Jump to content

Welcome to TheMalibuCrew!

As a guest, you are welcome to poke around and view the majority of the content that we have to offer, but in order to post, search, contact members, and get full use out of the website you will need to Register for an Account. It's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the TheMalibuCrew Family today!

Hours, year, and engine in your 'Bu


ChainSetter

Recommended Posts

On 7/30/2016 at 9:50 PM, Bill_AirJunky said:

I bet engines used for surfing with a ton of weight, don't last nearly as long as engines used at skiing RPMs & weights.

Hey Bill. 2 questions in regards to this:

1. Do you think this is true for all engine sizes? For example, as you suggested a 5.7 liter GM engine in a boat used for skiing may be more reliable than the same engine in a boat used for surfing with ballast. However, do you think an LS3 (6.2 liter) in that same surfing boat might fare better and have better longevity and therefore be as "reliable" as the 5.7 in the ski boat?

2. I've always subscribed to the theory that heat is the real killer of powertrain components in any vehicle (cars, boats, cycles, etc.). This is why I change my fluids regularly since a new fluid (oil, atf, coolant, etc) has a higher capacity to absorb and dissipate heat more efficiently than older fluids. If the engine used for surfing is maintained properly and never experiences higher than normal heat do you still think it is experiencing more wear and tear than the ski boat experiencing similar maintenance and heat conditions? 

I'm really curious what you think. I'm new to boating and just trying to glean as much info from guys with experience as I can.

Oh, 2014 23 LSV with the LS3 and 189 hrs. I've put almost 50 hrs on the boat since buying it at the end of March.

Link to comment

Good question, Charlie. I'm inclined to think a larger motor would haul heavier weights for a longer time frame than a smaller one. But I have no real data to back that up. Just judging from what we know about engines in trucks hauling weight. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment

I have a 1999 SS LXI with 1000 hrs , still strong as new running mobil 1 oil and routine maintenance. A Friend has the same year and engine and has over 2500 hrs still running strong barefooting with it. And he has used pennzoil marine oil all its life. Preventive Maintenance is the key.  

Link to comment

We have an 08 23' lsv that we bought from Charlie Hurst that works at Malibu.oil change at every 50 hrs. About to have my 3rd change. Close to 800 hrs.

Link to comment

256 hours on a 2011 VLX with 330 monsoon, serviced every 50 hours and meticulously maintained but even so the engines getting rebuilt as I type because water got inside the engine due to worn exhaust manifolds. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Diesel86 said:

256 hours on a 2011 VLX with 330 monsoon, serviced every 50 hours and meticulously maintained but even so the engines getting rebuilt as I type because water got inside the engine due to worn exhaust manifolds. 

Any idea how to tell if the manifolds are wearing? That seems really premature. Was there any salt use? 

Link to comment

My boat history -

 

94' Hydrodyne Legacy - sold with 988 hours, basic maintenance only

95' Supersport Nautique GT-40 engine - sold with 600 hours, basic maintenance only

(current) 04' LSV with 380 Hammerhead - currently at 400 hours, basic maintenance only to this point.

Link to comment

So many variables to consider with this Question/statement. Is the motor carbureted or FI, how was maintenance on engine, what prop is on boat, how was it used, what oil/filters used, what fuel used, on and on....... I know back a few years ago when there were a few more gas powered "starter" lobster boats around, the guys that really keep up on maintenance would change an engine every couple years just to try and avoid any down time, that was typically about 3500-4500 hours. Most of those were carburated engines that TYPICALLY wont last as long as a FI engine. I can bet most of those boats were heavier then a weighted Malibu boat. Engine failure threads are pretty uncommon to see around here.

We have 760 some odd on ours now with very little issues, actually I dont think we have had any mechanical issues, only small electrical issues. (coil and knock sensor) 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, robbennett said:

Any idea how to tell if the manifolds are wearing? That seems really premature. Was there any salt use? 

Maybe 40-50 hours of salt use, engine was flushed after every trip, don't think there's a way to tell, only found out because the dealer thought it was cranking over slowly so he compression tested it when I had it serviced. 

Thankfully I bought an aftermarket warranty with the boat. 

Link to comment

2000 Malibu LX... 750 on first engine, 975 total on boat now (225 hrs on new engine)

2010 Malibu LSV 600 on first engine... 630 total on boat now (30 hrs on new engine)

Sounds like I kill them... but I maintain every 50 hrs... 2000 Malibu I bought used and it looked like it had a bit of a rough life.... possibly salt water use too...

2010 LSV :( 2 unique failures happened at once... ballast bag fitting in locker broke.... Auto bilge was not working... did not know the bilge stop working and could not tell that the bag was leaking... 1st indicator was low voltage on Malview and it was too late... she drank water into her heart :( .... Insurance took care of the hydrolock and I paid for an additional bilge pump to be mounted in center of boat... hopefully will never again happen with the redundant bilge pumps.

@Bill_AirJunky I don't think I can agree with your statement. When I slalom behind my boat (don't laugh :lol: at me... yes I still do that... and the wake behind the boat wit front ballast is pretty nice) I am turning 4500 + rpms... When I wakeboard I have 3500 lbs of ballast and turning 3200 rpms... when I surf I have 5300 lbs of ballast and turning 3500 rpms... on the foil.. cuz I am still a newbie... no ballast and I am sure my rpms are around 2500-2800...  I agree that weight has a factor... but constant high rpms are not good either.. just my 2cents:cheers:

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
6 hours ago, kerpluxal said:

 

@Bill_AirJunky I don't think I can agree with your statement. When I slalom behind my boat (don't laugh :lol: at me... yes I still do that... and the wake behind the boat wit front ballast is pretty nice) I am turning 4500 + rpms... When I wakeboard I have 3500 lbs of ballast and turning 3200 rpms... when I surf I have 5300 lbs of ballast and turning 3500 rpms... on the foil.. cuz I am still a newbie... no ballast and I am sure my rpms are around 2500-2800...  I agree that weight has a factor... but constant high rpms are not good either.. just my 2cents:cheers:

 

So when you slalom ski, how long is your average ride? A lot of guys I know who still do it, only ski for 5 or 10 minutes at a time. They might drop, turn around & do it again, but the break is benefiting the engine as much as the rider.

I pretty much only ride a foil any more. An average ride is probably 20 or 30 minutes long, occasionally with no crashes or breaks slowing down....usually around 3200 RPM for me. I imagine a lot of surf sessions are at least that long..... If not longer with breaks picking up the surfer occasionally.

At work we are seeing issues with surf boat engines blowing cooling hoses off.....then overheating. I believe there is a bulletin in place about it. 

Link to comment
ahopkins22LSV

Surfing is actually probably more like slalom in regards to how long the engine is working. I've never seen a surfer for more then 5, maybe ten minutes straight. Rider is always falling whether they are learning to ride the wave or trying a new trick. 

And with the new props/drive trains most people are turning under 4K Rpms. Some are in the low 3000's.

Edited by ahopkinsTXi
Link to comment

For me, at slalom, wakeboard or surf speeds, the rpm is about the same.   The difference is, when surfing I'm at near full throttle, slalom speeds are closer to 1/4 throttle.  A lot more horsepower is required to surf.  I would think this is much harder on an engine (and trans/v-drive).

Link to comment

I have the 2313 prop(top speed is 38mph) on my 2015 A22. we run about 4k ballast, surfing, and the motor doesn't struggle at all.  Prop has a lot to do with how hard the motor is working. If we drop the wedge, then the motor works a little harder. 

Link to comment
ahopkins22LSV
4 hours ago, MadMan said:

For me, at slalom, wakeboard or surf speeds, the rpm is about the same.   The difference is, when surfing I'm at near full throttle, slalom speeds are closer to 1/4 throttle.  A lot more horsepower is required to surf.  I would think this is much harder on an engine (and trans/v-drive).

If you are at the same RPMs does it matter where the throttle is? <--- Honest question for the engine guys.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, ahopkinsTXi said:

Surfing is actually probably more like slalom in regards to how long the engine is working. I've never seen a surfer for more then 5, maybe ten minutes straight. Rider is always falling whether they are learning to ride the wave or trying a new trick. 

And with the new props/drive trains most people are turning under 4K Rpms. Some are in the low 3000's.

Rarely do we see a lengthy surf run.  Usually someone falls trying something.   The only lengthy runs are when trying new things woke holding rope.  Example learning heelside,  I am back to square one.  Learning speed control,  pumping,  etc.  So I ride tethered for a couple minutes,  transfer then toss the rope.   

Link to comment
13 hours ago, Bill_AirJunky said:

So when you slalom ski, how long is your average ride? A lot of guys I know who still do it, only ski for 5 or 10 minutes at a time. They might drop, turn around & do it again, but the break is benefiting the engine as much as the rider.

I pretty much only ride a foil any more. An average ride is probably 20 or 30 minutes long, occasionally with no crashes or breaks slowing down....usually around 3200 RPM for me. I imagine a lot of surf sessions are at least that long..... If not longer with breaks picking up the surfer occasionally.

At work we are seeing issues with surf boat engines blowing cooling hoses off.....then overheating. I believe there is a bulletin in place about it. 

Longest session would be on wakeboarding... my foil rides are like 5 minutes before I smack the water :( ,,,,, Surf sessions are usually 5 -10 before trying something new, or just being stupid before then a reset...  

@carguy79ta is correct... propping your boat right will have the biggest factor.. just like having the correct gearing for your vehicle hauling a load. 

2 hours ago, ahopkinsTXi said:

If you are at the same RPMs does it matter where the throttle is? <--- Honest question for the engine guys.

My honest answer is no... but you will see an increase in fuel consumption.... 

If you drive your car in 1st gear at red line all day long,,,, that is bad

If you drive your car in 5th all day and are under powered that is bad

prop/transmission gives you the happy medium.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
7 hours ago, ahopkinsTXi said:

If you are at the same RPMs does it matter where the throttle is? <--- Honest question for the engine guys.

It absolutely does....More throttle required to stay at the same RPM's = More load on the engine.

3500 RPM's @ 25% Throttle (i.e. Skiing) = Minimal Load on Engine

3500 RPM's @ 90% Throttle (i.e. Surfing) = Large Load on Engine

When you "load-up" your engine you are doing things such as increasing fuel consumption, creating more heat (heat is the ultimate killer), increasing the load on piston rings, and increasing the load on your crankshaft and connecting rods. Not to mention the increased load on other components which help you achieve 90% throttle such as your fuel pump. Loading up your engine is what causes lugging. Lugging an engine is bad. When you are surfing and it takes you 90% throttle to get to only a fraction of the engines rated RPM's, you are significantly lugging your engine. IMO you are far better to surf at 4000 RPM's with 40% throttle than 3500RPM's at 90% throttle (this would be a difference in prop choice). You'd almost certainly be burning less fuel in this scenario as well. Now I can imagine that Indmar and PCM aren't selling these engines to Malibu, CC, MC, etc. and not taking into account what they are being used for. So I am sure that they have taken SOME measures to protect these engines against these issues. But I can for sure see surfing killing an engine quicker than any other watersport. Wakeboarding heavily weighted a close second. You can do the math from there. All that you have to do is listen to your engine to know how much load you are putting on it. That extra grunt and volume that you hear while planing weighted vs. empty is a key indicator. Prop choice can absolutely play a large role in how long your engine lasts. Even though 2 different props may get the job done, the one that creates more lugging will be the one that likely kills your engine quicker. Of course you have to find that happy median between where you are revving too high and lugging too much. Keep in mind that the RPM's and Throttle %'s that I am using are just numbers I'm pulling out of the air. But you get the idea.

Edited by MaliWop
Link to comment

I always thought if I could achieve redline fully weighted the prop is suitable, and engine is not bogging down.  However if fully weighted and Max RPM is less than red line,  then too tall of a prop for that amount of weight.

Example my 2014 had 450, it would be WOT at 4200 RPM  surfing.   Engine working way too hard and bogging down, 2419 prop, so no where left to turn except drain bags

Now 2015 has LSA, it will spin 5300 no matter how much weight I have with current prop.   So surfing at 3500 is NOT bogging the engine down.

Just my $.02

Edited by DarkSide
Link to comment
ahopkins22LSV

@MaliWop that all makes sense except for the noise portion. My TXi runs about 36/3700 Rpms at 36 mph for slalom and my friend T22 sacked out runs the same Rpms but the throttle is for sure further forward meaning closer to full throttle right? Engine and exhaust sounds the same.

Both of us have the same engine btw. 5.7 350

Edited by ahopkinsTXi
Link to comment

 

3 hours ago, DarkSide said:

I always thought if I could achieve redline fully weighted the prop is suitable, and engine is not bogging down.  However if fully weighted and Max RPM is less than red line,  then too tall of a prop for that amount of weight.

Example my 2014 had 450, it would be WOT at 4200 RPM  surfing.   Engine working way too hard and bogging down, 2419 prop, so no where left to turn except drain bags

Now 2015 has LSA, it will spin 5300 no matter how much weight I have with current prop.   So surfing at 3500 is NOT bogging the engine down.

Just my $.02

That makes sense. More horse power = more weight/resistance required to lug the engine. I agree 100% with your theory. When talking I/O's, the engine has a recommended WOT operating RPM range (for example 4400-4800 RPM's with 4800 being the rev limiter). If full throttle puts you in this range without bouncing off the rev limiter you are considered to be running the right prop. Anything under 4400 RPM's and you are considered to be propped too high and in turn are lugging your engine.  Inboards are likely the same but to be honest, I've never looked into it. Now we start talking Inboards and watersports involving heavily weighted boats. The game changes. You'll likely end up with a prop that will hit the rev limiter unweighted 99% of the time. Nobody should ever really be running a prop that can't get you close to the limiter, regardless of what you are running. 

3 hours ago, ahopkinsTXi said:

@MaliWop that all makes sense except for the noise portion. My TXi runs about 36/3700 Rpms at 36 mph for slalom and my friend T22 sacked out runs the same Rpms but the throttle is for sure further forward meaning closer to full throttle right? Engine and exhaust sounds the same.

Both of us have the same engine btw. 5.7 350

I can't argue the noise portion. Very possible. If you wanted to get technical on which boat would be lugging more, you'd have to compare transmission ratios, prop, weight, etc. Than comes mathematical formulas that are beyond anything I have any interest in figuring out. But considering you are both running the same engine and likely the same transmission ratio, and he is pushing more throttle than you to maintain the same RPM's, I guarantee he is working the engine harder than you are. Is he lugging it to a point where it is dangerous to the engine? Who knows. Likely not if he's propped right for the application. If you were to both maintain that same RPM for a period of time long enough to pop both engines, would his pop before yours? I'd bet yes. This providing everything else is equal and he is running more throttle than you to maintain the same RPM. At the end of the day, the more throttle you are running and the less RPM's you are achieving with with said amount of throttle, the harder you are working your engine. 

A 23 LSV running a 350 and propped correctly will likely outlive the same boat with a LS3 running a prop which lugs the boat more than the guy with the 350. However the guy with the LS3 will be able to maintain higher cruising speeds and will not work the engine as hard running equal weight when propped correctly. Now he can prop down and run far more weight than the guy with the 350.

  • Like 3
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...