Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
|Author||Topic: 150 Montauk/Sport|
posted 08-10-2005 02:36 PM ET (US)
There was some talk at a recent rendezvous (Charlevoix) about a center console 15' rig based on the sport hull and called a montauk.
posted 08-10-2005 05:57 PM ET (US)
The 150 MONTAUK will be in the 2006 catalogue. It may take a month or two before a dealer will take delivery of the first hull.
posted 08-10-2005 07:28 PM ET (US)
Will they then rename the 170 Montauk as a 170 Outrage?
posted 08-11-2005 03:56 AM ET (US)
It's possible Warren...it will probably have a maximum engine rating of 115hp.
|Knot at Work||
posted 08-11-2005 02:21 PM ET (US)
yet another reason I will never sell my 170 Montauk.... will we get the coveted title of "classic" jimh?
posted 08-11-2005 02:27 PM ET (US)
I think it is less likely that the 170 Montauk will be renamed a 170 Outrage, since the "Montauk" name is a very powerful brand. That's why they're calling the upcoming 150 Center Console a 150 Montauk...to capitalize on that brand recognition.
And well they should - it is one of the most capable, versatile small boats ever made, and from most reports, the 170 Montauk carries on that proud heritage very well.
I would expect the 170 to get "upsized" in engine rating soon - the 135 HP L4 Verado may be an engine system of choice for this rig, provided that the hull can handle the weight.
posted 08-11-2005 02:59 PM ET (US)
It's my understanding that the 150 and 170 Montauk will remain in the Legend Series. The Outrages have a different hull design, i.e. more "V". A CC 150 is a great idea. It would be even better if they would factory rig a jackplate as an option on that platform. BW is missing a lot of sales for the ever expanding "flats" fishing market. They were't even listed in an extensive line-up of flats boats by Fly Fish America. The 170 likely drafts too much for this use, but a 150 is another story, especially if the engine height were adjustable.
posted 08-11-2005 03:23 PM ET (US)
The BW website was updated for the 2006 models. The 150 CC was called 150 montauk and the 170 montauk retained the name. I just saw their website. They have pictures of the boat. It looks really nice.
posted 08-11-2005 03:41 PM ET (US)
The new web site is interesting. They have grouped the tender/sport/montauk line into one. The "legend" label has been dropped. It makes more sense this way. Outrage, Dauntless, conquest are boat lines. The legend was a group of different boats. The brand identification is more clear to me. I am guessing that the pictures of the MT 150 are based on prototypes and photoshop. I hope that if they are still working on the molds they consider adding a rod holders to the mt150.. The detail indicates that the MT 150 has a bilge pump. I can't imagine why and where the need this as the 150 hull is self baling.
posted 08-11-2005 09:45 PM ET (US)
The website says the 150 Montauk is available with a fishing package which includes a livewell and a cooler seat. If the gas tank is under the seat (RPS) where will the livewell go???
And once again I'm concerned about the weak horsepower rating.
posted 08-12-2005 08:06 PM ET (US)
In 2003, when we bought our 150 Sport, it, the 130 and 170, were in a category titled "Classics" and all shared the classic squared bow. Then some genius threw the pointed bow 190 in with them and renamed the category "Legends" sorta like "New Coke."
One word of advice. We bought one of those Igloo 36 Quart coolers, and it SUCKS for keeping ice for more than about a day. We wound up just using it for gear. Perhaps it'll do a little better with a cushion on it, but if I were buying one these new boats, I'd see if a Igloo 50 Qt 5-day cooler would fit.
posted 08-13-2005 08:18 PM ET (US)
so the question is: Will whaler make a 190 montauk ?
Since they now have a 150 and a 170.
posted 08-15-2005 12:59 PM ET (US)
I think that question has been answered with the renaming of the 190 Nantucket to a 190 Outrage, and the 205 Eastport to the 205 Conquest.
At least for the near term, it looks like the renaming scheme has settled down.
For my part, I think part of the decision for the 150 Montauk was A) the popularity of the new hull and the demand for "classic" 15 CC's, and B) the increasing numbers of "entry buyers" in the 15 and 17 foot range who want additional versatility in their boats. The 150 was not just being used as a "sport" boat, but also as a fishing boat - thus the need for a real fishing layout rather than the side console. The new design better met the way that owners were using the boats - and perhaps are also the result of owner/dealer surveys.
I think that I read somewhere that the 150 and 170 are the biggest selling hulls, with larger quantities than ever being sold. Given this increased demand for the 150 model, it makes sense that they'd expand the offerings for that hull. If the Ventura model weren't available, I bet we'd also see a side-console 170 Sport in limited release.
In reality, the 150 Montauk is a lot closer, dimension-wise, to the 17' Montauk than the 170 Montauk is.
I agree with posts above, however. Both these hulls deserve a higher HP rating.
posted 08-15-2005 05:18 PM ET (US)
Actually, the model we'd have probably bought if they'd had one would've been a 170 Sport.
The problem with more horsepower on the 150 is weight. The days of 228 lb 70HP and 260 lb 90HP carbed two-strokes seem to be going fast, if not gone. The 75's seem to be the highest weight/hp, based on much larger motors, for example, Mercury's 386 lb four-stroke 75 EFI or 375 lb 75 Optimax. These are the same weight as the 90 HP models used on the 170 and the 115HP some upgrade to.
The 150 hull is rated for something like 305 lbs, but the 264 lb 60HP BigFoot EFI is about as much as it will take and still have good trim.
posted 08-15-2005 05:55 PM ET (US)
Moe, Why the aversion to a center-console?
posted 08-15-2005 06:03 PM ET (US)
I'd like to have one of those new 150 Montauks with a 260 lb. Yamaha 90 HP two stroke on the transom. I bet it would perform great.
posted 08-16-2005 10:16 AM ET (US)
I'm sure the 150 Montauk will be very popular, but why not a center console? It's just not for us. Here's a comparison picture. Note that in this one, I didn't strive to get the proportions exactly the same down to the pixel level, like I have in drawings past:
I can't stand without walking for about more than 5-10 minutes... have to keep moving or sit down. Barb has a similar problem. We sit down, rather than stand, to boat and fish. Given that, there's no point in us trying to squeeze together on a narrow seat. We've rented a classic Montauk before and Barb tried the cooler seat, but being so far forward, where the vertical motion was greater, it was too rough on her ruptured disk.
Center consoles are great for those who need to follow a fish around the boat. We don't. They also allow standing with the knees bent for shock absorbtion to maintain higher speeds in steep chop. We don't have a problem sitting for waves under 3' and partially stand for those over that, the way we do crossing railroad tracks on the motorcycle. If there are very many of these waves, doing that gets tiring, so we slow down. We've primarily used the boat on Lake Erie, which is known for steep chop, and haven't had a problem, even with Barb's lower back problem.
Seating is the big issue for us. I think you'll find the seat cushion on the 150 Montauk to be about half the width of the 66" bench on the 150 Sport. Barb wanted to be able to bring another couple along comfortably. Three adults on the Sport seat will each have much more room than two on the Montauk. The 150 Sport's 33" mid seat is 11" wider than the 22" lid on the 36 quart cooler. While that won't matter much for one adult, it will with two grandchildren. If I were doing ours over again today, I'd replace the middle seat with a 70-72 quart cooler and have the bow and stern areas totally open.
There's also more storage room under the aft seat. A second 6 gallon tank (mounted longitudinally) AND our 2.8 gallon Porta-Potti can fit under the starboard side.
Finally, we can anchor and nap stretched out with Barb on the bow cushion and me on the aft seat. Having the additional 4" beam of a 170 Sport would be nice so I wouldn't have to put my feet between the gunwale and railing.
posted 08-16-2005 12:54 PM ET (US)
Good info Moe.
Given the direction fuel costs are moving, this 150 could pretty much be the perfect comprimise. I have heard very good things about the economy of that 60 EFI Merc. Now I just hope BW does not get too carried away with the cost of this new model. I guess we will see when the winter boat shows are upon us.
posted 08-23-2005 11:38 PM ET (US)
At the Clemon's Boats Kelley's Island Boston Wahler Owner's Event last weekend, I was talking to the Boston Whaler Representative from Engineering & Product Development, we talked at length about the new Montauk 150 and he also said to look for the new "Montauk 190" in the near future.....should be interesting!!!!!
posted 08-24-2005 11:46 AM ET (US)
I think that some of this model change/development/clarification is linked to engines. At some point the mercury four stroke line will probably look like this:
Verados-Going on the larger and higher ticket boats.
EFI engines-On the smaller and "legend" boats
The sport/tender 110-130-150 and montauk 150-170 (and possible future 190) units make a very clear and sensible product line that can better compete for the entry level buyers.
posted 08-24-2005 12:40 PM ET (US)
If this rumor of a 190 Montauk is true, what hull would they use? The 190 Outrage/Nantucket is in the Outrage family of boats because, well, it belongs there. It has a deep "V" a high freeboard a 25" transom like other Outrages and an internal fuel cell.
If Boston Whaler has plans for a 190 Montauk, I think it will be a newly designed hull.
posted 09-02-2005 08:53 AM ET (US)
"Home Aside" if you would share, would be interested in what you discussed with the Whaler rep about the 15.
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.