Montauk 170 console height ... too short? - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  Montauk 170 console height ... too short?

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Montauk 170 console height ... too short?

Chesapeake posted 10-14-2003 03:48 PM ET (US)
Was in a 170 for the first time yesterday. Very nice boat. It was parked along side a Nantucket and I can honestly say they seemed equally roomy.
Standing at the helm felt a bit uncomfortable as I really had to bend over to reach the wheel and throttle. Felt like it was configured to be driven sitting down. Definitely felt considerably lower than at the helm of a pre-2002 Montauk.
Anyone else can comment on this observation, particularly 170 owners and those who previously owned a classic 17?
Also, it seemed that the console (at least in this boat) was identical to that in the 160 Dauntless. That might explain things.
Barney posted 10-14-2003 07:09 PM ET (US)
Check this out on your question:
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum8/HTML/000915.html Jim
Chesapeake posted 10-14-2003 11:19 PM ET (US)
Haven't driven a classic Montauk, the new 170 seems to be even shorter from floor to throttle. It was not comfortable. Shocked whaler would do this. I am only 6'0" AND found it uncomfortable reaching over. maybe it is just me...
Chesapeake posted 10-14-2003 11:20 PM ET (US)
Should have said "having driven a classic ..."
fitn217 posted 10-15-2003 10:08 AM ET (US)
I've considered moving the console up. I was thinking that there might be a problem with the wires and cables being too short. I was thinking I could probobably could use starboard to boost it up. I NEED SOMETHING TO HIDE BEHIND IN NOVEMBER!!! That wind on your face and chest is brutal. Has anyone took on this project yet?
whalerdude posted 10-17-2003 08:26 AM ET (US)
How could you forget driving my 'Classic' on boat trade day in Door County last year!
Chesapeake posted 10-17-2003 10:12 AM ET (US)
Whalerdude: It is recollection of driving your 92 Montauk that made me think of this. I recall that the top of the steering wheel and the throttle where in very comfortable reach. When I stood at the helm of the 170 Montauk, I felt like I had to "hunch" over to reach the wheel and controls.
When I moved over to the Nantucket and the Dauntless 180, the controls felt to be at a normal, comfortable height. Again, it just felt like the old Dauntless console (now the new Montauk console) was built too short.
Building a 4" fiberglass extension kit / mold would be a great option for Whaler or some other intelligent glass company or individual. I wonder if anyone else agrees about this.
Goosedog posted 10-17-2003 11:37 AM ET (US)
At 6'4", I would love to hear of any aftermarket (or fabricated) extention kits for the 170. However, the driving stance recommended by Rich M in the prior thread does work.
Knot at Work posted 10-18-2003 06:14 AM ET (US)
I suppose a circus midget would find it a bit too high...
GRIN
Chesapeake posted 10-20-2003 09:05 AM ET (US)
Knot: guess that's why all circus midgets drive 13 Sports! :-)
Knot at Work posted 10-20-2003 01:05 PM ET (US)
Chessie, Amen but a circus midget needs at least a 15 to haul the flaming hoops and poodles with funny hats
cmarques posted 10-21-2003 10:08 PM ET (US)
I have an '02 Dauntless 160 and the height is good for me. Looking on BW's website the Montauk console looks the same but appears to lack a tilt wheel like mine. It is very comfortable with the wheel tilted near horizontal but ng down or vertical. I run 99% of the time standing up and it seems very uncomfortable sitting down with the wheel down also. I've never been in a Montauk except at boat show when I bought my Dauntless- don't remember if it was a classic or 170. Even though the windshield on the Dauntless seems to be quite higher than the Montauk it can still be brutal when cool out.
13DAUNTLESS posted 10-22-2003 04:09 PM ET (US)
For those of you that own a new Montauk, would it help the console height issue for the tall guys if you put a tilt wheel on?
Goosedog posted 10-22-2003 04:49 PM ET (US)
Yep. Brand/style recommendations?
Jimm posted 10-22-2003 07:26 PM ET (US)
13D - Nope, but as you get older and knees start to give way(like most of the other parts on your body)it's nice to sit down.
bugsyjr posted 10-23-2003 08:46 AM ET (US)
We have recently upgraded from an 88 Montauk 17' to a 2004 Montauk 170 (90 Stroke). I think the console on the 88 was much more comfortable standing up than the 04. I am only 5'9.
bugsyjr posted 10-23-2003 08:48 AM ET (US)
Sorry, should read 90 4 Stroke
Knot at Work posted 10-23-2003 10:15 AM ET (US)
I lean the RPS all the way forward and that helps withsomething to sit on. 5'11 and at 40 mph I like to be standing anyways.
I think it is fine. No issues yet.
sumnerdav posted 10-23-2003 12:22 PM ET (US)
How do you get your 17 to go 40? Mine seems to top at about 34.
Knot at Work posted 10-23-2003 04:59 PM ET (US)
One person light on gas, smooth sea. Bimini removed. WOT saw 40 and it wanted to keep going. I bet I could get higher at max rpm.
not a 17MT but the 170 montauk. 2003 Montauk 90 hp 4 stroke Veng prop
sumnerdav posted 10-24-2003 10:23 AM ET (US)
Knot at Work
My 2003 17 has a Mercury 90 Saltwater 2 cycle with the stock aluminum prop. Do you have any suggestions for me to pick up speed? This is my 1st powered Whaler.
Thanks
Barney posted 10-24-2003 10:36 AM ET (US)
sumnerdav, Sounds like engine trim. Bimini should be down also. I got 38 MPH with the bimini up on the same setup at Knot. The outboard on the new Montauk can be trimmed up alot. Forum members have hit 40 and 42 with the 90 HP 4-Stroke. You should see that also, if they put the standard 21 pitch prop on your 2-Stroke. Jim
Knot at Work posted 10-24-2003 12:17 PM ET (US)
Sumner, I agree with Barney you can do better and it sounds like trim. I get on plane and once up trim my motor till I "feel" it. A well trimmed boat will feel smooth in the knees and you will see a increase in RPM without a increase in Throttle... at least initially.
I usually feel a good trip at 5200-5400 rpm for 37-40 mph
You just need to experience different trim bumps and effect.
I am only speaking about the 4 banger. I am not qualified to talk about a 2 stroke.
Jeff
lhg posted 10-24-2003 01:02 PM ET (US)
I think it is criminal to be running an aluminum prop with any 90 HP engine on a boat that should do over 30 mph. The money for the 90 is wasted, and you should have bought a 75.
Any 90 HP powered Montauk, new or old, should be running an SS prop, at least a Vengeance model (available up to 18" pitch), or then a Laser II is you can turn 20" of pitch.
The SS props give more hull and bow lift and better top speed.
sumnerdav posted 10-24-2003 01:26 PM ET (US)
ihg
I think that it's criminal that I don't already have a SS prop.
How do I go about selecting the proper prop for my motor and boat. What 's the most economical method of purchasing the proper prop? I've looked at props on ebay, but in most cases I can't figure out which one will fit and perform properly.
Thanks for you help
Barney posted 10-26-2003 05:14 PM ET (US)
sumnerdav, I recommend a new thread to discuss that topic. Surely someone here on the Forum has your setup but with a SS prop. I would like to know myself. I have a 4-Stroke but am curious. Jim
lhg posted 10-26-2003 07:12 PM ET (US)
My remarks were simply to emphasize that when one pays 20 thosand for a nice rig like a 170, it seems that the few dollars save off the selling price, by either BW or it's Dealership, is not smart selling. The 90 will certainly run much better with a good SS prop.
For the new 170, certainly BW Customer Service must know which Mercury SS prop is appropriate. Doesn't the 90 4-stroke upgrade automatically come with an 18" pitch SS Vengeance prop? That could be appropriate for the 2-stroke 90 also. I could not tell you if the engine could turn the minimum 20" pitch that a Laser II or High Five come in. Perhaps a 4 bladed 17" Trophy Plus would work, or an aftermarket Stiletto or Rapture 19". I'd check with BW or others here that own your boat/engine combination.
I also remember seeing somewhere, maybe on this site, that BW indicated that 170 would do about 43 with either 90 HP engine.
Barney posted 10-26-2003 07:24 PM ET (US)
I searched the site and could only find minimal info on the 2-Stroke props for the 170. Someone mentioned a 19 stainless, but that's it. We need some data dudes. Jim
MantyMonty posted 10-26-2003 07:49 PM ET (US)
I was interested in purchasing a SS prop for my 2004 170 also. I took the numbers of of my alum. one and they are 48 77348A45 21P. I am guessing it is a 21 pitch. Don't know for sure, but when the motor size (90) and year is entered on Mercury's web site, it gives three or four sizes that are compatable. The middle sized one is a 131/4 x 21 pitch. I had my boat out twice before I had to winterize it, but my son and I had it crusing at a little over 42mph according to my Garmin 188C data. This was in 3 foot rollers in Lake Michigan last week. It seems to work fine for us, but I might still invest in a SS prop.
MantyMonty posted 10-26-2003 07:52 PM ET (US)
Sorry, I forgot to mention this is mounted on a 2004 2 Stroke 90 Saltwater Series Mercury. I am assuming Whaler put this on the motor during their setup, because Al at Twin Cities Marine did not give me the box from the prop like they did with my 150 sport.
jimh posted 10-27-2003 09:25 AM ET (US)
I think it is criminal that all this good information on propeller selection for 170 MONTAUKs is buried in a thread about console height.

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 170 console height ... too short?
Chesapeake	posted 10-14-2003 03:48 PM ET (US) Was in a 170 for the first time yesterday. Very nice boat. It was parked along side a Nantucket and I can honestly say they seemed equally roomy. Standing at the helm felt a bit uncomfortable as I really had to bend over to reach the wheel and throttle. Felt like it was configured to be driven sitting down. Definitely felt considerably lower than at the helm of a pre-2002 Montauk. Anyone else can comment on this observation, particularly 170 owners and those who previously owned a classic 17? Also, it seemed that the console (at least in this boat) was identical to that in the 160 Dauntless. That might explain things.
Barney	posted 10-14-2003 07:09 PM ET (US) Check this out on your question: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum8/HTML/000915.html Jim
Chesapeake	posted 10-14-2003 11:19 PM ET (US) Haven't driven a classic Montauk, the new 170 seems to be even shorter from floor to throttle. It was not comfortable. Shocked whaler would do this. I am only 6'0" AND found it uncomfortable reaching over. maybe it is just me...
Chesapeake	posted 10-14-2003 11:20 PM ET (US) Should have said "having driven a classic ..."
fitn217	posted 10-15-2003 10:08 AM ET (US) I've considered moving the console up. I was thinking that there might be a problem with the wires and cables being too short. I was thinking I could probobably could use starboard to boost it up. I NEED SOMETHING TO HIDE BEHIND IN NOVEMBER!!! That wind on your face and chest is brutal. Has anyone took on this project yet?
whalerdude	posted 10-17-2003 08:26 AM ET (US) How could you forget driving my 'Classic' on boat trade day in Door County last year!
Chesapeake	posted 10-17-2003 10:12 AM ET (US) Whalerdude: It is recollection of driving your 92 Montauk that made me think of this. I recall that the top of the steering wheel and the throttle where in very comfortable reach. When I stood at the helm of the 170 Montauk, I felt like I had to "hunch" over to reach the wheel and controls. When I moved over to the Nantucket and the Dauntless 180, the controls felt to be at a normal, comfortable height. Again, it just felt like the old Dauntless console (now the new Montauk console) was built too short. Building a 4" fiberglass extension kit / mold would be a great option for Whaler or some other intelligent glass company or individual. I wonder if anyone else agrees about this.
Goosedog	posted 10-17-2003 11:37 AM ET (US) At 6'4", I would love to hear of any aftermarket (or fabricated) extention kits for the 170. However, the driving stance recommended by Rich M in the prior thread does work.
Knot at Work	posted 10-18-2003 06:14 AM ET (US) I suppose a circus midget would find it a bit too high... GRIN
Chesapeake	posted 10-20-2003 09:05 AM ET (US) Knot: guess that's why all circus midgets drive 13 Sports! :-)
Knot at Work	posted 10-20-2003 01:05 PM ET (US) Chessie, Amen but a circus midget needs at least a 15 to haul the flaming hoops and poodles with funny hats
cmarques	posted 10-21-2003 10:08 PM ET (US) I have an '02 Dauntless 160 and the height is good for me. Looking on BW's website the Montauk console looks the same but appears to lack a tilt wheel like mine. It is very comfortable with the wheel tilted near horizontal but ng down or vertical. I run 99% of the time standing up and it seems very uncomfortable sitting down with the wheel down also. I've never been in a Montauk except at boat show when I bought my Dauntless- don't remember if it was a classic or 170. Even though the windshield on the Dauntless seems to be quite higher than the Montauk it can still be brutal when cool out.
13DAUNTLESS	posted 10-22-2003 04:09 PM ET (US) For those of you that own a new Montauk, would it help the console height issue for the tall guys if you put a tilt wheel on?
Goosedog	posted 10-22-2003 04:49 PM ET (US) Yep. Brand/style recommendations?
Jimm	posted 10-22-2003 07:26 PM ET (US) 13D - Nope, but as you get older and knees start to give way(like most of the other parts on your body)it's nice to sit down.
bugsyjr	posted 10-23-2003 08:46 AM ET (US) We have recently upgraded from an 88 Montauk 17' to a 2004 Montauk 170 (90 Stroke). I think the console on the 88 was much more comfortable standing up than the 04. I am only 5'9.
bugsyjr	posted 10-23-2003 08:48 AM ET (US) Sorry, should read 90 4 Stroke
Knot at Work	posted 10-23-2003 10:15 AM ET (US) I lean the RPS all the way forward and that helps withsomething to sit on. 5'11 and at 40 mph I like to be standing anyways. I think it is fine. No issues yet.
sumnerdav	posted 10-23-2003 12:22 PM ET (US) How do you get your 17 to go 40? Mine seems to top at about 34.
Knot at Work	posted 10-23-2003 04:59 PM ET (US) One person light on gas, smooth sea. Bimini removed. WOT saw 40 and it wanted to keep going. I bet I could get higher at max rpm. not a 17MT but the 170 montauk. 2003 Montauk 90 hp 4 stroke Veng prop
sumnerdav	posted 10-24-2003 10:23 AM ET (US) Knot at Work My 2003 17 has a Mercury 90 Saltwater 2 cycle with the stock aluminum prop. Do you have any suggestions for me to pick up speed? This is my 1st powered Whaler. Thanks
Barney	posted 10-24-2003 10:36 AM ET (US) sumnerdav, Sounds like engine trim. Bimini should be down also. I got 38 MPH with the bimini up on the same setup at Knot. The outboard on the new Montauk can be trimmed up alot. Forum members have hit 40 and 42 with the 90 HP 4-Stroke. You should see that also, if they put the standard 21 pitch prop on your 2-Stroke. Jim
Knot at Work	posted 10-24-2003 12:17 PM ET (US) Sumner, I agree with Barney you can do better and it sounds like trim. I get on plane and once up trim my motor till I "feel" it. A well trimmed boat will feel smooth in the knees and you will see a increase in RPM without a increase in Throttle... at least initially. I usually feel a good trip at 5200-5400 rpm for 37-40 mph You just need to experience different trim bumps and effect. I am only speaking about the 4 banger. I am not qualified to talk about a 2 stroke. Jeff
lhg	posted 10-24-2003 01:02 PM ET (US) I think it is criminal to be running an aluminum prop with any 90 HP engine on a boat that should do over 30 mph. The money for the 90 is wasted, and you should have bought a 75. Any 90 HP powered Montauk, new or old, should be running an SS prop, at least a Vengeance model (available up to 18" pitch), or then a Laser II is you can turn 20" of pitch. The SS props give more hull and bow lift and better top speed.
sumnerdav	posted 10-24-2003 01:26 PM ET (US) ihg I think that it's criminal that I don't already have a SS prop. How do I go about selecting the proper prop for my motor and boat. What 's the most economical method of purchasing the proper prop? I've looked at props on ebay, but in most cases I can't figure out which one will fit and perform properly. Thanks for you help
Barney	posted 10-26-2003 05:14 PM ET (US) sumnerdav, I recommend a new thread to discuss that topic. Surely someone here on the Forum has your setup but with a SS prop. I would like to know myself. I have a 4-Stroke but am curious. Jim
lhg	posted 10-26-2003 07:12 PM ET (US) My remarks were simply to emphasize that when one pays 20 thosand for a nice rig like a 170, it seems that the few dollars save off the selling price, by either BW or it's Dealership, is not smart selling. The 90 will certainly run much better with a good SS prop. For the new 170, certainly BW Customer Service must know which Mercury SS prop is appropriate. Doesn't the 90 4-stroke upgrade automatically come with an 18" pitch SS Vengeance prop? That could be appropriate for the 2-stroke 90 also. I could not tell you if the engine could turn the minimum 20" pitch that a Laser II or High Five come in. Perhaps a 4 bladed 17" Trophy Plus would work, or an aftermarket Stiletto or Rapture 19". I'd check with BW or others here that own your boat/engine combination. I also remember seeing somewhere, maybe on this site, that BW indicated that 170 would do about 43 with either 90 HP engine.
Barney	posted 10-26-2003 07:24 PM ET (US) I searched the site and could only find minimal info on the 2-Stroke props for the 170. Someone mentioned a 19 stainless, but that's it. We need some data dudes. Jim
MantyMonty	posted 10-26-2003 07:49 PM ET (US) I was interested in purchasing a SS prop for my 2004 170 also. I took the numbers of of my alum. one and they are 48 77348A45 21P. I am guessing it is a 21 pitch. Don't know for sure, but when the motor size (90) and year is entered on Mercury's web site, it gives three or four sizes that are compatable. The middle sized one is a 131/4 x 21 pitch. I had my boat out twice before I had to winterize it, but my son and I had it crusing at a little over 42mph according to my Garmin 188C data. This was in 3 foot rollers in Lake Michigan last week. It seems to work fine for us, but I might still invest in a SS prop.
MantyMonty	posted 10-26-2003 07:52 PM ET (US) Sorry, I forgot to mention this is mounted on a 2004 2 Stroke 90 Saltwater Series Mercury. I am assuming Whaler put this on the motor during their setup, because Al at Twin Cities Marine did not give me the box from the prop like they did with my 150 sport.
jimh	posted 10-27-2003 09:25 AM ET (US) I think it is criminal that all this good information on propeller selection for 170 MONTAUKs is buried in a thread about console height.