Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  Nice fuel tank installation on 170 Montauk

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

Author Topic:   Nice fuel tank installation on 170 Montauk
erik selis posted 12-05-2007 03:15 AM ET (US)   Profile for erik selis   Send Email to erik selis  
After being out fishing we me several times in my 170 Montauk, a fishing buddy of mine: Kees Michielsen, could not contain himself any longer and decided to buy one for himself. He ordered a 2007, 170 Montauk with several options and it was delivered this summer.


Kees proudly showing off the first fish in his new 170 Montauk:

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/Kees/IMG_1768Large.jpg

Check out the 100-hp Mercury Four-Stroke Veradito, made for the European market

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/Kees/montauk2.jpg


Just recently he also decided to have the dealer, "NW Driessens" in Amsterdam, build in a (semi) fixed fuel tank underneath the RPS. I wanted to share these pictures with all of you as it looks very factory built.

Here's a picture of the original set-up:

Before

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/Kees/ BostonWhalerMontauk170rebuild.jpg

After

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/Kees/ BostonWhalerMontauk170rebuild1.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/Kees/ BostonWhalerMontauk170rebuild2.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/Kees/ BostonWhalerMontauk170rebuild3.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/Kees/ BostonWhalerMontauk170rebuild4.jpg

I don't know all the details yet but here is the info Kees gave me:

-It's a 70 liter Moeller tank, strapped to brackets mounted on the floor.
-The cover plate is made from the same material as the console door.
-It has a fuel level gauge built in the console dash (see the photo's
-The whole installation, all in costs $750

As soon as I get the opportunity I will try to get a look behind the cover plate and take some pictures.

Erik

Feejer posted 12-05-2007 09:05 AM ET (US)     Profile for Feejer  Send Email to Feejer     
Thats GREAT. We need more details
Feejer posted 12-05-2007 09:10 AM ET (US)     Profile for Feejer  Send Email to Feejer     
Ugg, I just realized that only 18.5 gallons. Still, its a killer setup
erik selis posted 12-05-2007 09:26 AM ET (US)     Profile for erik selis  Send Email to erik selis     
Yes, I agree. 70 liters is a bit on the small side but I think you could get a larger model of some kind in there. I like the idea of the setup. The same method of attaching the vent and the filling hole could be used with a slightly larger tank IMO.

Erik

erik selis posted 12-05-2007 09:30 AM ET (US)     Profile for erik selis  Send Email to erik selis     
Just for the record: the dealer is "EW Driessens" en not "NW".

Erik

GreatBayNH posted 12-05-2007 01:14 PM ET (US)     Profile for GreatBayNH  Send Email to GreatBayNH     
Looks awesome!

I wonder why they didn't place the fuel gauge next to the other gauges on the instrument panel though. There is room for an additional gauge up there.

750 is a good chunk of change for 18 gallons. And you are stuck with basically an internal tank with no easy way to get the tank out for cleaning or on shore fueling. Or perhaps I'm not seeing the whole picture.

With little storage space on the 170 it's always nice to have the option to remove one of your twin tanks and use the extra space for a grab bag and such.

But yes, it looks very nice.


-Seth

Feejer posted 12-05-2007 02:18 PM ET (US)     Profile for Feejer  Send Email to Feejer     
Seth, You sure are stuck on those twin tanks lol
L H G posted 12-05-2007 04:11 PM ET (US)     Profile for L H G    
Evidently, and as performance data from Whaler indicates, the 90HP EFI Merc is strong enough that they can put 100HP stickers on it for the European market and still be OK. Since we know the block can be programed for up to 115 non-supercharged HP, maybe Merc just uses different software for the increase, like they do for the Verados?

Also, I note that BW is not furnishing Smartcraft gauges for the 170, even though the engine supports it. Is there a low cost System gauge furnished, so the Smartcraft data can at least be seen?

Feejer posted 12-05-2007 05:38 PM ET (US)     Profile for Feejer  Send Email to Feejer     
Does the 100 weigh more? Take a look at the 1st photo. The stern seems to be sitting pretty low. The swim transom is underwater. Even when I'm standing in the rear of the boat my swim transom is still ago 2-3 inches above the water
L H G posted 12-05-2007 10:12 PM ET (US)     Profile for L H G    
All the new ones weigh 399#, 13# more than the previous Yamagucci version sold by Merc.
fisherman posted 12-06-2007 08:13 PM ET (US)     Profile for fisherman  Send Email to fisherman     
Hi Erik:
Beautiful installation.
About the only complaint I have is the potential for spillage during the course of filling. Not only at the filling point but as well out the vent?
Ray
erik selis posted 12-08-2007 09:14 AM ET (US)     Profile for erik selis  Send Email to erik selis     
Freejer,

I don't think there's any difference between the 90-HP, EFI FourStroke Mercury and the 100-HP version for Europe other than a bit more kilowatts. (67 vs 73.5)

http://www.mercurymarine.com/engines/outboards/fourstrokes/ enginesetone_specs.php?ID=76

http://www.brunswickmarineemea.com/products/single/ 2007$$$ENEN-$-ME$4S$F115-80$ME4S_100EFI

Also, referring to the boat sitting low in the water: I think there's just a wave coming in from the stern as the picture was taken. On these Dutch rivers there's a lot of traffic from large vessels causing some very confused and long lasting wave movement. It's just an impression. If the photo would have been taken 2 seconds later one could possibly say that the boat would be sitting high.

Up to now, Kees is very satisfied with the engine. It's quiet, powerful and very fuel efficient. He did have one issue but it was solved quickly and under warranty.

As I already mentioned I will get some pics with the cover removed as soon as I get the opportunity. I'm planning on fabricating the same configuration but with a slightly larger tank.

Erik

erik selis posted 03-13-2008 03:04 PM ET (US)     Profile for erik selis  Send Email to erik selis     
I finally got some more pictures of the installation of the fuel tank.

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/Kees/untitledLarge.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/Kees/tank1Large.jpg

Erik

contender posted 03-13-2008 03:31 PM ET (US)     Profile for contender  Send Email to contender     
Like I stated before, I do not understand why people purchase plastic gas tanks. This set up is clean but it would have been a lot nicer to have a custom built aluminum tank. The custom tank would have been built to the owners specs and fit under the seat (could have been made a little bigger to hold more fuel). The aluminum tank is a lot safer than a plastic one...good luck
Feejer posted 03-13-2008 04:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for Feejer  Send Email to Feejer     
Now I'm disappointed. I thought he had an aluminum tank made, still a nice idea. Too bad BW does not offer something like that. I'll stick with my Moeller 26 gallon. I'm currently working on building a plastic cover to hide the part of the tank that sticks out from the RPS
erik selis posted 03-14-2008 12:46 AM ET (US)     Profile for erik selis  Send Email to erik selis     
Feejer, I had already mentioned in my first post that it was a 70 liter Moeller tank in there. As far as I know Moeller only makes plastic tanks. I agree though that a stainless or alu tank, made to fit, would be a better solution. It could also hold more fuel IMO.

Still it remains a nice and good idea.

Erik

Feejer posted 03-14-2008 07:09 AM ET (US)     Profile for Feejer  Send Email to Feejer     
My fault, I missed the plastic tank in the 1st part of your thread. The whole idea is really great and it looks like it was put together well.
Casco Bay Outrage posted 03-14-2008 09:02 AM ET (US)     Profile for Casco Bay Outrage  Send Email to Casco Bay Outrage     
Erik -

In re-visiting this thread let me say that is a nice installation. The rear cover really adds to a clean look.

CBO

Ferdinando posted 03-15-2008 08:11 AM ET (US)     Profile for Ferdinando  Send Email to Ferdinando     
Erik:

If you don't mind my asking what does a new 170 go for in Holland?

Thks,

Fred

erik selis posted 03-16-2008 03:23 AM ET (US)     Profile for erik selis  Send Email to erik selis     
Fred,

The price for a 170 Montauk with most of the options runs between 25.000 and 27.000 Euro. This price includes the factory trailer which we cannot use on the roads here. We have to add another 3.000 Euro for a certified trailer with brakes.

Concerning the fuel tank: During the Easter holidays I will start making the drawings for a larger aluminum fuel tank to fit under the RPS. I will implement the good ideas that Kees has in this setup. I will also make these drawings available for whoever needs them. If anyone has any other good ideas, please let me know.

Thanks for all your replies to this thread.

Erik

GreatBayNH posted 03-16-2008 07:45 AM ET (US)     Profile for GreatBayNH  Send Email to GreatBayNH     
Is the RPS hinged to the deck? If so can we get some close-ups of the hinges and secure points for the RPS.
erik selis posted 03-18-2008 04:29 AM ET (US)     Profile for erik selis  Send Email to erik selis     
Seth, there are no hinges on the RPS but it could be a good idea to mount them if you can find some secure points. That is if you find the need to get under the RPS often.

I just got some information from Kees that really doesn't surprise me. He's been having trouble filling the fuel tank. It takes a very long time to fill the tank because the non-return valve of the filling valve (handle, gun?) always kicks in. Not surprising if you see that there is a very short-radius elbow (blue) going directly into the tank followed by a hose (black) going up into the filling cap, also making a short bend. No surprise to me.

He's now planning on bringing the fuel inlet cap further to the port side of the RPS so the hose does not make such a short bend. Hopefully the elbow doesn't cause any more problems...we'll see.

Concerning the fuel vent : I think I would place mine in a different place all together. When I restored the 1984, Montauk a couple of years ago I also put in a stainless steel fuel tank underneath the RPS:

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/ 1984%20Montauk%20Restoration/DSC00840Medium.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/ 1984%20Montauk%20Restoration/DSC00864Medium.jpg

I lead the fuel vent hose through the cable duct under the deck, into the console and connected it to the vent itself mounted on the starboard side of the console.

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c86/erik069/ 1984%20Montauk%20Restoration/FuelVentLarge.jpg

I think this would also be doable for this type of installation on the 170 Montauk. I think there would also be less chance of spillage during filling via the fuel vent. Just as fisherman (Ray) suggested.


Erik

Pilot posted 03-21-2008 08:01 AM ET (US)     Profile for Pilot  Send Email to Pilot     
Erik - I'll be very interested to see your Aluminum Tank drawings for the 170. My 170 is a 2008 and there's been some modification to the RPS and the floor molding . . . so I'm not sure of what will fit with small the small deck ridges, etc.


I had a Bayfield 32' sailboat and had to replace the fuel tank . . . I had it fabricated from aluminum and made several improvements. Instead of using a dip stick to read fuel (common for old sailboats) I installed a direct read fuel gauge on the top of the tank - easy to read and accurate. I also had them add baffels inside the tank to prevent sloshing of the fuel back and forth.

I was preparing to contact that fabricator to work with them on a more "factory looking" large capacity solution for the 170. My dealer suggested he had a local fabricator that he uses and ask for a proposal and quote.

I'll be happy to share if that comes about.

Also, I noticed some people reference Stainless as a potential option for fuel tanks . . . in my research for my sailboat I found that Stainless is not recommended because of brittleness / cracking potential. There's actually a regulation that requires stainless fuel tanks to be cylindrical with a "domed" top.

Richard

erik selis posted 03-22-2008 01:15 AM ET (US)     Profile for erik selis  Send Email to erik selis     
Richard,

Thanks for the tips. I would also be very interested in the proposal that your dealer's fabricator is sending you.

Concerning stainless: This surprises me a bit as stainless seems less brittle to me than welded aluminum. At least if you are using the right type of stainless and welding material. 316L is especially made for welding and I have used it many times for fuel tanks in the past. Never had a leak yet. If you have a link to these regulations or norms for stainless fuel tanks I would also appreciate it. Maybe I'm overlooking something.

Erik

Pilot posted 03-22-2008 10:54 AM ET (US)     Profile for Pilot  Send Email to Pilot     
American Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC) - News & Events: ABYC Press ...Q. What are the limitations for the use of stainless steel in fuel tank ... cannot be any larger than 20 gallons and it must be cylindrical with domed ends. ...
www.abycinc.org/news/faq.cfm - 20k - Cached - Similar pages


Above is from ABYC as the return appeared. . . when I searched the subject on Google. when I cliked on the item . . . I couldn't find more details without buying a report. But it is consistent with what I read before in more detail. Unfortunately that link is on my old computer - before I moved to China and back and now have a new computer.

When I was replacing my sailboat Diesel tank . . . no expspense was spared and I started out thinking I wanted a stainless stell tank. Then I came across the above information - but I think it was somewhere else.

The fabricator makes alumuninum and stainless tanks for Diesel and water tanks . . . but only Aluminumn for Gasoline. I know you can use stainless for Gas - but after reading a number of articles decided to stick with Alumininum - even though mine was for diesel.

I have no idea why over 20 gal. they specify cylindrical, but "cylindrical and domed gasoline tank" - may turn up more infor.

Richard

contender posted 03-22-2008 04:18 PM ET (US)     Profile for contender  Send Email to contender     
Better to build an aluminum tank, I had on built (30 gals to my specs). and fits under my console, erik ran my vent hose the same as you did in your pictures, on the top left side of my console. I use a chrome plated bronze fuel fill screw type on top of my console lower right side. On the top of my tank I had a fuel float gauge put in. I have had this set up now since 1985 no problems and I always know how much fuel I have (easy to see gauge) no electric to worry about clean and simple...good luck

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.