2006 170 Montauk Re-power

Optimizing the performance of Boston Whaler boats
mkelly
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2015 6:31 pm

2006 170 Montauk Re-power

Postby mkelly » Wed Nov 25, 2015 2:26 pm

I'm the owner of an 2006 170 Montauk with the Mercury FOURSTROKE EFI 90-HP. [This is a] heavy engine. [I am] thinking of [re-powering with] the in-line 90 HP E-TEC. The lighter engine is appealing, [will] probably have a bit more torque, and has new engine "pop." Anyone running [the three-cylinder E-TEC 90-HP] engine on [a Boston Whaler 170 MONTAUK] boat (or thereabouts)?

flymo
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 2:58 pm

Re: 2006 170 Montauk Re-power

Postby flymo » Wed Nov 25, 2015 3:51 pm

If it's a 2006, you mean a 170 Montauk, right?

I have driven a friend's 2010 version, which I think has the same Mercury 90 FOURSTROKE. On the 170 with its fairly wide stern, the engine weight was not problem, so lightening-up would not seem to have a major advantage. As long as your existing Mercury has been maintained and is working okay, it is unlikely its power has dropped much from when it was new. Overall, I don't think it would be worth the money to re-power with an E-TEC 90.

However, the E-TEC 90 H.O. would be a different story--adding some weight over the regular E-TEC 90, but also adding some horsepower, while still staying, at least nominally, within the hull's capacity plate limit. Having driven my friend's boat flat out, it sure seems like it could handle (and would be fun with) a few more ponies.

Tim

Ridge Runner
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 12:12 pm
Location: Matawan NJ / Punta Gorda FL

Re: 2006 170 Montauk Re-power

Postby Ridge Runner » Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:51 pm

I agree with flymo - the E-Tec 90hp in-line 3 cylinder outboard will not make much of a difference on your 170 Montauk. I have re-powered two 2005 170 Montauk's in both cases I went up in HP. One with a E-Tec 115HO - V4 (390lbs) and the other with an OptiMax Pro XS 115 in-line 3 cylinder (375lbs). Both were very nice upgrades in performance. From a value perspective the OptiMax will be about 30% less expensive as you can re-use the current rigging and the motors is about $2,500 less expensive.
Last edited by Ridge Runner on Thu Dec 03, 2015 11:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Member since 2005
2005 170 Montauk, 2010 E-TEC 115 H.O.
2016 210 Montauk, 2017 E-TEC G2 200 H.O.

"Red sky at night, sailor’s delight - Red sky in the morning, sailor’s warning”

Ridge Runner
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 12:12 pm
Location: Matawan NJ / Punta Gorda FL

Re: 2006 170 Montauk Re-power

Postby Ridge Runner » Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:53 pm

170 Montauk with E-Tec 115HO:
1.jpg
1.jpg (131 KiB) Viewed 7768 times
2.jpg
2.jpg (129.53 KiB) Viewed 7768 times
Member since 2005
2005 170 Montauk, 2010 E-TEC 115 H.O.
2016 210 Montauk, 2017 E-TEC G2 200 H.O.

"Red sky at night, sailor’s delight - Red sky in the morning, sailor’s warning”

Ridge Runner
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 12:12 pm
Location: Matawan NJ / Punta Gorda FL

Re: 2006 170 Montauk Re-power

Postby Ridge Runner » Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:54 pm

3.jpg
3.jpg (85.24 KiB) Viewed 7768 times
Mercury OptiMax ProXS 115


4.jpg
4.jpg (156.52 KiB) Viewed 7768 times
170 Montauk with Mercury OptiMax ProXS 115
Member since 2005
2005 170 Montauk, 2010 E-TEC 115 H.O.
2016 210 Montauk, 2017 E-TEC G2 200 H.O.

"Red sky at night, sailor’s delight - Red sky in the morning, sailor’s warning”

flymo
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 2:58 pm

Re: 2006 170 Montauk Re-power

Postby flymo » Fri Dec 04, 2015 8:28 am

RIDGE--Wow. The Evinrude E-TEC 115 H.O. on the 170 MONTAUK looks great! It looks much less bulky than the stock motor on my friend's boat, and I also like the color match. Do you have any performance data?

Ridge Runner
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 12:12 pm
Location: Matawan NJ / Punta Gorda FL

Re: 2006 170 Montauk Re-power

Postby Ridge Runner » Fri Dec 04, 2015 4:18 pm

There is a lot of info in the old forum about my re-powers. The E-TEC 115 H.O. re-power was done in 2009.

One of my main uses is pulling one or two skiers from deep water starts. (You can see the turbo swing in the [second] picture [above].) When skiing I run a PowerTech 17-pitch or 19-pitch four-blade propeller--depends one or two skiers. Those propellers pull like a freight train.

I did a lot of propeller testing when I first did the re-power with a three-blade 21-pitch propeller. I hit 51.8-MPH via the GPS. I think a 115-HP motor is a very good choice for this boat. Boat US insurance has no concern; a115-HP-rated motor was the most I could insure. By the way, the E-TEC 115 H.O. is dyno tested to be 127-HP.
Member since 2005
2005 170 Montauk, 2010 E-TEC 115 H.O.
2016 210 Montauk, 2017 E-TEC G2 200 H.O.

"Red sky at night, sailor’s delight - Red sky in the morning, sailor’s warning”

flymo
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 2:58 pm

Re: 2006 170 Montauk Re-power

Postby flymo » Mon Dec 07, 2015 5:20 am

Thanks Ridge - I found the info on the old forum, and putting aside the commentary from certain drama queens, it was interesting. I like the Montauk 170, but always felt it was a little underpowered and I don't like the massive black motor they sell on it now. The E-TEC is a great solution. If /when I get ready for a new boat (not to mention permission from the admiral) I may well look around for a 170 with a tired motor and follow your lead on the repower.

Tim
Last edited by flymo on Mon Dec 07, 2015 1:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.

jimh
Posts: 7326
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 2006 170 Montauk Re-power

Postby jimh » Mon Dec 07, 2015 8:01 am

I believe the prior discussion mentioned twice above must be this thread:

Montauk 170, E-TEC 115 H.O.

endus
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 10:20 am

Re: 2006 170 Montauk Re-power

Postby endus » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:10 pm

This year we re-powered our 2004 170 Montauk with the E-TEC 90 H.O. I am very satisfied with it, though I think the propeller could use more pitch. The 170 MONTAUK will go over 40-MPH, and the boat feels like maybe it has just a little too much power for its own good when running in the ocean--which is what I want. I already towed a stricken vessel, a smaller inboard motorboat, and [the MONTAUK with E-TEC 90 H.O.] performed admirably.

My father was very much in favor of the E-TEC 90 three-cylinder, but even he admits in the end we made the right choice getting the H.O. version. Having the separate oil reservoir under the console is better for me. I can check and make sure there is plenty of oil whenever I turn on the power for the day. I did not like the idea of the oil reservoir being under the engine cover where I might not notice that it was getting low.

Aesthetically, I think the E-TEC 90 three-cylinder looks too small for the boat. I must admit, thought, that for Evinrude to get 90-HP out of such a small package is pretty cool.