Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  170 Montauk: Pleasure Cruising

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

Author Topic:   170 Montauk: Pleasure Cruising
Livingwater posted 10-24-2005 10:29 PM ET (US)   Profile for Livingwater   Send Email to Livingwater  
I plan to downsize from a 24 foot cruisier to a 2006 170 Montauk. I usually cruise the Long Island Sound and would appreciate hearing from other owners how the newer Montauk handles.

The seating on the Montauk doesn't look very comfortable. I usually stand while piloting the 24 footer so I expect I'd be doing the same on the Whaler.

How stable is the Montauk with a 6'10" beam?

What's the expected cruising range with the 115-HP outboard running on the combined 13.2 gal. fuel tanks?

jimh posted 10-25-2005 09:27 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
The 170 MONTAUK is not sold with a 115-HP motor.

The factory has compiled some performance data with the various motors available, but it does not list fuel economy:

A 17-foot boat is not going to ride as well as a 24-foot boat, so you ought to be prepared for a difference in the ride.

bsmotril posted 10-25-2005 12:14 PM ET (US)     Profile for bsmotril  Send Email to bsmotril     
Also, consider that you are likley going to get wet from windblown spray in any chop over about 1 foot. Not a problem with proper clothing, but not very pleasant either when you want to cruise in spring and fall. There's a pretty big jump up in comfort, ride, and dryness going from a Montauk to an Outrage 19. Big jump in price too. But, the 19 will still give pretty good fuel economy, around 5 mpg with an optimax. And it has more fuel capacity to boot. BillS
Buckda posted 10-25-2005 12:31 PM ET (US)     Profile for Buckda  Send Email to Buckda     
Define cruise. By my definition, you can't cruise very far at all on most boats with 13 gallons of fuel. That will get you about 35 miles in my 18' Outrage, in ideal conditions.

I also, would recommend the 190 Outrage for the greater range and the fact that it's designed to operate in "bigger" water like the Sound. Canvas options can keep you dry in both boats, but are not generally available through the factory (but can be acquired from a quality source on LI in Greenport).

Good luck with your purchase, whatever you decide.


jmontani posted 10-25-2005 02:05 PM ET (US)     Profile for jmontani    

I have had my 170 since mid Aug. 2005 with 2 stroke, 27 gal Pate tank, fishing package, bow cusion, and swim ladder. I use it mainly for cruising to the beaches and restaurants (with a little fishing).

I love the boat and it fits my needs perfectly.

A few notes...

1. Unless the water calm, plan on being on your feet to drive. The RPS in forward position serves as a great leaning post.

2. Get some form of a larger fuel tank unless you plan to trailer each day. The 27 Gal Pate has worked well for me. My 90 2 stroke gets around 4 miles / gallon running at 3800rpm in good conditions. (86 mile range with 20% reserve)

3. The comfort will not be anything like the 24 foot boat you are comming from. Depending on how far you run, sea state, and number of people, the 170 may not be the right choice. 2 people are fine, 3 is OK, 4 gets crowded if you are making a long run. I shuttled 6 for 2 miles and that was OK but wouldn't want to make a longer trip.

4. The plus side is that this 17 foot boat does just about anything very well. One of the largest 17 foot boats on the market in terms of useable deck space. Storage is limited to the console and anchor locker. I use the cooler seat for additional storage and bring a seperate cooler for the beach.

5. For 17 feet the 170 ride is very good, but at the end of the day, it is still a 1700lbs+/- 17 foot boat. Coming from a 24 foot boat to a smaller hull (17 or 19) the ride will not be as comfortable. With a Whaler in rough water, the 170 is solid but your body may remind you of the trip the next day.

I would test drive the boat on a less than desireable day with multiple passengers and see if you like it. After all, all boats are comfortable when the water is glassed over.

Just my thoughts and good luck.

Sal A posted 10-25-2005 02:14 PM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     
Look at Tom G's 18 Outrage with Honda 150 in the marketplace section. His boat is essentially new, very beamy, has trailer and full electronics.

boatman1979 posted 10-25-2005 09:05 PM ET (US)     Profile for boatman1979  Send Email to boatman1979     
I've been boating on the Sound all my life. After selling my 18 Wellcraft and buying a 150 Sport, I must say there is quite a difference in the ride(glad I got the cushion package!) I would imagine that the 170 will handle a bit better, but not like a 24. I agree with the previous post - test it on a choppy day. This past season, I took the 150 from my home in CT, to Port Jefferson. The morning ride was fine, but the wind picked up in the afternoon and kicked up 4 passengers were terrorized, but took comfort in knowing that we wouldn't sink. The smaller whalers certainly have their advantages, but a soft comfortable ride may not always be one of them.
swist posted 10-27-2005 01:27 PM ET (US)     Profile for swist  Send Email to swist     
It was my impression that the ride on the 170 Montauk was a LOT better than on the 150, due to a sharper bow and a little more deadrise (although you certainly wouldn't call it a deep-V). There is a lot of offshore and near-shore use of Montauks in average Summer conditions (1-3 or 2-4 waves, moderate wind) and I don't think people are being beaten into submission.
Moe posted 10-27-2005 01:42 PM ET (US)     Profile for Moe  Send Email to Moe     
The bow and stern of the 170 and 150 are virtually identical in shape:

There is a minor difference in that the highest part of the 150's reverse chine is closed off at the transom to about 4" forward of it.

I'm not saying the 170 doesn't ride better, just that it's probably not for the reasons you state.


LHG posted 10-27-2005 02:32 PM ET (US)     Profile for LHG    
I think the Montauk 170 is one of Whaler's nicest boats, but for offshore pleasure cruising, I think the interior is scaled wrong, too small. This is harsh, but it seems scaled to more like 8th grade kids, who are not yet tall enough for the high school basketball team. So depending on your height, this could be an uncomfortable boat for offshore cruising, and hard on your back. A straight posture is important for offshore comfort piloting a small boat. BW even made the mistake of showing a catalog photo of a tall person piloting the Montauk. Take a look.
That photo is in the Mercury catalog also.

You might want to look at a slightly larger model, with better scaled interior

Buckda posted 10-27-2005 03:08 PM ET (US)     Profile for Buckda  Send Email to Buckda     
Perhaps a 180 Dauntless or a 190 Outrage (formerly a 190 Nantucket)would be better options. Both have the size, layout and hullform that will perform better in a body of water as large as you plan to be boating in.

Stepping down from 24' to 17' is a HUGE decelleration. I don't know why you're making the move (and it's none of my business) but if a new or slightly used 180 or 190 is realistic for you, you should consider them. Both are easy to handle alone, can be launched single-handedly and will perform much more adequately on a "nominal" day on the sound.

Unfortunately, they both use more power and fuel compared to a 170 - but they both should also be worlds away more efficient and less expensive than your 24' boat was.

You haven't really colored in the lines yet on how you plan to use the boat, but the Ventura models might also be appealing given the seating arrangement for your passengers. For day/pleasure cruises, I think this line may be MOST appropriate. The Outrage is primarily a fishing machine, though some of us here have managed to convert them (at no small expense) into little weekenders for extended cruising/camping.

The nice thing about these larger hulls is that (even though you don't have to use it all at once) the bigger fuel tanks allow for greater weight to be carried low along the keel, providing superior ride characteristics in choppy conditions.

rumrunner posted 10-27-2005 05:25 PM ET (US)     Profile for rumrunner  Send Email to rumrunner     
Until a few months ago, I used a 1986 Montauk exclusively on LI Sound, but recently switched to a 20' Outrage. I realize you're asking about a 170, but here's my observations in regard to a classic 17' on LI Sound.
The Montauk was ALWAYS a safe ride.
But it was RARELY a comfortable ride.
Especially with more than two people in it. Passengers were often wet from spray, and got pounded in terms of ride quality.
LI Sound has an omnipresent chop, with short frequency waves.
With that said, I still loved the Montauk, even on the Sound.
A great boat.
Sal A posted 10-27-2005 05:30 PM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     
I don't know Tom personally. But please re-read my suggestion above and see the link to his boat. Probably buy that close to a well equiped 170 Montauk, and it is really much more boat for similar coin.


Livingwater posted 10-28-2005 09:40 PM ET (US)     Profile for Livingwater  Send Email to Livingwater     
Thanks for all the reply's. I intend to use the boat for sightseeing and relaxing. I don't fish but I sure love boating.

I was concerned about the 2006 picture which shows a great 170 Montauk being piloted by someone that looks to be 6'4. Most of my boating on Long Island Sound is done while standing which helps reduce the shock to the back if you let your knee's bend with the force. I want a smaller boat which I can keep in the garage during the winterized season so I can polish and wax it daily....

I like the indistructable rub rails on the Whaler and the unsinkable legend (fact). To me the outboard seem to be less maintenance and you could trim completely out of the water if you were spending an extend time in a wet slip.

I also like the fact that the explosive hazard from flammable fumes buiding up in the bilge will never happen in a Montauk.

Livingwater posted 10-28-2005 09:49 PM ET (US)     Profile for Livingwater  Send Email to Livingwater     
Also, I usually boat with only my 6'5 son. He usually drives while i relax and keep an eye out for lobster pots.
WT posted 10-28-2005 11:41 PM ET (US)     Profile for WT  Send Email to WT     
I highly recommend taking a test ride. If you are over 6 feet tall, you may feel uncomfortable driving the 170. I'm 5'6" and I feel the steering wheel is a tad low. (I don't drive my boat sitting down.)

If you only have room in your garage for a 17 foot boat then the 170 Montauk is the Whaler to get.

I love my Montauk.¤t=Warrenfullreso_edited.jpg


Livingwater posted 10-29-2005 08:11 AM ET (US)     Profile for Livingwater  Send Email to Livingwater     
Looked at your picture gallery "WT".
What a great looking boat!!!

I'm just a tad under 6' in height and I'm looking forward to cruising in a Whaler with the solid hull design. When cruising on Long Island Sound with the 240CS It's concerning (I don't worry)that you can hear the water banging against the "Hollow" hull. It must be awesome owning a Whaler.

As far as my choice of boats is concerned I prefer the Conquest model dollar$ and the greatest value around spells M.O.N.T.A.U.K

Now for a trip to memory lane.

It was around early 1980 one of my friends invited me to go fishing on his 28 footer (Can't remember the brand) but it was a cabin style wood boat, anyway...We headed out thru the "RACE" on Long Island Sound for fish. The water was really churning up and the ride was extremely rough for a 1980 landlover. While in the "RACE" his boat got into a swell and also took a wave from bow to stern which knocked out his electronics. The thing I remember most about that trip was the other boats in the area at the time. The boats were all rocking pretty severely and one was capsize however in all this commotion "in the middle of it all" there were 3 guy's fishing from a small boat oblivious of their surroundings. It was a Boston Whaler....

swist posted 10-29-2005 09:31 AM ET (US)     Profile for swist  Send Email to swist     
What is the problem with piloting a Montauk 170 sitting down?
highanddry posted 10-31-2005 02:16 AM ET (US)     Profile for highanddry  Send Email to highanddry     
"What is the problem with piloting a Montauk 170 sitting down?"

I sit down in my comfy seats on my Nantucket but when the water goes rough and the throttle goes to the stop it is usual to stand to allow you legs to absorb the shock of impact. The thing I am beginning to see about solid hulled Whalers is that they are far more a glutton for punishemnt than are most humans able to stand comfortably. When you are seated your spine absorbs most of the impact, it can get quite sore whereas your legs, designed by the creator to absorb tremendous impact, do quite well doing so.

fno posted 10-31-2005 09:46 AM ET (US)     Profile for fno  Send Email to fno     
If you're looking for a dryer ride and a bit more comfort than a Montauk, think about the 160 Dauntless. Not as much utility, but a better ride (deeper V) and more seating.
whalerdude posted 11-05-2005 01:01 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalerdude  Send Email to whalerdude     
I bought my 2006 Montauk in August. I use for long cruises and family 'tubing' outings with the kids.

We love it so far because it is so convenient to have the boat ready to go and clean in my garage at home.

I just did a 80 mile cruise on Lake Michigan last friday by my self. I sat down on the way down to Chicago but stood up on the way back as I had about a 1 ft chop coming home. This is my 7th whaler and I am really amazed at how well this boat rides for a 17. It feels like my old 19 Guardian.

I love taking a long cruise in this boat. If it is really choppy, I just slow down and it is fine. I don't get very wet unless I am getting the chop from the side with a lot of wind.

No rattles or loose fittings or railings! This is good. Boat is very well screwed,bolted,glued together.

Motor runs very well. I am a MERC guy now!! (LHG will be pleased).

The console is a bit low. I am 6' and would like it to be about 3" higher. But, I will put up with it because it just fits under my garage door.

I have a Pate C24. I can go 80 miles on about 11-12 gallons.

That is a nice reserve. The seating is fine for a family of 5. I was thinking of ordering the optional stern seats but the kids use the port seat as a step when coming off of the swim ladder. They always want to ride on the bow sun pad.

So far no big problems with the boat.
The trim cover fell off of the binnacle and I had a pin -hole leak in my new Pate tank. I had to send the tank back to pate for a replacement. That was a pain.

Email me if you want any additional comments or have questions.

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.