1. Use the full 4 digit year for everything you are asking your question about. Example: 1962, 1988, 2000, 2011
2. Include the correct name of your Whaler model. Example: Montauk 17, Montauk 170, Outrage 26, Outrage 260
3. Include the length when necessary. Example: 16, 17, 18, 20, 22
4. Do not post your email address anywhere on this site as it is already in your user profile.

Outrigger solution for Classic 1988 Montauk
DLynch	#1  Posted on 01/14/14 - 11:34 PM
Member Posts: 8 Comments: 0 Joined: 04/10/08	Happy New Year to all. Since my early teens (a Hell of a Long Time Ago) I've always loved blue water offshore fishing (especially chasing marlin, sharks and tuna A.K.A "The Big Three" and here's a link to what my brother and I have done to our 1988 Classic 17 Montauk: http://s1088.photobucket.com/user/dom...S.jpg.html We tested the system on land with simulated loads and even a simulated marlin strike and noted no apparent issues. I must emphasize the use of quality fittings and tension stays to the bow, etc., which are very important. We also tested the setup offshore last Sunday and dropped (lost) a marlin (often happens trolling lures due to the hardness of their bills, trace bill-wrapped , etc., a few jumps is often all it takes for the fish to flick itself free). I appreciate this is not an OEM solution but after much thought (+ much research here and on CW Whaler, and testing, with doubts!) here is what we have. I believe it better suits our needs than the OEM solution in some ways, we can deploy our bimini (very important in the Aussie sun), no holes needed to be drilled, our rigger poles are carbon composite (light and easy to deploy) and I believe probably a lot stiffer the smaller diameter OEM setup. Hooking Marlin, etc., is always challenging on trolled lures and the stiffer the poles the better. I also reckon they dress up the rig. Having said that, everything on small boats is a compromise of sorts. So there goes, so far so good. I'm not recommending people do this, that's a choice for individuals, at their risk. I'm just putting forward what I've done and hopefully people find it interesting. Regards Dom [ moderator's note: It is easy to create a hyperlink by highlighting the URL and then clicking the URL button below. Alternatively, you can just type the tags [url] and [/url] before and after the link, respectively.] Edited by Tom W Clark on 01/15/14 - 7:11 AM
kamie	#2  Posted on 01/15/14 - 2:00 PM
Member Personal Page Project Albums Posts: 2975 Comments: 3 Joined: 11/04/05	Hmm somehow my response from the is morning is gone? Nice solution for the Outriggers
Whalerbob	#3  Posted on 01/15/14 - 3:45 PM
Member Personal Page Posts: 311 Comments: 0 Joined: 12/07/06	Looks good, please let us know how it holds up and it would be great to see pics of a Whaler caught Marlin! I've done some offshore trolling in my 1989 - 17 Montauk but just small tuna, mahi, and one decent wahoo. I'd like to install riggers but I only rarely go offshore (in the Whaler) so not a high priority. With smaller tackle I've had good success putting rod holders on my Bimini to add some height and run the bigger rods from the RRP. Be careful with those rod holders with heavy tackle. I used to have about 9 of that style (perko) but more than half have failed for various reasons. Running in chop with those riggers up will put a lot of stress on them, can you take then down and store on the gunnel while under way? The best rail mount rod holders I've found is the CE Smith, fixed 30 degree mounted on the vertical rail stands. Expensive but well worth it in the long run. Edited by Whalerbob on 01/15/14 - 3:51 PM
DLynch	#4  Posted on 01/16/14 - 2:50 AM
Member Posts: 8 Comments: 0 Joined: 04/10/08	Hi Whalerbob, Thanks for the warning on the Perko holders. I was initially concerned about both them and the rails. However the system seems to work very well so far - the load (force and moment for those engineers here) from the riggers is distributed (shared) somewhat across the forward railing, using the tension stays. I haven't seen any bending/excessive movement in the rails from these loads. It works a lot better than I was expecting, I had grave doubts initially. The Perko holders have so far served me well and for most rods I use safety lines with s/s snap clips so even if the rod holder fail I should not lose my outfits. Re running in a chop (and during trolling deployment - when the loads are higher) the riggers have had no issues as they are braced forward and back by the tension stays and the actual poles are 2 piece but fit together like a fishing rod, they are not telescopic and prone to collapse. I can take the riggers down and store them while underway but this does not appear necessary, and to me would further restrict the already narrow beam of the Montauk. So for running I leave them vertical, and splayed when trolling. If I have any issues with the setup including holders I will post them but looks good so far. It has been said "The price of a marlin is eternal vigilance" and there is usually a lot of water between them. Happy fishing..
Whalerbob	#5  Posted on 01/16/14 - 3:51 AM
Member Personal Page Posts: 311 Comments: 0 Joined: 12/07/06	The issues with the Perko holders are if you under tighten them they'll slip on the rails, if you over tighten them they'll gauge your rails and eventually that backing plate will crack and break which perko changes an arm and a leg for. You have to continuously check that center screw, it will eventually work lose but Locktite helps. Last year I was seriously considering a pair of 15' telescopic carbon riggers that are designed to plug into a 30 degree rod holder. If I can find the link I'll post it. They were pricy but very nice. The but end has a 30 degree bend so they stand upright when under way and angle out when deployed.
Finnegan	#6  Posted on 01/16/14 - 8:21 AM
Member Posts: 1926 Comments: 16 Joined: 05/02/08	In the early 80's I used my 1971 Nauset for offshore trolling in the Atlantic, off the S.E. coast of Florida, rigged with a pair of Lee 15' gunnel mount outriggers. Subsequently I have used my Outrage 18 and Outrage 25, also rigged with Lee outriggers, for the same trolling. I have a lot of experience with outriggers for ocean trolling and they put a LOT of pressure on the base mounts. I was surprised to see Dom's mounts up high on the bow rails, and wonder how well, and how long, the rail can take that kind of stress. Anyway, for information purposes, in order to use the gunnel mount Lee outriggers on the 16/17' hull, I designed a pair of varnished mahogany (to match the Nauset varnished interior) "boxes" which mount to the gunwale in the space between the bow rail and the side rail. These "Outrigger mount boxes" as I called them, were rock solid, with a top surface of approximately 5" x 14" to mount the Lee base plate. The top surface was appriximately 1/2" below the top of the gunwale, attached using another set of the Whaler bow rail through-hull fitting plate, and the bottom attached to the hull at the wood backed "step" in the hull interior (where other Whaler fittings are also mounted to the boat). The Nauset, of course, could not use Whaler's later console rail mount outrigger system. Actually,l I think my design is better, since they are so solid and give a wider spread than the console units provide It sounds complicated, but is not, and the "mounts" look factory designed. This unit mounts the outriggers at the gunnel level, and midships, where Lee intended them to be mounted for easy use and deployment. The 15' poles run straight up for traveleing, and are easy to lay out for fishing. I still have the original design drawing and templates which I used to build and install these fittings. drawn full size.
bottomfish	#7  Posted on 01/16/14 - 10:16 AM
Member Personal Page Project Albums Posts: 198 Comments: 32 Joined: 01/07/09	Nothing better than blue water fishing in a 17' Montauk. It will be interesting to see if that holds up. Clamp on rod holders on pieced rails only mounted by screws seems like a receipe for disaster. I am sure the spread is impressive and I am also sure it functions pretty well but the stress on those clamp-on rod holders has to be really heavy. My rails are all 1" welded and through bolted and I would still be nervous. I fish offshore in Mexico every year and usually just lay my 7' rods out off the back corners then run a flat line short and a high line long up the middle for a 4 rod spread. The montauk throws a narrow wake so this works well with my bimini up. One year I wanted to try a wider spread and took a long strait aluminum pipe and layed it accross the top of the console rail. it improved my spread but too low for rough seas. Good luck with it but I would keep a close eye on it as once it starts to go all that torque will tear it up fast. Someone mentioned a whaler caught marlin. My avatar is a 17' Montauk caught sailfish. Fun stuff.
gchuba	#8  Posted on 01/16/14 - 4:32 PM
Member Posts: 1675 Comments: 0 Joined: 03/31/13	There was mention in this posting about the force of trawling on stainless rod holders. I first tried Westmarine's mid quality and then the pricey ones. Both slipped, and when tightened was exactly like Whalerbob posted, the casting cracked. I went with some after market brand from ebay with "House of Stainless.com" on the casting. They are holding up better but when trawling with a 2 lb. or 3lb. ball they like to slip too (much less than the pricey ones). The CE Smith would not work on my boat (my 1 inch stainless rail is 17 inches above gunnels). Any ideas or recommendations of fabric/rubber/matting/etc... that I can place inside the clamping so I do not trash the rail? I can tighten the bolts but each turn makes me cringe. Thanks. gchuba
Whalerbob	#9  Posted on 01/16/14 - 6:12 PM
Member Personal Page Posts: 311 Comments: 0 Joined: 12/07/06	Please explain why you can't use the CE Smith? I don't think they would work on the new Montauk rails because their rail supports are sort of diagonal. My rails are 7/8 but I'm pretty sure they offer them in 1". Before I gave up on the Perko rod holders I molded inserts out of epoxy putty (got the idea after seeing the ceramic inserts CE Smith uses) they helped to protect the rails but the backing plates kept breaking, center screw loosening so I finally gave up.
gchuba	#10  Posted on 01/16/14 - 6:20 PM
Member Posts: 1675 Comments: 0 Joined: 03/31/13	Whalerbob They would sit too high. I currently have my Cannon downriggers underneath my rail. My knees are trashed (courtesy of collegiate wrestling) so I laid my boat so I have a leaning post throughout. My rod holders are underneath the horizontal rail to my gunnels and the CE Smith would stick out like a sore thumb. gchuba
Whalerbob	#11  Posted on 01/16/14 - 6:25 PM
Member Personal Page Posts: 311 Comments: 0 Joined: 12/07/06	Found a photo. I put them as high as I could and I think they look fine but if your rail supports are vertical you can put them any height you like. http://s1072.photobucket.com/user/Wha...3&o=19 Edited by Whalerbob on 01/16/14 - 6:41 PM
gchuba	#12  Posted on 01/16/14 - 6:49 PM
Member Posts: 1675 Comments: 0 Joined: 03/31/13	Whalerbob, I tried to hit the photo you were describing. Did not take. Honestly though, I like the look of the rod holders under my rails directly over my gunnels. Now that I reflect, the raised holders over my transom would probably aid in clearing my "jack plated motor". Thanks for the contribution. I will get a couple and see how they work. gchuba
Whalerbob	#13  Posted on 01/16/14 - 6:52 PM
Member Personal Page Posts: 311 Comments: 0 Joined: 12/07/06	Try again, I fixed the link. The other benefit of mounting like this is there's nothing protruding on the inside to bang your thigh on. Edited by Whalerbob on 01/16/14 - 6:57 PM
gchuba	#14  Posted on 01/16/14 - 7:21 PM
Member Posts: 1675 Comments: 0 Joined: 03/31/13	Whalerbob, Beautiful picture. The original picture posted had horizontal attachments. The posting of the vertical attachment looks great. I am working on the boat tomorrow and will attach my downriggers and check for clearance. I will probably get two of each mounting system. Thank you. gchuba
Whalerbob	#15  Posted on 01/16/14 - 7:29 PM
Member Personal Page Posts: 311 Comments: 0 Joined: 12/07/06	No problem. I'm up to 6 of them and may add a couple more.
DLynch	#16  Posted on 01/16/14 - 11:51 PM
Member Posts: 8 Comments: 0 Joined: 04/10/08	I should clarify that my rod holder set up for trolling can be seen in the second photo of the original link: The rigger rods in the Perko holders are attached on a slight splay on the rear rails, and the flat lines run from the RPS holders. The first photo on the link is a perhaps a little misleading – it shows a rod in a holder on the forward rails – this was only temporary, during setting up the system, I do not run rods from the forward rails while trolling. While running to and from the grounds, I use the RPS for two rods and the console holders for other rods, with a towel underneath the holder lip to reduce reel scuffing. One of the RPS holders keeps rotating – I think the locking screw is threaded – any suggestions? I seriously considered purchase of an OEM setup but after much deliberation decided not to, as I wanted significantly thicker, stiffer poles (mine are approx. 41 or 42mm outer diameter at base vs. approx. only 28 mm poles to suit Lees OEM holders), and the ability to use my Bimini while trolling. I have also seen examples of the cast aluminium OEM mount heavily corroded/in some cases cracked near their mounting holes. Also if my riggers didn’t work (or if the system fails) that’s fine I’ll transfer them to a conventional boat with conventional gunwale mounting bases. Hi Larry, Happy New Year and I hope you are doing well. I’m also well experienced with outrigger trolling and well aware of the large loads imposed – and that they are cyclical - not just on the holders, but load transfer to the rails then to the mounting screws – this certainly concerned me and I didn’t believe it possible. Even without these loads the forward rail is a little flexible. That said, with the riggers set and restrained (both fore and aft, and while running to/from grounds and trolling), I cannot visibly see any deflection/bending/rocking of the rails – this surprised me greatly. It almost seems the riggers, properly set up with tension stays (fore and aft) add stiffness to the rails, if one considers the whole set up as a frame. It seems rock solid, I can’t believe I’m writing this. This to me is counter-intuitive – but it seems to work so far. How long it will last of course I don’t know (my thinking mind says it doesn’t have a chance – but at sea it has so far….). If it fails, I will accept that, and report on any issues here. I do like to through bolt fittings (with Grade 316 Stainless Bolts and “Nyloc” nuts, with oversized washers) but due to the Whaler construction I didn’t want to do this through the hull sides. I reckon your boxes for gunnel mounts are a great idea, (much better than OEM) but I didn’t have spare aluminium strips (or whatever they are?? – either cast into the hull or added later) on the hull to conceal any through bolting. So I just set things up and tested them and very surprisingly they seemed ok. I’m not a betting man and if you asked me to bet on this I would not have. I am not saying they will not fail, and I have only had 7 hours at sea so far, but they have surpassed all my expectations. They’ve seemed as solid and rigid as a mounting through the sides of a Bertram 28, again with the mounting stays both forward and back. The current rigger setup allows the rigger lures to run in clean water outside the prop wash. Interestingly before using the riggers I was also able to run at least three and sometimes 4 lures (depending on wind conditions) – outer lines for splayed holders mounted on the rear rail, with flat lines run from the RPS holders. I also run a “Pakula Witchdoctor” teaser which is an underwater mirror that oscillates and flashes like a strobe light. The short corner lure should run just behind this. While the Montauk doesn’t have much weather protection, freeboard, beam or storage (and is a b*&#**d to mount suitable riggers on due to construction!!), I have to say it has handled well and as I’m sure you gents know runs beautifully in a following sea. It also fits in the garage. I'm having trouble downloading iphone videos to photobucket but when I figure this out I'll try to show some videos of the rig at sea including how solid the riggers are. Cheers, Dom Edited by DLynch on 01/17/14 - 12:09 AM
Whalerbob	#17  Posted on 01/17/14 - 4:34 AM
Member Personal Page Posts: 311 Comments: 0 Joined: 12/07/06	Dom, I hope you're not feeling defensive, I'm really just trying to help. You need to remove that RPS holder to figure out what's going on. At the bottom of the tube there's a Mahogany plug with two screws that go through the plug into the teake RPS to hold it in place. You need a really long screwdriver but aside from that they are pretty easy to get to. It's probably just a lose screw but if water collected in the tube that plug could be rotten. There's a small drain hole in the plug that gets clogged so I enlarged mine a little. If/when I eventually replace those plugs I'll use 1" king starboard. Check out my photobucket album for pictures of the PVC inserts I made for my RPS and under RPS tackle storage. I know you'll sacrifice a little height but you might consider sliding the rigger mounts closer to the deck to minimize the leverage. Most of my Marlin fishing is done from a 58' custom sport fisherman and up in the Northeast US our fishery starts about 70nm offshore and we'll travel nearly double that. That Pakula teaser freaks me out whenever I check lines and forget it's there. I keep telling the owner he should put a13 sport on the bow but so far he isn't going for it.
DLynch	#18  Posted on 01/17/14 - 2:27 PM
Member Posts: 8 Comments: 0 Joined: 04/10/08	Whalerbob, No worries, all is good, thanks for your help and advice, I appreciate it. BTW I reckon your boat looks great. I'll keep a close eye on the Perkos (thanks for the heads up on the failure rate), and try fixing the RPS holder - maybe the plug is rotten.. Another task to do ! I did consider keeping the rigger mounts low down on the rail but chose to keep them up near the rail tee as this provides restraint for them against rotation (during trolling). Again I stress using the tension stays - I wouldn't do any of this without them and also wouldn't lower the splay angle of the riggers any more. I wasn't concerned about losing some height on the riggers as they are plenty high already. I intend this as only an interim boat so I'm not too worried about possible failures and don't want to spend more $ (CE Smith etc) on it except for routine maintenance. Aren't those Pakulas freaky ! I still freak too when I see them flash, god knows what the fish think.... Interesting your fishery is quite wide offshore, here in Sydney and the NSW coast the fishery ranges from right in against the rocks (small black marlin in summer), to the shelf edge (approx 28k out depending on where, approx 100 fathoms) - there can be black, striped and blue marlin at times. Many fish are taken inshore (30-60 fathoms) and perhaps most at 80 fathoms. Off the shelf there are also good canyons but they are really game boat domain. So here in good weather trailer boats are quite able to chase fish. Thanks again and I'll report any issues etc. Dom Edited by DLynch on 01/17/14 - 2:51 PM
DLynch	#19  Posted on 01/23/14 - 2:20 AM
Member Posts: 8 Comments: 0 Joined: 04/10/08	Here's a link to a video of the riggers during trolling. http://s1088.photobucket.com/user/dom...2.mp4.html It was taken with an Iphone, hopefully it gives some idea of the setup. Edited by DLynch on 01/23/14 - 3:06 AM