2016 Indmar Raptor\Monsoon Engine HP & Torque Ratings with answer from Malibu Factory Rep

[Sailvi767]

1 hour ago, ORMailbuboater said:

Warning was (fuel trim short) Data valid but above normal.

Adaptive Learning / Fuel Trim:  Fuel trim is a two part adaptive strategy that adjusts fuel injector pulse width (open time) to adapt to wear, defects, or changes in the system. The two parts of a computers fuel trim adaptive strategy are short term fuel trim STFT (additive) and long term fuel trim LTFT (multiplicative).

Short term fuel trim adjustments are short temporary adjustments that happen immediately. Long term fuel trim is accumulated over time and stored in memory. It is often the result of several STFT adjustments that exceeded a 25% increase or decrease over time. STFT adaptive strategies use drive maps written after extensive tests performed by engineers using equipment like dynamometers.

Could be too many short term adjustments being made outside of design parameters is triggering the error message. 

Thanks, that makes sense. It would come on only for the first start of the day. After that no issues until the next cold start. 

[MadMan]

What I always thought interesting on my boat was the 3 different activities where the mph is held constant, surfing @ ~10mph, wakeboarding @ ~20mph and cruising @ ~30mph are all accomplished at about 2800-3200 rpm.

[Sailvi767]

43 minutes ago, DarkSide said:

One other notable, I think expecting 3200-3500 surf cruise RPM is wishful thinking.  Keep in mind '16 has 1.76:1 Tranny.  It will inherently be much higher thus placing the real usage a above 4000, which is where the 2 engines really start to separate.   Even with lower ratio tranny last year IXFE was running 4000RPM surfing.  Granted there will be a different props to offset the tranny.  But I don't foresee 3200 RPM surfing.

 

It's possible that 3200 to 3500 will work. The pic I am posting is with the boat lighter then normal surfing weight. All internals full with PNP's about ⅔ full. I am the only person in the boat. I will try and get some pics with everything full including a bow bag and more people in the boat next week. 

For some reason can't add photo. Rpm at surfing speed at above configuration was 3000 rpm. Will try and add picture later.

Edited April 8, 2016 by Sailvi767
Photo

[catalac]

52 minutes ago, DarkSide said:

One other notable, I think expecting 3200-3500 surf cruise RPM is wishful thinking.  Keep in mind '16 has 1.76:1 Tranny.  It will inherently be much higher thus placing the real usage a above 4000, which is where the 2 engines really start to separate.   Even with lower ratio tranny last year IXFE was running 4000RPM surfing.  Granted there will be a different props to offset the tranny.  But I don't foresee 3200 RPM surfing.

 

Just asking but why would 1.76 tranny make any diff its proped up to match the new tranny? Prop is spinning slower but has more pitch net effect same as the 1.48 tranny with a shallower prop, no?

[shawndoggy]

10 minutes ago, catalac said:

Just asking but why would 1.76 tranny make any diff its proped up to match the new tranny? Prop is spinning slower but has more pitch net effect same as the 1.48 tranny with a shallower prop, no?

I think there is some voodoo to prop efficiency too where the prop gets most efficient where pitch is matched to diameter.  So you lose efficiency going to a flatter prop?  Dunno maybe eric from OJ can drop some knowledge on us.

[catalac]

Suspect you are correct on pitch efficiency as I can confirm the flat 12 inch pitch on the 15vlx sucks. I'm tempted to try out the old standard 1235, or 2773 on mine. 

[Sailvi767]

New attempt at adding surf mode pic.

[shawndoggy]

25 minutes ago, Sailvi767 said:

New attempt at adding surf mode pic.

what are your RPMs at 12mph / how is the boat weighted?

[Sailvi767]

I posted the conditions in my earlier post. The boat was full internal ballast. Plug and play about ⅔ full so 1000 to maybe 1100 lbs PNP and just me in the boat. Overall a light boat for surfing. I will try and snap some pics next week with the boat more heavily weighted and a couple of speed points. 

[MadMan]

15 hours ago, shawndoggy said:

I think there is some voodoo to prop efficiency too where the prop gets most efficient where pitch is matched to diameter.  So you lose efficiency going to a flatter prop?  Dunno maybe eric from OJ can drop some knowledge on us.

https://www.vicprop.com/propeller101.htm#4

In general, horsepower available and shaft speed determine the propeller diameter, while shaft speed and boat speed determines propeller pitch. The pitch of a propeller divided by its diameter is a term called "pitch ratio." For example, a propeller of 20" diameter and 20" pitch has a pitch ratio of 1.0, a diameter of 20" and pitch of 15" a pitch ratio of .75, etc. For best efficiency, the pitch ratio of boat propellers should be in the range of .55 to .80 for tugs and trawlers, .65 to 1.0 for heavy and average cruisers, .80 to 1.2 for medium and fast cruisers and .90 to 1.5 for exceptionally fast cruisers and runabouts. Pitch ratios outside these ranges generally will indicate an unsuitable shaft speed.

I think ".90 to 1.5 for exceptionally fast cruisers and runabouts" would be used for our application.  Mine is 18 / 14 = 1.29.

 

[IXFE]

I don't know why we're talking about surf rpm all of the sudden. That's more a function of your transmission, prop, weights, and speed. All those variables being equal I would expect the 410 and the 450 to show the same RPM. The difference (if there is a material difference) would come in the ceiling.  We'll never know because we'll never have video evidence of TWO identically equipped and weighted boats (410 & 450) on the same lake on the same day. 

All you can do is demo one or the other at your riding spot weighted how you like. If it works (i.e. doesn't hit the ceiling and you're happy with the rpm's), then you buy it. 

At 3000 rpm the boat pictured is very light. Especially considering the gear reduction trans.  Go add WM high capacity bags (i.e. not the new '16 bags), 1000lb bow triangle, and a crew of people  .  You'll be at or near 4K rpm I don't care what engine you have  

Finally, I will say this... Generally speaking I think there is a lot LESS difference between boat engines in the real world than we make out on the forum.  I believe that's even more true this year than in the past (having demo'd both fully weighted). 

Edited April 8, 2016 by IXFE

[hethj7]

So, not to randomly bring this thread back up, but I just noticed in the 2016 manual a horsepower range is published by Malibu.  350-555 HP is shown for the 23LSV.  410-555 is shown for the 25LSV.   Can you get the base motor in the 25LSV?  If not, that would lead me to believe 350 HP for the Monsoon 410 and 410 HP for the Monsoon 450.   

http://www.themalibucrew.com/_files/malibu/malibu_2016_manual.pdf

 

Of course, I see it also says exhaust ports are located beneath the swim platform on port and starboard side.  We know there is only a single port for the Ford engine.   

 

 

Edited July 2, 2016 by hethj7

[Taradise07]

Anyone considered the gas factor?? In the old builds with the ls3 vs 350.. The 350 sucks super bad on gas, which is why in my case I'm opting for the 450 vs 400 on the new whip.  Also - nobody should ever pay retail for those motor upgrades lol   I am a wake lady, I know nothing of the technicalities, but in my area - if we were going on a hr trip - we always took my boat with the LS3 due to top speed, and the fact that we wouldn't have to fill up on gas twice... Just curious what you guys think on that piece of it.. 

[shawndoggy]

18 minutes ago, Taradise07 said:

Anyone considered the gas factor?? In the old builds with the ls3 vs 350.. The 350 sucks super bad on gas, which is why in my case I'm opting for the 450 vs 400 on the new whip.  Also - nobody should ever pay retail for those motor upgrades lol   I am a wake lady, I know nothing of the technicalities, but in my area - if we were going on a hr trip - we always took my boat with the LS3 due to top speed, and the fact that we wouldn't have to fill up on gas twice... Just curious what you guys think on that piece of it.. 

I can see how one engine design can be more efficient than another.

I cannot see how a motor with a hotter tune (Ford 6.2L 450 vs Ford 6.2L 400) is going to burn less fuel.

[Ronnie]

How much fuel would you burn before you would see any $$ gain from the 450 over the 410? IF the 450 would be better on fuel...

And remember, those numbers do not reflect HP numbers.

[ORMailbuboater]

1 minute ago, shawndoggy said:

I can see how one engine design can be more efficient than another.

I cannot see how a motor with a hotter tune (Ford 6.2L 450 vs Ford 6.2L 400) is going to burn less fuel.

What I think they are trying to say is that a hotter tune alone would not unless the engine is not working as hard.   Lets say you want to motor across the lake at say 32 MPH.  If you load up a boat with the stock engine set up for wake surfing that runs at a higher RPM at 32 MPH then stock boat is working harder than boat setup to run lower RPM since it has more power for a different prop.

Hypothetically speaking since I have not tested that theory I would make the assumption that a stock engine may consume more fuel than a 450 or 575 SC running a different prop at lower RPM at cruising speeds.  

Lots of talk on here about getting a higher pitch prop to lower RPM at surfing or wakeboarding speed to gain efficiency.  Same I think would apply if one wanted to cruise across the lake in a different boat that can run lower RPMs.  This is hypothetical as it may or may not consume less fuel due the the more powerful engine demanding more fuel for the added power.    I did not buy the 575 for fuel economy.  

I do have a higher pitch prop on my 2016 23 LSV so can cruise at 30+ comfortably and still surf 11 MPH, full stock ballast, PW2 deployed, 12 passengers at ~2500 RPM no issue getting to speed and holding speed.  

[67King]

4 hours ago, shawndoggy said:

I can see how one engine design can be more efficient than another.

I cannot see how a motor with a hotter tune (Ford 6.2L 450 vs Ford 6.2L 400) is going to burn less fuel.

You burn more fuel when you pump more air (more displacement or higher RPM).  If the engines are teh same (bore/stroke/cam events), then they won't be pumping different amounts of air.  With a tune, you are generally going after its thermal efficiency, typically at the cost of durability.  As you improve thermal efficiency, you are improving both power and fuel efficiency.

[dboyle]

Hi Folks

New to the forum and what a great write up and responses to the Monsoon engines.

I have a question maybe people have experienced or may help if they run into this issue.

 

This year we bought a new 23lsv with the 410. the Malibu boat has been outstanding when we have the boat. it seams every 35 hrs put on the engine, the engine code for over heating goes off and the boat is in for a new manifold as it has cracked. As of this week we are at 140 hrs on the engine and about to go on our 4th new manifold....

thoughts? people with the same experience?

not an engine guru, but do you think at cruising speeds approx. 25/26MPH 4000RPM and surfing RPM around the same, this engine cant handle the stress/heat?  out of the 140hrs, 100hrs is surfing..

 

your feedback is welcome.. I'm thinking of putting in the 575 just to reduce stress and maybe heat!!!! I could be totally wrong..

 

Doug

[Ronnie]

What prop is on your boat? What is your elevation? 

 

[dboyle]

27 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

What prop is on your boat? What is your elevation? 

 

Hi Ronnie

in Ontario Canada near Toronto, at sea level.

Prop is the stock Torque Prop that came with the boat

[Stevo]

33 minutes ago, dboyle said:

Hi Ronnie

in Ontario Canada near Toronto, at sea level.

Prop is the stock Torque Prop that came with the boat

Get the number off the prop to know for sure, my 14' had a "torque " prop on the sheet but it was the 1235. I had that changed out to 2315 before signing the papers,

then later jumped to the 2419

 

[dboyle]

1 minute ago, Stevo said:

Get the number off the prop to know for sure, my 14' had a "torque " prop on the sheet but it was the 1235. I had that changed out to 2315 before signing the papers,

then later jumped to the 2419

 

Ok. 

Do you believe this is driving up RPMs and creating overheating? 

[Stevo]

24 minutes ago, dboyle said:

Ok. 

Do you believe this is driving up RPMs and creating overheating? 

Not sold on that yet but considering,

i believe there is a heat shield problem that caused a code warning to be thrown.

@ConnollyCrew what am I thinking of

[Ronnie]

You probably have to 2249 prop which is the so called "Torque" prop or "High Altitude" Prop. On my '16 I had the same prop. I went with the standard prop which is the 2277 on my '17 and lowered my RPM's by 500-700 RPM's. I have no problems with the boat pulling with the 2277 and the fuel usage is much better. I do not think this is causing the manifold problem (I am assuming it's the exhaust manifold) but it will make your motor not work near as hard. There are many boats out there like your's running the 2249 prop without the manifold problem, but it will help lower the RPM's and less strain on the motor. IF the manifold is getting damaged, you may have a blockage in the cooling system allowing the manifold to overheat or possibly an alignment problem with the manifold when torqued down at instal. Is it the same side that you have the issue with each time? Steve mentioned a heat shield issue, that could possibly do it as well but not sure it would crack a manifold.

[dboyle]

15 minutes ago, Stevo said:

Not sold on that yet but considering,

i believe there is a heat shield problem that caused a code warning to be thrown.

@ConnollyCrew what am I thinking of

Thanks 

i also have 3 cracked manifolds. It makes me wonder if they are using metal from North America or overseas. Definitely a difference.