET could have more usable space than this one. D

Later,
Zpeed7

posted 02-19-2003 04:00 PM ET (US)         

I don't care for Whaler's new "futurama" consoles, especially the minimal gauge areas and vertical section supposedly designed for radio and electronics. Once the glass is cut for a "soon to be outdated" piece of electronic equipment, what do you do? The designers should have the replaceable black electronics panels in there instead. One wonders about experience with boating electronics when you see poorly thought out features like that.

Are we correct in assuming this will go in BW's "Classic" section of the catalog? One thing is sure, the people in charge of this division of Whaler's design are definitely following this website, and are to be commended for listening. Overall, I think the boat looks nice, but want to see one out on the water first.

Regarding HP, here are the approximate engine pricing comparisons for Mercury (all saltwater XL 25" blue graphics). Even a 150 is marginal on an older 19 Outrage II, so on this one, I would think a 115 would be inadequate. Same old thing we've been seeing them do on other models.

115 Merc carbed: base, would not buy.
115 merc 4 stroke: add $1200 same as above
125 merc carbed: add $250 would consider minimal
135 Merc Opti: add $3100
150 Merc carbed: add $1450 (best deal)
150 Merc EFI: add $3100 the fastest/quietest
150 Merc Opti: add $4500 135 Opti a better deal/almost same performance

These are the TRUE differences in engine pricing. What Whaler will charge for the upcharge could be higher or lower.

Over all I think the boat looks good, and should be a big seller like the new Montauk. It is also somewhat similar to the 210 Outrage, which I think is not a big seller.

I happened to see a 240 Outrage on the water the other day. It has terrible proportions.
Too short, fat and high, a floating bathtub. Reminds me of the short lived 18 Outrage of '99-'00. Doubt if it will sell. The 270 is a little better, but I would assume the 320 is the best proportioned for this particular design shape. I was told by a Whaler person that the hulls on the 240, 270 and 320 are Sea Ray designs.

I just spent 5 days on the water in the "outboard center console capital of the world", and saw almost no newer Whalers. Saw almost all other brands, but Whalers were conspiculously absent. Johnny Morris' Merc powered Sea Crafts are everywhere, so they must be big sellers lately. Their classic lines and shape are appealing, although they, too, are fair weather boats.

posted 02-20-2003 07:27 PM ET (US)            

It is exremely exciting to see such a fundamental difference (compared to the recent past) in the Forum members' opinions and attitudes toward a new Brunswick whaler product. I don't recall ever reading anything like this in the past couple of years.

Has Jack Grainger has registered an opinion yet? - an interesting Forum litmus test for the 190.

posted 02-23-2003 01:00 AM ET (US)            

The 190 first has to go into production and then become available. No known timeframe appears set for either event.

posted 03-05-2003 10:11 PM ET (US)            

Yes, it is an Accutrak hull.