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!

Sign in to follow this  
kayt425

Looking to buy/order a 2019 at Boat Show next week

Recommended Posts

kayt425

I know that when buying a 100K++ boat fuel costs shouldn't be a huge concern, but since i boat at Powell several times a year, filling up a tank and having it last a while is a big deal to us as we don't want to run into the marina for fuel too often.  We are going to buy a 23 foot boat.  Seriously considering malibu and Centurion this go round.

Anyway, is the fuel consumption with Malibu vs Centurion really as bad as some of the online videos make it out to be?  Centurion is claiming their boats are burning half or a third of the fuel...If true that if a big deal to us.  If the difference is negligible then we don't really care.. but with those claims Centurion has peaked my interest.  With the wedge engaged it makes sense that the malibu would burn through fuel quickly.

Malibu is our favorite boat as far as design and interior storage and design...but do not want to fill up twice a day at powell.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IXFE
30 minutes ago, kayt425 said:

I know that when buying a 100K++ boat fuel costs shouldn't be a huge concern, but since i boat at Powell several times a year, filling up a tank and having it last a while is a big deal to us as we don't want to run into the marina for fuel too often.  We are going to buy a 23 foot boat.  Seriously considering malibu and Centurion this go round.

Anyway, is the fuel consumption with Malibu vs Centurion really as bad as some of the online videos make it out to be?  Centurion is claiming their boats are burning half or a third of the fuel...If true that if a big deal to us.  If the difference is negligible then we don't really care.. but with those claims Centurion has peaked my interest.  With the wedge engaged it makes sense that the malibu would burn through fuel quickly.

Malibu is our favorite boat as far as design and interior storage and design...but do not want to fill up twice a day at powell.

 

Even if those video are true... it’s a moot point now as Malibu has new engines this year. The most fuel efficient is the new M6 (GM 6.2L direct injection). If fuel efficiency is your biggest concern, i would check that box on your order sheet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mikeo

I was part of a project that figured out how to get the GPH data from the engine computers for a "true" comparison. In my mind, my opinion is: each boat should be set up the way _you_ want to use it and then perform the measurements/record the data for analysis. For example, if you surf at 10.5 MPH behind a Malibu, but 8.5 MPH behind a Mastercraft at 11.2 MPH behind a Tige then use those speeds. The same goes for ballast, don't try to put the same weight in each boat. Set things up how you're going to use it so you know what the "real world" scenario is.

To get GPH data from a modern engine computer you'll need some parts and you'll need to put them together. Here's how to make it happen:

https://www.wakegarage.com/projects-archive/miscellaneous-projects/accurate-fuel-flow-gauge-r110/

Go demo a few boats, ride behind friends boats, do whatever you need to do so you have the data you need to be comfortable with your final decision. I don't watch the GPH too much since I'm spending quality time with my family, I "hacked together" the gauge so I could get better info on how close the tank is to empty :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Slayer
1 hour ago, Ronnie said:

You can “make” any boat get terrible GPH with it being overpropped and over weighted. This is just another made up selling point by a smaller, competing boat mfg. I work the boat shows every year. A lot of those conversations with buyers is dispelling the silly things the other mfg’s tell people about competing brands. Some of those points are ridiculous at best. I’ve had many Malibu’s, most of them 23’s. Propped and weighted correctly, you should expect ~5 GPH surfing.

This is a great point.  FWIW, I get about the same GPH in my RLXi while skiing.  For purposes of discussion, if our big wake boats all weighted down for surfing are getting approximately the same GPH, I find that pretty remarkable.  Running weight of the RLXi is ~3250# and running weight of our wake boats is likely double that.  I'm really interested in seeing what the new M6 provides.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ronnie
1 hour ago, inlandlaker said:

This is a great point.  FWIW, I get about the same GPH in my RLXi while skiing.  For purposes of discussion, if our big wake boats all weighted down for surfing are getting approximately the same GPH, I find that pretty remarkable.  Running weight of the RLXi is ~3250# and running weight of our wake boats is likely double that.  I'm really interested in seeing what the new M6 provides.  

15" (in the LSV) & 17" (in the 25 LSV) props in these surf boats. I don't know what prop your RLXi is running.

My '19 23LSV w/409 (6.0) surf RPM is ~3300 with the 2277 prop. With the 2249 you can raise that to ~ 3600-3700 RPM. I'm betting your ski RPM's are close to those numbers.

With my '17 & '18 23 LSV's, you could add ~400 rpm to those numbers with the 410 Raptor & 2277 prop.

My '16 with the 410 Raptor & 2249 prop was surfing over 4200 RPM.

You can see the GPH going up with the RPM's.

The 6.0 in my '19 is very quite, unlike the Raptor motor was. I have no complaints with the 6.0 409 motor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NWBU
17 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

My '19 23LSV w/409 (6.0) surf RPM is ~3300 with the 2277 prop. With the 2249 you can raise that to ~ 3600-3700 RPM.

Slight hijack but it sounds like you've been happy with 2277 so far? That's what I'm planning to run too, and was hoping to see those RPMs around 3,300-3,400.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ronnie
3 minutes ago, NWBU said:

Slight hijack but it sounds like you've been happy with 2277 so far? That's what I'm planning to run too, and was hoping to see those RPMs around 3,300-3,400.

It's right there. So much quieter than the last few boats as well. 

I ordered with the 2277 and my dealer loaned me a 2249 to compare. Pretty much 3-4 MPH difference in the RPM range between the two props. 2277 top speed was 41, 2249 top speed was 39.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kayt425
13 hours ago, IXFE said:

Even if those video are true... it’s a moot point now as Malibu has new engines this year. The most fuel efficient is the new M6 (GM 6.2L direct injection). If fuel efficiency is your biggest concern, i would check that box on your order sheet. 

I wouldn’t say it’s my ‘biggest concern, just wondering if those claims hold any water’. I’m glad Malibu is back with the GM based engine blocks.  Not a big fan of the raptor motors.  My last boat was a 2015 MC X30 with the 6.0 Ilmor.  I loved that engine but had too many issues with other things.  

Anyway, I guess I’m one of those guys who watched the centurion videos and it has me thinking I should care more about fuel efficiency.  

Appreciate your responses!  Ilol make my decision at the show.  Ri237 or 23 LSV :)

first world problems...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dan Lee
17 hours ago, kayt425 said:

I wouldn’t say it’s my ‘biggest concern, just wondering if those claims hold any water’. I’m glad Malibu is back with the GM based engine blocks.  Not a big fan of the raptor motors.  My last boat was a 2015 MC X30 with the 6.0 Ilmor.  I loved that engine but had too many issues with other things.  

Anyway, I guess I’m one of those guys who watched the centurion videos and it has me thinking I should care more about fuel efficiency.  

Appreciate your responses!  Ilol make my decision at the show.  Ri237 or 23 LSV :)

first world problems...

Consider those tests the same way you would consider it legit in determining the fuel economy in your truck if you reset the fuel economy on your dash/overhead console & drove for 5 minutes & took those results.

 

 

I personally ran a test on my 2019 23 LSV with an M6 engine.  I used 19.02 gallons on 3.7 hours of engine run time.  That was a real world scenario at 5.14 gph, crew of 3.  The time on the water included:

-initial drive back to good water & checking top speed, holeshot, hot laps, etc

With full ballast & 550 PNP

-4 wakeboard sets 

-3 surf sets

-about 20 min cruise while draining

-misc idle time while getting trailer, no wake zone, etc.   I tend to be “key conscious” to keep the hours down.

 

 

i think that is a fairly accurate “real world” day on the water for most boaters.  That should get you 2 full days on the water even if my numbers were a little light.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Capdoogie

The so-called videos were done by an amateur at a centurion dealer.   Boats were done on different days, different air and water temps.  Not to mention wind speeds. A whole host of issues I.e. all fuel tanks not full or same. Different engine sizes. Not all current models.  On and on.  The Malibu was set up totally wrong.  Bottom line... if you want a great surf boat that does quick transfers etc. best wave get a Malibu. There is a reason Malibu doesn’t  let other companies have a wedge.  But even if the Malibu sips a few more ounces of fuel, I would trade that any day over a centurion that takes a long time to form its wave, slow to  no transfers. A cockpit not designed for women but don’t take my word for it put your wife in the Capt. Chair and see how the elbow rest is, and more! I demo almost all new boats every year and also compete.  I can tell you the pitfalls of most of the other boats too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Suggy

You will not be disappointed with the 2019 23LSV. Especially with the new and improved PW3 and the new line of engines. The M5Di is amazing and the direct inject helps a ton with fuel economy. Unless you're at high altitude, the M5Di will do the job but if you want to go big then the M6Di. If you're worried about fuel economy then go the new Malibu engines but the GM blocks are much better now than the Fords as well. Can't go wrong here. The M5Di is not much of an upgrade (not as much as going to the 450). Not sure on cost to go from 409 to M5Di to M6 though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kayt425

I am at high altitude.  The M6 engine sounds like the one for me.  Does anyone know what that checked box will set me back?  8k?  Thank you for al your responses!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NWBU

Cost to change from 409 to M5 is $1500, and I think M6 is $8500, all MSRPs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TallRedRider

I think that fuel efficiency is not a great priority on a 100K+ boat.    But I worry a lot more about the economy tanking and me losing a ton of money that way when the boat depreciates.  If a guy loses 7K per year in depreciation (makes the math easy), and one boat runs 5 GPH at $3 per gallon and another runs 10 GPH at $3 per gallon then after 100 hours the gas hog boat loses 10K per year vs. 8.5K per year.  Big deal.  Bump the gas price up and it still is a fraction of the loss each year.  If the economy tanks, now my 7K depreciation, turns into 15 quite quickly.  (Just hypothetical numbers, no haters please)

Bigger deal is what he said about running low on fuel at Lake Powell.  I would get a cheaper boat and buy into a houseboat with a big toy tank if I hadn't done so already.  Between the toy tank and a few runs to the marina, running out would not be an issue at all. 

On my 23 LSV test drive, he wanted to show me how big the wave could get and put the wedge at it's highest position.  The RPM's were cranking at 4500+.  That would suck a lot of fuel.  I didn't like the giant short wave anyway, but think some people might do that, and it will suck a lot of gas if they do.  In the Centurion test, I am pretty sure that is what they did.  

I went from a 2015 G23 to a 2016 G23.  some small tweaks to the hull but went from normal fuel injection to DI in an otherwise identical motor.  For all the raving about fuel efficiency being better, I am not sure I could tell.  Most folks reassure me it was true.  As I said, I just open up my wallet and fill up the tank without questions, so I might not have noticed, because I don't care much.  But again, it was not like I said 'Wow, I still have a half of a tank left!'.  Never seemed any different.  

Edited by TallRedRider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IXFE
10 hours ago, TallRedRider said:

 I just open up my wallet and fill up the tank without questions...

This for real made me laugh out loud. Never were truer words spoken. I’ve honeslty never even attempted a GPH calculation. It’s not like this is my daily driver. Who cares?

I think the biggest determination of GPH is RPM (ie prop) as others have stated. Last year I ordered the 2249 torque prop in 23 LSV and while I didn’t do any math, I did notice that I was filling up more that I was accostomed to. Surf RPM’s were really high too. So I switched to 2277 regular prop and it was like a different boat. Lower rpm, a lot quieter, and fuel burn returned to normal. 

Im really excited about this new M6 motor. Can’t wait to take it out. Nobody is calling it this... but it’s the same motor (LT1) found in the C7 Corvette (ie next gen LS3 which was a phenomenal boat engine).  I wonder why Malibu doesn’t market it as the Corvette motor anymore. I thought that was pretty cool. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sparky450
14 hours ago, TallRedRider said:

  As I said, I just open up my wallet and fill up the tank without questions,

No truer words to be spoken!!😜😎 Being the on the water is what I enjoy.  Gph really doesn’t matter. It is about time spent with family and friends😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fman
On 1/31/2019 at 11:46 PM, kayt425 said:

I know that when buying a 100K++ boat fuel costs shouldn't be a huge concern, but since i boat at Powell several times a year, filling up a tank and having it last a while is a big deal to us as we don't want to run into the marina for fuel too often.  We are going to buy a 23 foot boat.  Seriously considering malibu and Centurion this go round.

Anyway, is the fuel consumption with Malibu vs Centurion really as bad as some of the online videos make it out to be?  Centurion is claiming their boats are burning half or a third of the fuel...If true that if a big deal to us.  If the difference is negligible then we don't really care.. but with those claims Centurion has peaked my interest.  With the wedge engaged it makes sense that the malibu would burn through fuel quickly.

Malibu is our favorite boat as far as design and interior storage and design...but do not want to fill up twice a day at powell.

 

Have no clue what the new engines are going to save in fuel.  I have a 2017 23 LSV Raptor 410, 2277 prop after 175 hours of use avg for me is 7 GPH.  I am sure with the new engines it will only get better.   I dont slam my boat, I would say I am on the lighter side for ballast, usually around 3200-3400 rpms surfing.  The wedge does create more drag when surfing than boats without it.   On flipside it also helps save fuel when wakeboarding.

How you use your boat will dictate the fuel consumption.  Learn how to weight it properly.  Realize when your towing young kids on a wakeboard or tubing you dont need ballast.  Be smart about when to load up ballast and when to run without it.

You can definitely smoke 12 GPH+ of fuel if you try and don't use common sense, but those videos are another marketing gimmick from other manufacturers.  They also dont tell you the 23 LSV is the all time best selling boat ever produced,  with the best resale value of any manufacturer, so keep that in mind.

You know what they say...."The truth is on the water":) buy the 23 LSV and have an amazing boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dalt1

18LSV with 410 Raptor. 65 hrs and track every gal of fuel used. Averaged 5.3 GPH with probably 50% Hydrofoiling, 30% cruising and 20% surf with Plug and play 550lbs full.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wdr

@dalt1, which 550s did you put in? TNT is showing me the Ronix as pnp bags.

Edited by wdr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kayt425

Like i said in the original post, I really don’t care about the money aspect of fuel efficiency, but i may care about how it would change my trips to Lake Powell if I’m burning through too much fuel on the daily...Sure we all just open up our wallets for our boating passion and spending time with family & friends.  But i was just wondering if the Centurion videos truly held any weight.  It looked like they were legitamely hooked into an Analytics software  to track the engine performance.  If another boat burned half the fuel and performed similar I would be interested to learn more because the hassle of fuel at Powell for me would be relieved a bit when not with the houseboat.

However if it is just a bunch of marketing nonsense then would hate to have that sway my decision.  I have been out on a 2018 Malibu 23 for a demo ( with the Raptor 450) and the RPMs were 4000+ during surfing and the engine was screaming.  Turned me off a bit.  But the salesmen didn’t seem to have a clue what he was doing so, I’m going to talk directly to the sales manager or the owner next time.  Not the 22  year old kid who had no boating experience whatsoever.  Worst demo experience of my life.  But i chalk it up to the kid not the dealer/brand.

Again appreciate the feedback.  I may be in the Malibu fold here soon.  Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NWBU

Give the 2019's a try and you'll see a big difference in RPMs and noise level.

I put 65 hours on my 2018 23 LSV (w/410) last summer, basically surfing 95% of the time since we don't have to go far from the launch. I didn't track my fuel as well as these guys above but my experience is consistent with what they're reporting. I believe the Centurions are more fuel efficient, but nowhere near the extremes they try to show in that marketing clip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
siteki

We have a 2018 23 LSV with the 410. We live in in Souhern Utah and get to Lake Powell a few times a summer. We don’t have a houseboat and just launch every day. We average about 35-40 gallons per day. We definitely don’t need to fill up twice a day like the OP was concerned about. We mostly surf with a little bit of time for tubing and kneeboarding for the younger kids. We average about 6-7 hours of engine time per day with a few hours for swimming and floating. We love our Malibu. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dalt1
16 hours ago, wdr said:

@dalt1, which 550s did you put in? TNT is showing me the Ronix as pnp bags.

It was what TNT had in stock. Think that is what it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kayt425
16 hours ago, siteki said:

We have a 2018 23 LSV with the 410. We live in in Souhern Utah and get to Lake Powell a few times a summer. We don’t have a houseboat and just launch every day. We average about 35-40 gallons per day. We definitely don’t need to fill up twice a day like the OP was concerned about. We mostly surf with a little bit of time for tubing and kneeboarding for the younger kids. We average about 6-7 hours of engine time per day with a few hours for swimming and floating. We love our Malibu. 

Thank you for this response.  Very helpful.  

Very much looking forward to the Utah Boat Show this weekend.  Fun decisions to make 👍🏻

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...