Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
Kicker weight limits info needed on 170 Montauk
|Author||Topic: Kicker weight limits info needed on 170 Montauk|
posted 04-17-2004 09:34 PM ET (US)
Up until yesterday, I was going to purchase a 6 hp kicker for my 04' 170. Today I got a good price quote on a new 03' Johnson 8 hp. 4 stroke, two cyl. I have a question as to this motor being too much transom weight for the 170. Has anyone mounted a similar engine on a 170, and are the results satisfactory? This long shaft Johnson/Bomb. weighs 83 lbs. I plan on making a move on this Johnson on Monday if the weight isn't too much for the transom. Any input will help my decision.
posted 04-17-2004 09:52 PM ET (US)
Max engine weight for the 170 is 410#
I believe your classic 90HP come in at 303#
that leaves you 107# to play with.
So with 83# kicker plus oil and other stuff you should still be under the max.
posted 04-18-2004 06:06 AM ET (US)
Got a question for ya to consider....why would ya want a johnson sittin next to your new mercury?....
this is my personal opinion.....not that of the dealership I work for...be advised
posted 04-18-2004 09:32 AM ET (US)
Now that you say it, I do remember seeing the light model Mercs coming out sometime in the summer of 04'. It certainly would be a better match seeing black with black on the back. I would assume the new Merc. 8 is a 2 cyl.so vibes shouldn't be an issue. Do you have any insight when the light models are coming out? Thanks for the reminder.
posted 04-18-2004 10:13 AM ET (US)
They don't look like they cost anymore than the old style either. They are in the West Marine catalog now. Jim
posted 04-18-2004 01:36 PM ET (US)
It sounds like you work for River Marine on Crater Lake Hwy on the outskirts of Medford..??
Johnson/Evinrude (OMC) was purchased by Bombardier.. Parts are still available for the older engines but Manty says he is thinking about a 2003 model which is being manufactured by Bombardier now... The 8HP and below Johnson 4 Strokes are made by Bombardier.. The 9.9 and above 4 Strokes are made by Suzuki with the Johnson name on the cowl.
I do agree that matching engines on any boat look better but that is just in the eye of the beholder..... Anything will work as long as it is under the Max weight. (and runs good of course).
The new Merc 8 HP 4 Stroke looks like it might be a good choice if you want to stay with the same manufacturer and have matching color engines.
"8HP, 84lb 20" Shaft Merc 4 Stroke - Lightweight - 5326855 - 1F08211DK
posted 04-18-2004 02:35 PM ET (US)
The Mercury lightweight is black and red where as my 90 2 stroke is black and blue trimmed (Saltwater series). So they wouldn't match perfectly either. The price I got on the 03' Johnson was 1575.00. I thought it was a pretty good price, but I haven't checked a whole lot.
posted 04-18-2004 02:40 PM ET (US)
The price listed above for the Merc was out of West Marine.... I'm sure if you shopped around, you might find a better price...
posted 04-18-2004 06:05 PM ET (US)
If you have the 170 montauk with a 90 four stroke. The motor weight is 386 pounds. Recommended max weight for the transom is posted by whaler being 410 pounds.
That leaves only 24 pounds left.
figure you have to mount a bracket also. So thats more weight.
posted 04-18-2004 10:21 PM ET (US)
I do have the 2 stroke 90 Merc. As Kamie mentioned it weighs in at around 303 lbs. The 8hp. 2005 lightweight Merc weighs around 84 lbs. That leaves me some room for the bracket, oil, prop and nuts and bolts. If 410 lbs. is indeed OK to operate at, I probably will go with the light model Merc.
posted 04-19-2004 01:29 PM ET (US)
I'll throw in my 2 cents. I've ordered a '04 170 with a two stroke. From the research I've done, I'm leaning towards a 6 HP 4-stroke Merc. I believe it weighs in at 55lbs. I'd like to have a quite trolling motor while the noise of a 2 stroke doesn't bother me while running. The two grand I saved on a the 2-stoke 90 can be applied to the kicker. Plus I can pull the kicker off when I head to the lake for a water skiing weekend.
What type of a mount are you considering? I'm thinking about having a fixed mount fabricated out of aluminum. I need to get the boat before I can get serious about it though.
posted 04-19-2004 03:55 PM ET (US)
Check out Tanner Manufacturing out of Bellingham, WA.
posted 04-19-2004 05:00 PM ET (US)
Thanks! You saved me a bunch of research and design. That was an awesome tip. I've seen the brackets on the Oak Bay charter web site. That's where I got my motivation to have a part custom fabricated. I know some good metal shops here in Seattle but if someone has already done the design that will save a lot of time and money.
posted 04-19-2004 05:10 PM ET (US)
It is always nice to include links so other people can view what someone else is talking about..
This way everyone will be up to date...
posted 04-19-2004 05:22 PM ET (US)
Just checked out the site and made a quick call. These guys seem like pros. Like most quality purchases, you get what you pay for. It's just under $500 for the solid bracket shown on their web page. After reading some old threads on this site, it sounds like a worth while investment. There are some folks who have been disappointed the cookie cutter brackets sold at chain stores.
posted 04-19-2004 07:04 PM ET (US)
I put a 6hp merc four-stroke on my 170 and hated it. The dealer installed it with a Garelick moveable bracket on a "custom" stand-off mount. The engine vibration was bad to begin with, and was amplified by the POS Garelick bracket. The whole setup was terribly insecure and seemed liable to fall off while trailering or motoring in anything but lake conditions. Fortunately the motor was stolen off my boat a few weeks after I got it, so that headache went away - I was actually relieved to lose a $2k piece of equipment, if you can believe that.
While I still had the motor, I spent a lot of time staring at the kicker clearances required to tilt it up and decided that a fixed bracket would be difficult to accomplish with that motor. Before you decide on a fixed bracket, make sure that the clearances required by your particluar kicker motor will be achieved. Note that the Tanner website mentions a number of Whaler models that their brackets are designed to work with, and the Montauk is not listed among them.
If I were to get another kicker, it would probably be a two-cylinder model mounted to a very-well-engineered fixed bracket that allows extended operation (including trailering) with the kicker motor tilted up. I think I would probably also want to figure out a good way to steer the kicker from the helm. For trolling I was using my main outboard as a rudder, but as an emergency get-home motor I'm concerned that the drag created might have rendered progress into a strong headwind unacceptable.
posted 04-20-2004 10:36 AM ET (US)
Thanks for the input. I read your comments on a previous thread. That's part of the reason I am considering a fixed mount. According to the guy at Tanner I talked to, they do have a Montauk bracket, it's just not listed on the site. They also make custom brackets. Before they fabricate they request several photos of the application in order to make sure all the clearances are met. I'm hoping that the fixed mount will cure the vibration problems you encountered but I won't know until I try.
As far as steering goes, they sell connecting rods that run between the motors so you can steering the kicker from the helm. They have ball bearing joints at either end so that each motor can be independently in an upright position and still function.
posted 04-21-2004 08:20 AM ET (US)
Couldn't the bracket posed here: http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/bracket15AuxMotor.html
for 15 Whalers be adapted or modified? It certainly is strong enough, decent looking, and significantly less expensive. If I were to try it, I'd mock up a plywood version, attach the motor to it and put it up against the transom to determine the fit, and when I got it satisfactory, get a quote from someone local to fabricate it. Just a thought....
posted 02-19-2005 03:18 AM ET (US)
I am interested in installing a 4 stroke kicker for my 2004 170 w/ the 90hp 4stroke.
* Whaler tech support advised that the transom will support weights above the 410lbs (which is about the weight for the wet 90 w/ ss prop). The factory tests were conducted with this configuration.
Has anyone installed an 8 or 6hp 4 stroke on their 170?
Thanks in advance.
posted 02-20-2005 02:43 AM ET (US)
Just installed a 6 hp Nissan 4 stroke kicker on my 170, GPS reads 4 mph top speed not the fastest but,in open ocean here in Hawaii it will get me home.Also its runs a little rough but,suits my needs.We have only the Coast Guard if we get in trouble so this outboard really does give me peace of mind.
posted 02-20-2005 04:18 AM ET (US)
Do you have any pictures of that setup? We would like to see them if you do.
posted 02-20-2005 11:54 AM ET (US)
I considered a kicker for my 170 but was concerned about starboard list. For the guys that have them installed, how does the boat sit/ride/handle with 80+ pounds hanging off one side?
posted 02-21-2005 07:53 AM ET (US)
Whaler1234, since this is only a kicker, why waste nearly 100lbs on an 8hp when you can get a classic Merc 15 at the same weight? I realize its a 2-stroke and you probably want to avoid the hassles of a separate fixed fuel supply. Consider though if you boat in off-shore waters, an engine that propels you to 4mph in descent conditions is going to have problems keeping you going once the seas kick up - been there done that.
posted 02-21-2005 09:24 PM ET (US)
You're right, the classic 15 is only 4lbs heavier than the classic eight. I am still researching what would be the best hp rating for my '04 170. Your comment on the 4mph in rough seas adds to my growing list of questions on kicker motors for the '04 170.
1) Is 4mph from a 6hp kicker enough motor?
posted 02-22-2005 07:43 AM ET (US)
Whaler 1234, I don't totally understand your question,
"Montauks hull speed is 7mph, what motor can I achieve this with?"
If you are attempting to get 7mph out of a kicker, and Oahuwhaler is getting 4mph out of an 8hp, I'd think a 15 2-stroke will give you 8-10mph in fairly calm water but this is only a guess. This is one situation where I would prefer the power of a 2-stroke over a 4-stroke and I would be propping that thing down so it was screaming right at the upper limit of its intended rpm range in calm water pushing a 170. The real test of that kicker is bringing you home when the seas are rough and you are bent over trying to tiller-steer a fairly large boat. Think ahead on how you intend to steer it. I think (but am not 100% sure) that you can either buy an extension handle for tiller steering or buy the linkage kit and use the boat's installed steering system for the kicker.
Your question on whether or not the 170 will handle safely with all the extra weight on one side I think is truly the $64K question. I can tell you this if it will help...I weigh 230 and my main fishing buddy weighs over 275 and on the occasion where we both step to the side (like when reeling in/gaffing a fish), I still feel safe in the boat.
posted 02-22-2005 01:08 PM ET (US)
From what I gathered and deduced, I believe hull speed is the max speed I'll be running at prior to planing. I may be wrong. There was mention that trying to run a motor smaller than the minimum will not get you on plane, therefore, the higher hp will net the same speed as the kicker. The factor being that planing takes that much additional hp to get the hull out of the water.
After searching these forums, it seems that the 8hp was a popular choice, followed by the 6 and 9.9.
posted 02-22-2005 03:29 PM ET (US)
And hull speed for a Montauk 170 is 6 MPH, not 7 MPH.
posted 02-22-2005 04:05 PM ET (US)
I just confirmed with my local marine sales shop that my order was placed last Friday for a T9.9 high thrust Yamaha four stroke kicker. I am going to mount it on my 04 Montauk in spring. The tipping possibility will be off set by the weight of the portable gas tank and bucket 1/2 full of 8 pound trolling balls. My 65 lb. son and the bucket-o-balls didn't list it noticably last year, so it won't be a problem. I will be 20 lbs. heavier though due to the CMC-PT35 power tilt unit on the transom. I am going to connect the two motors with with an EZ steer or front connecting rod. That will keep me in the center of the boat where I belong. My son and seldom fishing wife will be on the bow seat also contributing to counterweight. The high thrust should push the 170 fine in Lake Michigan waters. Have a good day!
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.