Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  2004 170 Montauk or 1997 17' Outrage

Post New Topic  Post Reply
search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   2004 170 Montauk or 1997 17' Outrage
Nushlie posted 05-04-2004 07:14 AM ET (US)   Profile for Nushlie   Send Email to Nushlie  

Please comment on the major differences between these two boats. We are going to buy one or the other. The Montauk is brand new the other looks and runs like new.

We will be using the boat to bounce around Lake Erie, St. Clair, and every once in a while an inland lake. The new Montauk is approx $20,000 the Outrage somewhat cheaper, but not too far from the Montauk.

We have heard that the 17' Ouitrages were great boats with smooth rides, however, priced too near the 18' Outrages, consequently Whaler discontinued the 17' model.



NASNAS posted 05-04-2004 07:53 AM ET (US)     Profile for NASNAS  Send Email to NASNAS     
The 17 outrage has a deep V hull (or somewhat deep) the montauk has the classic tri-hull design. If you are going to be running in areas with good sized chop, go with the outrage, the 17' is a solid boat and burns hardly any fuel with a 115 and can run fast. We had a 17' outrage before we got the 21' and it was run all around the chesapeake bay, and out up to about 15 miles offshore. It could hold it own for its size and perform like a larger boat.

Either boat is a good choice, you can't go wrong.

Good luck!

aubv posted 05-04-2004 08:36 AM ET (US)     Profile for aubv  Send Email to aubv     

While I have not taken a new Montauk for a test ride I have done comparisons of both boats.

Here is a list of features that, I think, make the 17'OR an all around better boat than the Montauk.

Sky pylon.
In-deck Storage
Rear quater seats w/storage
56 Gallon fuel tank
Under-gunnel rod racks
Gunnel mounted rod holders
Wide gunnels W/non-skid
6 cleats in good locations
Room for a second cooler under RPS

I don't like the side railings on the Montauk and I'd constantly be worried about fuel consumption with only 13 gallons of gas. It appears with all of the talk on CW about adding Pate tanks to Montauks, the thought is well founded.

I'd take either boat over 99.9% of all of the other boats in the 17' range. However, I own a 1996 17' OR w/130.

Moe posted 05-04-2004 08:58 AM ET (US)     Profile for Moe  Send Email to Moe     
Deja vu all over again...

Nushlie posted 05-04-2004 11:20 AM ET (US)     Profile for Nushlie  Send Email to Nushlie     

I knew there was a reason I was leaning toward the 17' Outrage, just read Moe's note. We had investigated a one year newer Outrage a few months ago.

Thanks for your help and I wonder if I should even be allowed on the water with this memory of mine.

Moe, if I remember prior posts you have a 15' Whaler that you purchased from the people in Lakeside. I read your notes as that is where we were going to buy the Montauk.


prm1177 posted 05-04-2004 09:54 PM ET (US)     Profile for prm1177  Send Email to prm1177     
Had a chance to view mine (97 OR II 17) and a 170 side by side at my marina last weekend. They were both out of the water for maintenance.

The Montauk certainly looks more like the classic with its squared bow and lower freeboard. Inspection showed a sharper deadrise on the Outrage vs the Montauk. The hull designs side by side confirm the Outrage should be better in rougher water, while the Montauk should plane quicker, on less HP when on smoother water.

The aesthetic differences were interesting as well. The Outrage having more sophisticated lines (rounded gunwales with non-skid) and a more finished transom and bow storage areas. Also noticable were the rear quarter seats in the OR II. The boat appeared bigger in comparison.

If I was looking for a lake or smaller bay boat, the Montauk would tempt me. But on SF Bay, I'll show my bias and keep my Outrage II.

seasicknes posted 05-04-2004 11:30 PM ET (US)     Profile for seasicknes    
It all depends on what your after. Is it important to you that the boat fit a standard size garage ? If it does, then a montauk will fit the bill.


Nushlie posted 05-05-2004 06:59 AM ET (US)     Profile for Nushlie  Send Email to Nushlie     
PRM and Others:

I appreciate your addressing my questions regarding the 17' outrage. The one I'm thinking about is in good shape with a Yamaha 135 and comes with a nice trailer. The boat and motor have about 300 hours on them, always used in fresh water. There are a few electronics on the boat but nothing too fancy or expensive.

What would be a fair price on the boat I'm describing?



prm1177 posted 05-05-2004 05:16 PM ET (US)     Profile for prm1177  Send Email to prm1177     
What year boat and motor? Does it have a trailer? Prices will vary around the country a bit as well. I've seen 1999's go for $22k in NY, to '98's going for 18k in the midwest.

It's a rare boat and in good condition with a trailer will fetch ubove blue book. I bought my 97 with an Optimax 135 used last year, and I've already been offered $2500 more than I paid for it. A scan of the Trader shows a fair price in the $18s for a 96-97.


Post New Topic  Post Reply
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.