Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  190 Nantucket now standard with 135 Opti

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

Author Topic:   190 Nantucket now standard with 135 Opti
Sal A posted 07-30-2004 09:24 AM ET (US)   Profile for Sal A   Send Email to Sal A  
Hi guys,

Thanks for pointing out the recent changes to Whaler's website. Of note is that the 190 Nantucket is not even offered with a 115 two stroke in the new model year; the 135hp Optimax is standard. Any conjecture as to why it was dropped?

lizabethie posted 07-30-2004 10:49 AM ET (US)     Profile for lizabethie  Send Email to lizabethie     
Hi guys, I've been reading for awhile and thought I could add my 2 cents here. Pardon for not being nearly as technical as the gang is, but I'll try my best. We've had our Nantucket for a little over a month now, and have kept everything pretty much standard as delivered by the dealer. With 4 adults (2 men at about 240# each, and 2 normal women) the boat with the 115 will top out around the 31 mph.
The dealer kept emphasizing how the Nantucket with the 115 was priced to get people into the market. But honestly, when you are spending $30K already, what is an extra $5k that the dealer said the 135 cost. Of course, ours had nothing available with that, and would have had to special order it. I couldn't wait, so we took the 115.
We're using it mostly for fishing, with just the 2 of us. (It gets too crowded with more fisher-people.) For our purposes, the smaller engine is fine, because we spend so much time at 5 mph in the Norwalk islands in Long Island Sound. I guess if you're on open water (not trying to avoid rocks and find fish,) the extra power would be appreciated.


Sal A posted 07-30-2004 10:56 AM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     

I am surprised you don't get more top end speed with your 115 2 stroke. My 4 stroke hits 6000 rpm's (6100 actually ...scary)and hits 36ph with a full tank, 2 normal-sized adults and 3 small kids. I would have thought your motor would outperform mine. Do you have the right prop?

PS Glad you love your boat; we love ours as well.

Yiddil posted 07-30-2004 01:08 PM ET (US)     Profile for Yiddil  Send Email to Yiddil     
Hi all, Sal:) Yeah I noticed that on the Whaler site, but Im still pretty pleased with the 115-2 doing 30 plus at 4500rpms with full tank of gas and two adults...Im suprized because the 115 really did well in the graphs and performance notes I read....well I guess that means you have to add 5 grand to the old base price??? Not I, Im happy with what I got:) Im never gonna do 30 plus in 4 footers, and Im real happy at 4500rpm all day long in less than a foot waves:)Once in a while Ill pump her up past that but usually stay in the 4500rpms as its very economical:))I was suprized to see the new cuddy ready to sell, did I see that right ...shes a 20 footer...800 pounds heavier??? wonder how she compares to the Nantucket???? :)Im sure we payed less Sal:)
lizabethie posted 07-30-2004 01:36 PM ET (US)     Profile for lizabethie  Send Email to lizabethie     
Well, I know it's an aluminum prop... is it the one that's perfect for it? Dunno. <shrug> I'm pretty sure it was the standard with the regular 115 though. Like I said, it moves us within our needs, we took it up from Westport to Bridgeport with the 4 aforementioned adults at a constant 28 mph, and I couldn't complain. (Heck, that's sure a lot faster than I-95 moves through the same stretch!) I am just so excited that we have the boat and are out on the water, I don't even mind the long ride down the river in the channel.

We could probably get more performance if we researched the engine and were able to adjust things to the optimal settings. (The standard load it carries is us, our fishing gear, sodas and snacks, full tank of gas, bimini, and the accessories from the fishing package.)

But, like I said, I've been so happy with just having a boat, and now that I feel like I've gotten the best, it would be hard to go with anything less. (I talked my fiancé, Mark, up from the Montauk, and am so happy I did. On our delivery date, I walked down the dock, looked at it and said 'Oh, its bigger than I remember!' and the dealer looked at Mark and told him he was lucky :) )

We got a tube and might take the nieces out this weekend; I'll see how it does with the extra drag.


BOB KEMMLER JR posted 07-30-2004 01:53 PM ET (US)     Profile for BOB KEMMLER JR    
standard 135 opti,is that confirmed?might just be a mistake on the site guys
erik selis posted 07-30-2004 02:00 PM ET (US)     Profile for erik selis  Send Email to erik selis     

I don't think it's a bad idea that they made the 135 Optimax the standard motor for the 190 Nantucket.

It looks like they got rid of the 115 Optimax as an option. A good idea IMHO. This motor just doesn't perform well enough for the Nantucket. The 115 Carb. 2-stroke is a better performer. Maybe they should have kept this one as an option for a while longer.

Beth, could it be that you have the 115-hp 2-stroke Optimax on your boat? It would explain the speed figures.

In any case the 190 Nantucket is a fantastic boat with whatever engine is mounted to it.


lizabethie posted 07-30-2004 02:44 PM ET (US)     Profile for lizabethie  Send Email to lizabethie     
I checked with my expert (Mark) and what we have is the Mercury 115 SaltWater, plain 'ole plain 'ole. (

From what the dealer told us, this was the standard. We are neophytes as far as the details are concerned. Its part of the reason I lobbied so heavily for a BW instead of another (more affordable) brand.

When I told Mark that it sounded like we should be getting better WOT speeds, he said 'Nope, really don't think we could.' Could've gotten a dud, or may be doing something wrong. In fact, we probably are. He trims the engine up to get the nose down, and we might be getting too much air in the water then. I think it would be much less efficient like that, and we haven't had any problems with gas guzzling though.

Jimm posted 08-01-2004 10:53 AM ET (US)     Profile for Jimm    
Hey guys, don't forget that Beth's top speed is with four people on board and two of them go 250 lbs each.
jimh posted 08-01-2004 11:24 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Due to federal regulations limiting the emissions from outboard motors, sale of traditional ("classic") two-stroke outboard motors, like the Mercury 115-HP, will not be permitted in the United States beginning in 2006.

The effect of this regulation has been to make the supply of these motors somewhat limited in the 2005 model year. Since they cannot be sold after a certain date, a manufacturer will not want to have a large inventory of these motors unsold as the year 2006 approaches. Therefore, availability of this motor will probably be uncertain in model-year 2005. This has probably affected the decision by Boston Whaler to offer the 190 NANTUCKET with a different engine as the standard or base model.

Also, it has been often mentioned that the horsepower ratings of these classic motors was on the conservative side, so that, for example, in the case of a 115-HP rated engine, you might very well be getting more than 115-HP. The actual horsepower could be as hight as 125-HP and still be rated as a "115".

In the newer, low-emission, motors, the tendency has been for the horsepower rating to be more accurate, and a 135-HP rated motor is likely to be just that and no more. The reason behind this has been mentioned as related to the emissions requirements, but it is unstated exactly how this influence is felt.

Yiddil posted 08-02-2004 12:09 AM ET (US)     Profile for Yiddil  Send Email to Yiddil     
Im trying to remember what I got at 5000-5500 RPMs...may have been 38....dont so it often but once in a while I punch it! Not sure. I guess Ill have to see what she does next time out. Could I ask for more power, Im sure everyone would say yes, but is the 115-2 okay, you betcha!I decided after reading everyones posts, and again is whats important to you, to get the things I really wanted on the Nantucket and still live with the 115-2, so I got the spread around some $ for the other needs, comfort, electronics, canvas, live well, etc. I was on Kevs Outrage today and his 135 made that boat fly in flat water on the potomac and the adjacent bays, what a great boat!Older Outrage 19 me thinks...with a few less creature comforts.

We compared differences in our boat styles...Nantucket has much higher freeboard so she feels different, CC is huge on the Nantucket and sheilds wind out of your face a bit more(also rain) just a few differences...but I wouldn't give up that Bow Dodger, cusion and leaning post fer nothing! I guess us older guys need some padding:) hehe Beth enjoy your boat!!!:) The Yiddil

Sal A posted 08-02-2004 08:06 AM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     

I agree that the 135 Opti as standard is probably a good standard engine. TG-190 was very pleased when he had that set up. I hate to admit it but I will probably repower, probably look for a 150 4 stroke, hopefully Mercury; I am going to try to be patient.

I had my boat down to Tices Shoal, a neat anchoring place in Barnegat Bay not far from the Barnegat Lighthouse, with another dad and 4 kids. My son James ripped a toenail off (dont ask how)and I was trying to punch it to get him back up north. The bay had a real chop to it, with 15-20 knot winds coming out of the south at out back. I was trying to punch it a bit, while keeping the motor trimmed down to smooth out the chop and minimize the porpoising. At 5000 rpm's we were doing 24mph, and I wish I had more power.

To those reading and considering engine options for this boat, learn from my experience, and from the good advice from many here who have long advocated putting the max horsepower on your transom.

The hull remains a wonderful, dry, and well-designed hull, and I love the solidness and layout.

Peter posted 08-02-2004 10:39 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
Jimh - are you sure conventional outboards made in 2005 can't be sold in 2006? I think that is impractical and unfair from a regulatory perspective.

I don't believe that the EPA regulation regulates sales but rather manufacturing. I believe that the way it works is that the engine manufacturers make emission certifications for each model of engine manufactured based on model year. Although the manufacturers make certifications regarding emissions for each of their model engines, until model year 2006, the manufacturers's certifications do not have to meet the 2006 EPA regulatory requirements.

So model year 2005 is the last year that they can manufacturer conventional outboards because its the last model year in which they do not have to meet the 2006 requirements. Nothing in the regulations that I have seen suggests that a leftover 2005 conventional outboard can't be sold in 2006, otherwise it would be akin to a game of musical chairs and what dealer or manufacturer would want to play that?

I think the supply is becoming more limited because the manufacturers are discontinuing production or sale of conventional outboards at times when it is convenient or makes business sense for the manufacturer to do so.

Dauntless18 posted 08-02-2004 11:26 AM ET (US)     Profile for Dauntless18    
First of all, congratulations on your excellent choice. As a fellow Southern CT resident bouncing around LI Sound, I often wonder whether the Nantucket would be a better boat for me than the 18 Dauntless I purchased (both boats are about the same length 18'6" vs 18'10" and about the same weight 2,000lbs dry). I don't know what the difference is between them in the deadrise or if it would make much difference. Would love to get your impressions of taking the 2ft chop / wakes in LI Sound.

Per the 115 vs. 135 Optimax (which I have). I really like the 135 and it gets the Dauntless up on a plane quickly, but I rarely get it above the high-3,000s in RPM. It is rare that the Sound or a portion of it is flat enough to open up to WOT with engine trimmed out (which should be around 5,400 RPMs, I just got 5,200 RPMs with engine trimmed all the way in for the chop this last weekend - only the second time I have had it up that fast). And, with the wakes so common, I can almost never trim-out for a bow-up position. So, I think a 115 2-stroke would be a great engine to have and in my opinion you will reach all the speed you can get on LI Sound.

lizabethie posted 08-02-2004 06:59 PM ET (US)     Profile for lizabethie  Send Email to lizabethie     
Dauntless18 - Nice boat! I really liked the Dauntless 16, but the 18 was going to be more than I wanted to spend. (There's a D18 that is at the beginning of our dock, usually sitting there wishing I could take her out too.) I think the difference in the Nantucket and the Dauntless is the beam, so while I would be slightly more steady stopped (and fishing,) you should cut through the chop more. That said, we don't bounce around too much unless we're up on the bbbiiiggg swells - 2" is nothing. (I tend to want to jump them like a kid, though.) We've got the leaning post, and I think it’s better than the bucket seats for going out in rougher water. I just hold on tight. We get up on a plane within 5-10 seconds, depending on how hard we hit the throttle. I tend to be a sissy, starting slow.

Anyway, about the top speed. We might have found the problem... While paddling around in my tube, I found myself checking out the prop. One of the fins was bent! Not very noticeably - we've never hit anything, so we're suspecting that it's always been like this, and that was why we always topped out around 29-31 mph. Now... that said, Mark tried to straighten it, and ended up kinking the aluminum, so we just ordered a stainless steel prop! Should be here by Wednesday. Once that comes in, I should be able to make a final determination.

jimh posted 08-02-2004 08:27 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Peter--You make a good point. I got my information from a representative of a manufacturer of outboards, so from his point of view he can't "sell" them, but, if you change to the point of view of a retailer who has some unsold engines in stock, he probably can sell them at anytime in the future past the deadline date imposed on the manufacturer.

How these regulations and time limits would apply to Boston Whaler, a boat and motor original manufacturer/integrator, might be a little hard to determine.

The decision to change to low-Emission engines across their product line may have also been affected by other factors, including image and brand prestige. No sense in putting the old techonology motor on your latest boat designs. Also, more profit potential might have weighed in on these matters, do you think?

AQUANUT posted 08-03-2004 10:17 AM ET (US)     Profile for AQUANUT  Send Email to AQUANUT     
I am sitting here looking at the new whaler stuff we just got in yesterday, and the new whaler product guide looks like a library book....our general manager jokingly put a 12.95 price tag on this thing,,hhhaha..a comment was made it was to be available at this thing is awesome.

on page 22 of 61,
stock mechanical list the 135XL optimax as standard equipment

however, under noteable options/accessories
the 115 exlpt EFI fourstroke and the 150XL optimax as optional

my question is: there are two optis available..1 fourstroke,

why is the 115optimax not offered....but the 115hp fourstroke is...


jimh posted 08-03-2004 11:26 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Aquanut--Your photo caption text sounds awfully familiar to me--because I wrote it!

AQUANUT posted 08-04-2004 10:13 AM ET (US)     Profile for AQUANUT  Send Email to AQUANUT     
you are exactly right jim!

thank you very much!

You wrote it, I read it, I enjoyed it, admired it, live it everytime I use my montauk 170, so I stole it!

repeating it should be very has been adjusted to reflect origin, thanks again.

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.