Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  Moving up from 130 to 150?

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

Author Topic:   Moving up from 130 to 150?
Fish Stick posted 10-25-2005 12:31 PM ET (US)   Profile for Fish Stick   Send Email to Fish Stick  
Has anyone moved up from a 130 to a 150 sport?

I would like a little more power for water toys, and the ability to carry about 200 lbs in the back (bigger bait tank).

The 150 is rated for about 500 more lbs and appears to have quite a bit more deck space.

Currently our 130 struggles to stay on plane with the tank, in typical conditions, at less than 18 kts. (even with a dole-fin) This is a rough ride in the chop, and tough on the bait.

Is there a quantifiable difference to justify moving up? Is there a noticeable change in real world, usable capacity between the two?

We have considered a Montauk, but like the sport seating configuration.

Thanks for your comments.

poker13 posted 10-25-2005 02:41 PM ET (US)     Profile for poker13    
Which engine do you have on the 130? The 130 with the 25hp four-stroke is a dog. If you look at the performance graphs on the BW website you'll get a good idea of what to expect from the 130 and 150 with the 40 and the 60 respectively. Top speed seems to be the same. You gain tons of room with the 150 and (I'm assuming, since I haven't ridden in one) softer ride.
Fish Stick posted 10-25-2005 03:38 PM ET (US)     Profile for Fish Stick  Send Email to Fish Stick     
We have the 40 hp 4 stroke on the 130.

The boat is great fun without the extra gear or more than 2 people. The boat just struggles a little with the extra gear and weight.

I was hoping someone would have experience moving from the 130 to 150 and could definitively say that moving up is well worth it. There is a real difference functionally between the two with a noticeable change in space, power and capacity.


fno posted 10-26-2005 08:19 AM ET (US)     Profile for fno  Send Email to fno     
Joe, two feet is two feet. We've all had the disease. Go for a Montauk. You'll just be wasting time and money cuz' you'll be back next fall asking the same question. Besides, any small Whaler can give you Whaler butt, a center console just give you less.
royaloakwhaler posted 10-26-2005 05:38 PM ET (US)     Profile for royaloakwhaler  Send Email to royaloakwhaler     
I agree with fno, check out the Montauk before you make your final decision. I went to a Whaler Test Drive event in the early summer with the intention of testing a 130 and 150 to replace my 15 supersport. I also took a run in the Montauk. I ended up taking home a 170 Montauk with a 90hp 2-stroke. For the extra money, the 170 seems like a totally different class of boat. The console has a stainless wheel instead of the black plastic wheel on the 130 and 150, a circuit breaker panel, a 12v outlet for accessories, and an overall much nicer feel. The 90hp 2s has more grunt than the 4strokes offered at the time on the 130 and 150. The 170 seems way more stable than the other two boats. My two huge labs can run around the boat without affecting the balance at all. As far as the seating issue goes, I liked the 130 and 150 better at first too, but after taking out the 170, it just seemed like a much better value and I couldn't resist. Just my $0.02
prxmid posted 10-26-2005 07:43 PM ET (US)     Profile for prxmid  Send Email to prxmid     
15 is a great hull. But coming from the 13 it's not worth the time and effort.

Go right to the Montauck

Moe posted 10-26-2005 09:19 PM ET (US)     Profile for Moe  Send Email to Moe     
We moved up from a 130 Sport (which was all I wanted) to a 150 Sport (which is what the wife wanted) before we bought the boat.

Here's a scaled drawing of the Legends, with the boats aligned at the aft side of the bow locker, so you can see the differences for yourself.

Except for weight and price, there's a greater difference between the 150 and 130 than between the 170 and 150, in most specifications.

130 - 13'3"
150 - 15'5" +2'2"
170 - 17'0" +1'7"

About a foot of the 170's extra length is lost to the motorwell that the 130 and 150 don't have, and most of the rest to a wider deck on the bow for a longitudinally vs laterally mounted bow cleat.

130 - 5'11"
150 - 6'6" + 7"
170 - 6'10" +4"

The 150 Sport forward seat is 33" wide compared to the 170's much narrower cooler, and the 150 Sport's aft seat is 66" wide, compared to about half that for the 170's seat.

Interior Freeboard:
130 - 15"
150 - 17" +2"
170 - 19" +2"

Here, the differences are about the same.

130 - 7"
150 - 7" (same)
170 - 9" +2"

Note the 170 has 2" higher freeboard, but it's sitting about 2" deeper in the water (beam which isn't much wider).

130 - 935 lbs
150 - 1400 lbs +465 lbs
170 - 1650 lbs +250 lbs

The 150 Sport's 264 lb 60HP is 48 lbs heavier than 130 Sport's 216 lb 40HP, so the 150's weight capacity advantage is about 417 lbs over the 130. The 170's 386 lb 90HP is 124 lbs heavier than the 150's 264 lb 60HP, so the 170's weigh capacity advantage is only 126 lbs.

Swamped Capacity:
130 - 1600 lbs
150 - 2900 lbs +1300 lbs
170 - 3400 lbs +500 lbs

Hull Weight:
130 - 600 lbs
150 - 900 lbs + 300 lbs
170 - 1400 lbs + 500 lbs

Fuel Capacity:
130 - 6.6 gallon tank
150 - 6.6 gallon tank up to 2 6.6 gallon tanks laterally or 4 6.6 gallon tanks longitudinally under the seat
170 - 2 6.6 gallon tanks replaceable with 2 12 gallon tanks or single 24-27 gallon tank.

Base price w/max HP 4 stroke
130 - $11,549
150 - $15,971 + $4,422
170 - $21,990 + $6,019

I'll admit the plastic wheel is cheesy, and the lack of horn and power terminal strips is inexcusable, but we fixed those for a coupla hundred bucks.


poker13 posted 10-27-2005 11:40 AM ET (US)     Profile for poker13    
Now if BW would only increase the max hp on the 150 Sport to 90...sweet.
Moe posted 10-27-2005 11:52 AM ET (US)     Profile for Moe  Send Email to Moe     
Even if Mercury did make a sub-300 lb 90HP outboard, about 100 lbs lighter than the current 90HP Mercaha, Whaler wouldn't use it. But we don't have to worry about that. Merc's own 90HP (Verado) will be not 100 lbs lighter, but 100 lbs heavier. :-D


poker13 posted 10-27-2005 01:03 PM ET (US)     Profile for poker13    
The Evinrude E-TEC 90 is 320 lbs.--that's not bad. Now if I could only get that 150 minus the engine...hmmm...
Fish Stick posted 10-27-2005 02:43 PM ET (US)     Profile for Fish Stick  Send Email to Fish Stick     
Thank you Moe for the detailed response.

The extra 417 lbs of working capacity and your drawings showing the 150 with almost as much deck space as the 170 are what have been sticking in my mind.

That extra 417 lbs is roughly 50% more working capacity than a 130. A big difference in my mind, when carrying safety items, fishing gear and a bait tank.

I wanted the 150 to start, but thought the 130 would work as well, and we could still use it at the dinghy dock.

In hind sight, I think the 150 and a small inflatable will better meet our needs than the 130 splitting the difference.

A stainless wheel and an electric panel would be some of my first projects. Where did you put a circuit breaker panel? I am thinking on the vertical surface under the electronics flat, but need to actually see a 150 first. That is the same general area I put a 3 switch water proof panel on the 130.


Moe posted 10-27-2005 03:52 PM ET (US)     Profile for Moe  Send Email to Moe     
I used a Blue Sea Systems fuse panel with negative bus:

You can see the top two mounting screws in this picture, one is through the USCG capacity plate, the other three use screw covers. The button is for the added Aqua-Signal horn.

In retrospect, this may have been overkill. The factory wire for the nav lights has its own in-line fuse. The GPS and VHF had their own in-line fuses. I wired the compass light to the nav light position of the nav/anchor light switch using a piggyback spade connector. The only things that really need fuses in the block are a lighter plug over by the nav light switch and the horn, shown here along with the compass. I could've used in-line fuses on those and just used positive and negative terminal strips instead of the fuse block.

I don't mean to diminish the added capability of the 170. With its much greater weight, it's going to give you and your bait a smoother ride. The big bait tank will be easier to move around mounted behind the 170's seat than in the stern area of a 150. When you consider the weight of both boats loaded for fishing, the 170's motor is pushing less weight per horsepower, so it's going to be a stronger setup both out of the hole and on top end. That extra power/weight will be better for pulling water toys.

The seating arrangement killed the 170 for us. Neither of us can stand up for very long because of medical problems and the 150's seating is much more spacious for us. We like to be able to bring along friends and not have to have them sit on a cooler. Had there been a 170 Sport, especially with a folding tongue trailer, we might have gone that route.

We've used the 150 in the steep chop of Lake Erie and have no problems with 1'-3' seas. In 2'-4' we have to slow down or partly stand up, the way we do on the crossing railroad tracks or dips on the motorcycles, for any waves higher than about 3'. We've been out twice in 3'-5', once anchored to fish, and while we never felt in any danger, we've decided that's much more like work than play, and probably won't do that again, unless we really need to be somewhere.

I'm not saying the 170 isn't better, just that the difference between it and the 150 is often exaggerated here.


tombro posted 10-28-2005 03:21 PM ET (US)     Profile for tombro  Send Email to tombro     
As a former 150 Sport owner who was looking to upgrade to a Montauk 170, my reasons were the following:

--90 horsepower 2 stroke, which I druther have

--Ability to stand at the helm, as I fish the Atlantic

--A windshield, warmer when making longer runs

That being said, The Admiral wanted a head, and we double (or triple) jumped to a 210 Ventura. But...I really liked the 150, and it will likely fit your needs for a lot less $$$ than a 170. As long as you don't find you need/want more power, a standup helm or a break from the wind.

I've driven both, and there is a noticeable difference in the 170 vs the 150 in the chop.

gsmith posted 11-05-2005 06:40 PM ET (US)     Profile for gsmith  Send Email to gsmith     
I had a 13 sport and now have a 2003 15 sport with the 60hp merc two stroke. We also had a montauk and 19 outrage over the years.

The 15 has a better ride and slightly better room than the old 13. The 60 hp mer leaves a lot to be desired. I use this boat mostly for short runs and going between the dock and the mooring for I mostly drive the 20 ft hydrasports my brother and I have.

I have spent much time in boston whalers over the years and my main complaint is the use of mercury engines. I have had nothing but problems with the 60 hp merc on the 2003 15. It probably has less than 50 hours and I would junk it tomorrow if I had the money for an new engine. I won't by another whaler until they get some better engine options. I don't know much about the merc 4-stroke but the 2-stroke we have is very poor. It always starts hard, runs rough and has problems.

Whaler should make it easier for people to get the boats with Honda or Yamaha engines. My last 3 whalers had Johnson engines which never game me a problem.

poker13 posted 11-05-2005 09:43 PM ET (US)     Profile for poker13    
Larry to the rescue!
Clark Roberts posted 11-06-2005 06:41 AM ET (US)     Profile for Clark Roberts  Send Email to Clark Roberts     
Troll! Let it be!
chopbuster posted 11-07-2005 04:34 PM ET (US)     Profile for chopbuster  Send Email to chopbuster     
My Main Man Moe, You wrote recently.

Base price w/max HP 4 stroke
130 - $11,549
150 - $15,971 + $4,422
170 - $21,990 + $6,019

Recent Pre-Boatshow prices for the 150 w/60HP 4/S and 170 w/90HP 4/S. $17,300 & $24,200 respectively.


Moe posted 11-07-2005 08:26 PM ET (US)     Profile for Moe  Send Email to Moe     
My numbers came off Whaler's website. Discounts and final prices vary by dealer.


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.