Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
Anyone put a kicker on a MT170 yet?
|Author||Topic: Anyone put a kicker on a MT170 yet?|
posted 04-16-2003 07:32 PM ET (US)
I am looking in to putting a 5HP kicker on my 2003 Montauk 170 for Salmon fishing in the Pacific Northwest. I'm Looking for advice and experiences.
Thanks in advance.
posted 04-16-2003 09:51 PM ET (US)
Just Picked up my 170! I have a Johnson 5 HP Four stroke that I will be putting on the right side transon... Will report!!! I saw the lay~ In wood support areas on the supplied from dealer schematic sheet and yes there is deffinately a large piece of Plywood at that side!!! Have to see if the short shaft will suffice!!! Dan
posted 04-20-2003 12:38 AM ET (US)
But after going out today on the flats I found that dragging the 90 Merc Skeg in the mud didn't make me very happy!!! I will have it on tomorrow just in case the water goes to 1 foot or so... Don't know what good it will do, but I also don't want to know what bad things could happen if I drag the 90 HP Merc thru the mud??? Could the impeller or any other part of the motor get beat up from sucking the sand and
Does any one know the answer!!!
After all we all love our 170s' Will tell ya what good a 5hp four stroke Kicker can do when out later today!!! Thanks and Happy Easter
posted 04-23-2003 04:46 PM ET (US)
How did the kicker do?
BTW, you try sucking mud for awhile and see how you like it :)
posted 04-23-2003 08:08 PM ET (US)
There is previous discussion on this topic to be researched. Evidently the very first models built had no provision for a pony motor, but I think this oversight was later corrected. One might check to see if your model is so designed.
posted 04-24-2003 12:23 PM ET (US)
I contaced Chuck Bennett at BW and he confirmed that my hull has the wood in the transom for a kicker.
The Yamaha 4 HP, 4-stroke long shaft only weights about 50Lbs and might be a good choice.
posted 04-24-2003 02:39 PM ET (US)
Sorry I never put the 5 HP Four stroke on the transom to see what it does... Will get to it!!! Its Cow time here at the secret place and I am busy loving the opportunity caTcthing fat Cows to ___??? Well big fat cows will do!!! Don't want to create a state of mass confusion as to any size... You have to just imagine!!! If you what pictures e-mail me... Oh yeah the MT170!!! Wow!!! :) All my RFA Chapter members/ friends are bugging me to go out!!! The Cow
posted 04-25-2003 10:17 AM ET (US)
I have been researching this kicker question for some time and have come up with these conclusions. I single cylinder 4 stroke will vibrate your boat to peices. I have heard from a few different people that if the boat has a rattle it will be found. Also 4 stroke merc's have the f/n/r on the side of the motor rather than the handle, that could become a real pain.
The next consideration is the 2 stroke. First thougtht is that they are very reliable and won't vibrate like a 4 stroke, but do you want to start mixing gas again or carrying a separate tank. Also the 6 merc weighs a couple pounds less than the 15!
I will be using the 2 stroke 15 we already have that is in cherry shape and only a couple years old. I will put it on a custom bracket that will throughbolt to the hull and just have stainless plates that will go out a couple inches and above a couple inches and will be very compact. I also will only carry the kicker when fishing since I like to go 40 in moderate slop.
posted 04-25-2003 04:51 PM ET (US)
How does the 5 HP Four made by Evinrude work... It is a 2000 motor with 5 hours on her... That is the motor I will use as a kicker... Also do these 5 HP kickers actually move the MT 170 1440 pound haul in a chop??? I know it is better than nothing... I am sure I will find out! Let The Cow be with you... Dan
posted 07-30-2003 06:35 PM ET (US)
I would like to bring this up again for the Montauk 170. I have a brand new 15HP 2 Stroke Yamaha that is used on my 11 foot standard Whaler (tiller). This is available as a kicker for the Montauk. Has anyone used a 15HP for a kicker and if so what type of bracket did you use. My only concern is weight at 75+ pounds. Yet lesser portables such as the 5hp Mercury 2 stroke weigh 45 pounds. Thanks B...
posted 02-18-2004 07:23 PM ET (US)
I was curious what type of mounting bracket people are using for their kicker motors on 170's. Specifically, is it possible to use a fixed mount vs. the adjustable type used on larger boats? It looks like one could tilt the kicker up to get it out of the water when not in use. Most of the brackets I've seen on the water and in stores adjust up and down. More moving parts, more things to break.....
posted 02-18-2004 07:40 PM ET (US)
I would look at this thread and see what Dick has done with his Montauk.. Although not a 170, his mounting should work very well on one..
I can concur about the vibration from a 4 Stroke and an older Classic Montauk. I had a 1999 or 2000 8hp 4 Stoke on the back of my Montauk, clamped and bolted... It vibrated everything in that boat... Some kind of Harmonics my Montauk did not like... I sold the engine and put on a 2 Stroke.. No vibrations to speak of....
posted 02-18-2004 09:05 PM ET (US)
I gave up on this. But if I came back to it a non-movable bracket has been recommended by quite a few. I like the self contained (internal tank) Mercury 4 HP 4-stroke, 20 inch. Jim
posted 02-19-2004 11:35 PM ET (US)
Joe-Thanks for the link. Dick has/had the whole setup I'm after (downriggers & all).
Barney-I agree on the self contained fuel tank. If I take the plunge and buy 170 this winter I'm thinking about the 5hp Merc 2 stroke. Nice & light and has it's own fuel supply.
posted 02-20-2004 09:48 PM ET (US)
I'm going to answer your original question:
posted 02-21-2004 08:39 PM ET (US)
Rodger, I have a Nissan 5 hp 4-stroke (with a 3 galons external tank) on a movable bracket. I use a tiller extention. Works great. http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/u_gonuts . hope this helps. Sam
posted 02-22-2004 10:44 AM ET (US)
Could a trolling motor be used instead?
posted 02-22-2004 10:48 AM ET (US)
Would a trolling motor work?
posted 02-22-2004 07:14 PM ET (US)
You bet. I mounted a small bracket to my swim platform for a trolling motor. No holes drilled in the platform. I use a 36lb just fine for what I do.
I will probably go to a bigger salt water series when this motor dies. But it has been around 4 years in saltwater so far. Jim
posted 02-22-2004 07:19 PM ET (US)
I also ment to say that samwhaler is ready for serious fishing. Wow. jim
posted 02-22-2004 08:45 PM ET (US)
Need some advice. If I were to put an 04' 6 HP four stroke Merc. (55 lbs.)on my 2004 Montauk starboard transom, do I need to step up to a heavy duty Garelick 71090 made for four strokes, or can a smaller setup be used that will accomodate a 6 HP two/four stroke? It seems a bit overkill with the larger bracket, but then again I am not familiar with the torque differences of a two or four stroke engine. Also, is thru bolting absolutely necessary for mounting the plate to the transom. I was leaning towards mounting it with four to six 3/8 or 1/2 screws, bedded. Any input would be appreciated.
posted 02-23-2004 09:09 AM ET (US)
Sam, I am also planning on mounting a kicker motor on the starboard side of the transom as you did. Looking at the pictures in your profile, I could only see 2 bolts going through the transom. Does this mean the other bolts came through the transom underneath the step? If so were they easy to get at?
Monty, I would surely thru-bolt any bracket carrying any type of kicker motor except for an electrical trolling motor. I have a bracket mounted on the port side of the transom for my Minn Kota 55lb thrust trolling motor and this is not thru-bolted. It's screwed to the wood in the transom using six 3/8" screws sealed with tech 7 sealant. It's more than strong enough for an electro-motor. See the pictures in my profile.
PS: Sam, what type of fish are you fishing for?
posted 02-25-2004 06:15 PM ET (US)
Last year I had my BW dealer mount a new 6HP four stroke
Mercury outboard to my 2003 170's starboard transom.
They chose to use the same Garelick bracket I see pictured
I don't recommend that bracket at all. I am looking
posted 02-25-2004 07:08 PM ET (US)
I agree with bobeson...
I had the same bracket and I hated it... It was always bouncing up and down while trailering or in rough water...
I was glad when I sold that particular Whaler just to get rid of that mount..
I still think Dick's idea is the best so far.. The powerhead is still plenty high enough from the water line..
This give a solid mount just as if the kicker were mounted to the transom..
posted 02-26-2004 09:15 PM ET (US)
First, I apologize for how bad the pictures of the 170 came up. Thatís what happens when you are in a rush and try to take a couple of pictures before the sun sets! Well, a few Buds donít help either. Iíll try to take better pictures this weekend, after the SNOW, SLEET AND FREEEZING RAIN ends in SOUTH CAROLINA. I should have stayed in New Hampshire.
Eric, I fish mainly for stripers on Lake Murray in South Carolina. I also fish inshore for Flounder and Redfish. I havenít ventured out more than 3 miles off the Charleston coast.
Bobeson, I didnít like the Garelick either. The bracket I have on is a Fulton MB1410. I have had no problems with it yet. I tailored the boat from Columbia, SC to Steinhatchee, Florida going 75 MPH on I-95 with no problems. I have fished in 20-30 MPH winds 2 weekends ago on Lake Murray. With a small 4-stroke, I expect to have some vibration. I put a rubber mat between the bracket and the hall, mainly to protect the hull from scratching, but I think it helps with the vibration too. I get as low as 1-3 MPH; troll all day on a single 3 gallon tank of gas.
Joe, I love the way Dick has the kicker setup on the classic hull. I tried that but could not get it to work for me. The 170 transom is different. The classic Montauk transom has a flush surface with no rub rail. Dick did it by adding a piece of mahogany raising the mount far enough to mount the kicker. With a short shaft Nissan that I had, and the extra width of the rub rail on the 170, it didnít measure up. Plus I wanted the kicker to be out of the way (down) while I fish. On the same note, Dick has a nice looking mount for the downrigger. It didnít work for the 170 angled hand rail (connecting the top of the rail to the hull) I had to come up with a different set of starboards bolted together to support the weight of the Cannon Unit-roll dragging a 10 lb ball. Would it work for everyone? Absolutely not, we all have different needs, wants and tastes. It works for me.
posted 02-26-2004 10:44 PM ET (US)
Thanks for the info...
Dick's boat does however have the Rub Rail that goes all the way around the transom.. That is why he used this type of bracket rather then mounting it directly to the transom... He did not want to cut the Rub Rail either..
You also have a short shaft and yes, you would need a bracket that would lower it into the water like the bracket you are using, rather then having a solid mount like Dick's... I think people with the long shaft kicker may be able to use either the solid mount or the mount like yours..
I'm glad you have a system that you like and works for you...
posted 02-26-2004 11:20 PM ET (US)
I'm glad to see we're getting some good discussion on this topic. I wasn't sure if resurrecting an old tread was the right way to go or not. Looks like it was. There's not too much discussion about mounting kicker motors (at least that I could find) and it's nice to see some new thoughts.
I still like Dick's solution the best. If you're buying a new motor it looks like you could make a stationary mount work.
posted 05-02-2005 03:41 PM ET (US)
Anyone consider installing a "Garelick" www.garelick.com stationary bracket(#71074) with a long shaft kicker for a 170?
Seems like the garelick would turn out similar to Dick's install on his older 17 montauk
Note: A short shaft(15") kicker would suffice for an adjustable motor mount. A fixed mount would require the long shaft(20").
posted 05-02-2005 05:28 PM ET (US)
It looked pretty flimsy to me.
posted 05-02-2005 05:36 PM ET (US)
I have a Honda 5hp on my McKee Craft 17 footer (sorry guys). My Mckee is essentially the same weight and shape of a Montauak 170. The Mckee 17 is 4" longer and wider than a Montauk. And, at 1,440 w/o power, is just 40 pounds heavier.
Anyway, to the point of this thread, my Honda 5hp one cylinder 4 stroke pushes my boat along fine. I can get to hull speed (~6 mph) at full throttle and it will troll all day (and night) at 3 mph. Vibration doesn't seem to be a problem however I wish I had a 2 cylinder. my main point is I think much more than 5 or 8 hp is way overkill for a small boat like the 170. Hull speed is hull speed. Much more than 5 or 8 hp and you're hauling extra weight and wasting fuel. 10 or even 15 hp on a 170? No way on my book...
|Knot at Work||
posted 05-02-2005 08:22 PM ET (US)
I know Erik did. Look at his threads it looks good!
posted 05-03-2005 09:59 AM ET (US)
My buddy Kawika did. He's had problems with the mount
breaking. Looking at the design, I'm not surprised. I'll see
if I can get him to jump in here with the details.
posted 05-03-2005 05:48 PM ET (US)
I put the CMC PT35 power tilt on my 2004 170. It was a clean installation. No reaching over the transom to shift or tilt with this set-up. The following site has some pictures of the application.
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.