M5 Disappointment

[breakz77]

Coming from a Raptor motor I love how quite the M5 is.

 

I have the 22LSV but running fully loaded (pnp + 500# lead) we had issues getting on plane also.

It came with the 2277 prop but I switched it out to the 2247 (almost identical to the 2249) and it gets on plane now without having to dump weight.

 

 

[ahopkins22LSV]

@Chappy make sure you have auto wedge on in your setting and it should move back and fourth on its own after your first pull up and manually picking it. Although if you do it manually you can leave it in lift longer.

[gregtay]

39 minutes ago, breakz77 said:

Coming from a Raptor motor I love how quite the M5 is.

 

I have the 22LSV but running fully loaded (pnp + 500# lead) we had issues getting on plane also.

It came with the 2277 prop but I switched it out to the 2247 (almost identical to the 2249) and it gets on plane now without having to dump weight.

 

 

What was your impact to RPMs when you made that change?

[UWSkier]

1 hour ago, IXFE said:

I sort of disagree...

You may have paid $2k to upgrade, but you upgraded to LESS displacement.  That’s all good if you want the latest technology, but if your goal is to run heavy I’d have given some serious thought to the M6. 

Consider this... you bought the motor that couldn’t get it done as the base motor in the G23 (with a 17” prop to boot), a boat that pound for pound isn’t really much heavier than you’re running your boat. 

I’m not saying the M5 isn’t a great engine... it’s just maybe not the one I’d gravitate to if I was was going to wakeboard heavy. 

Question... did you demo it set up like that?

This is kindof what I was getting at too.  Planing out a boat that's loaded for surfing to pull a wakeboarder takes torque lower in the power band and the 5.3L has always been more of a revver than a grunter.

The M5 is an awesome piece of engineering and I'd kill for a TXI with that engine in my garage... but to plane out that oversized load for boarding... it's the wrong tool for the job.

 

Edited July 9, 2019 by UWSkier

[weekender]

47 minutes ago, Chappy said:

I have this same issue with my 24 MXZ, I have the Monsoon 450, the High Torque prop (not sure what # it is) and 550 PNP but it doesn't sound quite as bad unless I have a boat full of ppl.  As long as I roll into the throttle slowly is doesn't seem to be a problem but if I drop the hammer I cna run out of throttle and not get up to speed. 

Quick stupid question, can you set up the wedge to go back and forth from lift to desired wedge position or do you have to do it manually each time you pick up a rider? 

in my experience normally if you are wakeboarding  and have the boat set in lift mode before taking off, it will remain in lift until you change the wedge to another setting once at speed.

Once you pickup the rider again and take off for another run, it adjusts to lift until you get on plane, then automatically adjusts to setting

[greg2222]

I have 2019 24MXZ with 450 monsoon so I try few options with props -— 17x19.5 boat was fast but not keeping surfing speed with all ballast - not happy ,  then I change to 17x14 - extreme acceleration but very loud , vibration at the floor and max speed 35mph - not happy with this set up and then I installed 17x17 and all change ,boat is quiet , smooth drive , making perfect wake with full ballast plus PnP , keeps surfing speed at 3200rpm and not draining fuel tank in 3 hours, speed 40mph at 5000rpm - very happy with this set up. 

Im not sure props number but assuming is 2805 for 24 and 25 Malibu.

i suggests to try for 22LSV prop 2247 no 2277 witch is recreational not for surfing 

 

[Murphy8166]

21 minutes ago, greg2222 said:

I have 2019 24MXZ with 450 monsoon so I try few options with props -— 17x19.5 boat was fast but not keeping surfing speed with all ballast - not happy ,  then I change to 17x14 - extreme acceleration but very loud , vibration at the floor and max speed 35mph - not happy with this set up and then I installed 17x17 and all change ,boat is quiet , smooth drive , making perfect wake with full ballast plus PnP , keeps surfing speed at 3200rpm and not draining fuel tank in 3 hours, speed 40mph at 5000rpm - very happy with this set up. 

Im not sure props number but assuming is 2805 for 24 and 25 Malibu.

i suggests to try for 22LSV prop 2247 no 2277 witch is recreational not for surfing 

 

Plenty of us surf a 23 LSV with a 2277 and it actually the perfect prop with the 409 motor.  That’s loaded with an extra 500 lbs midship.

[breakz77]

32 minutes ago, gregtay said:

What was your impact to RPMs when you made that change?

 

Only lost about 2-3 mph top end but usually try and cruise 25-30 mph anyways.

RPM was only 200-300 difference

[eubanks]

3 hours ago, IXFE said:

I sort of disagree...

You may have paid $2k to upgrade, but you upgraded to LESS displacement.  That’s all good if you want the latest technology, but if your goal is to run heavy I’d have given some serious thought to the M6. 

Consider this... you bought the motor that couldn’t get it done as the base motor in the G23 (with a 17” prop to boot), a boat that pound for pound isn’t really much heavier than you’re running your boat. 

I’m not saying the M5 isn’t a great engine... it’s just maybe not the one I’d gravitate to if I was was going to wakeboard heavy. 

Question... did you demo it set up like that?

I hear you.  Yes we demoed the boat but the engine wasn't available at that time (summer 2018).  We went off of all the information that we had from the dealer at that time so I guess that was the risk.  I only have 35 hours on the boat so I am still tweaking a bit.  Perhaps I just can't run as heavy as I want to for wakeboarding, and that's probably ok.  I just never imagined that this boat would struggle with "stock" ballast.  My guess is the wake isn't going to suffer that much by dropping some rear weight.  The shape plays more into it for me than the size.  (that's what she said)

 

Thanks for the input.  Perhaps I need to prop down at some point but it's probably too early to make that call.

[gregtay]

2 minutes ago, eubanks said:

I hear you.  Yes we demoed the boat but the engine wasn't available at that time (summer 2018).  We went off of all the information that we had from the dealer at that time so I guess that was the risk.  I only have 35 hours on the boat so I am still tweaking a bit.  Perhaps I just can't run as heavy as I want to for wakeboarding, and that's probably ok.  I just never imagined that this boat would struggle with "stock" ballast.  My guess is the wake isn't going to suffer that much by dropping some rear weight.  The shape plays more into it for me than the size.  (that's what she said)

 

Thanks for the input.  Perhaps I need to prop down at some point but it's probably too early to make that call.

I was in the same boat when I was placing my order. It was really challenging to choose a motor you couldn't demo (and there was zero information as far as someone running that motor in a 23LSV (or any boat!)   I do think after some more prop testing and more data everyone will come up with a combo that delivers great results with the M5.  In my case while I freaked out just before my boat went into production (there is a thread on it somewhere on TMC) and I threw more money at the boat and swapped from the M5 to the M6. So far I the M6 (plenty of power) but I am still not dialed in to where I want to be and I might also try some different props just to see what impact it has. In the case of the M6 there was also zero 23LSVs running around with it so it was impossible to know what prop was optimal.. but you have to start somewhere. 

[SCMike]

2 hours ago, breakz77 said:

 

Only lost about 2-3 mph top end but usually try and cruise 25-30 mph anyways.

RPM was only 200-300 difference

This is my exact experience, but the opposite.  I went from a 2249 to a 2277. RPMs decreases by ~300 RPMS and I gained about 3mph.  I have the Raptor 450, which turns the 2277 just fine loaded up.  If you are struggling with the 2277, the 2249 is a great choice. 

[Sparky450]

On 7/9/2019 at 2:38 PM, Chappy said:

As long as I roll into the throttle slowly is doesn't seem to be a problem but if I drop the hammer I cna run out of throttle and not get up to speed. 

 

This is what I found also. We don’t wakeboard much at all. This is the most weight we have ever had in the boat. I have the m6 in my 25lsv. I did run out of power this weekend wake boarding.  But as I said I was heavy. Full ballast. 550 pnp. And 9 adults. Probably average weight of 180-190.   Only two ladies in the bow. I lost weight to 50% rear and had no problem. I was not surprised I had to lose weight. I am running the 3077. But I will say the guys riding LOVED that wake. When we finished wakeboarding I hit fill all and we surged no problems at all. We would have had some great video if that Mavic drone hadn’t gone in the water🙁🙁!! 

Edited July 6, 2020 by Sparky450

[boardjnky4]

Run out of throttle? At full throttle? No comprendo.

The M5DI makes max torque at 3600rpm, so that's probably why you're struggling to get on plane at full throttle, because you are blowing past your max torque range. Might help in that case to get a prop that is pitched slightly higher, so that getting on plane is sitting the RPMs right at the height of the torque curve.

[Chappy]

15 hours ago, ahopkinsVTX said:

@Chappy make sure you have auto wedge on in your setting and it should move back and fourth on its own after your first pull up and manually picking it. Although if you do it manually you can leave it in lift longer.

Thanks!

[MFknK]

@eubanks

You mentioned your bow almost dips when coming off of plane, so you may have a similar issue that I have at times.

Try this, roll into the throttle slowly instead of dumping it all at once, when you hit about 17 mph, go ahead and manually move the wedge out of lift.

 

I am running an A24 with a lot of bow weight. When we are really loaded up with people, we have this type of issue. I had some friends take me on a jetski while my wife pulled someone up. When the boat broke 13-14 mph, it appeared that the wedge being in lift mode plus the bow weight was forcing the bow down too hard and the engine was not able to force enough speed to plane.

The same day, we tried running without the wedge first, but with all the extra passenger weight, it wasn't happening fully loaded. When we added wedge in lift mode, it help the boat with the initial jump, but then at a certain speed, stopped gaining.

 

I realize this is the opposite of what has been said prior, but it may be worth a shot...

[The Hulk]

I still wonder if the steeper prop angles are not helping these new boat's... 

[1107]

On 7/9/2019 at 9:00 AM, wdr said:

How did they figure that out?  Symptoms or seat of the pants comparison?

On the test ride the boat didn’t have as much punch (acceleration) as they expected.  Malibu told them to change the fluid and replace a filter but fortunately my dealer demanded a complete replacement.  

[granddaddy55]

On 7/9/2019 at 11:42 AM, Murphy8166 said:

@eubanks

You must be getting really washed up if you need wedge, tanks and bags to get over the wake.  Don’t you ride at 65’ 😂 I’m kidding.

For me it’s either - tanks full, bags full and no wedge or it’s tanks full to the point the just start to put water in bags and use wedge.  All 3 at once is way to much weight in the rear of the boat.

Take a day off work and let’s go experiment when we have a full day and the lake to ourselves. 

Stock MLS full including center plus little rear pnp snd wedge is a great wake with only 200 lead in bow snd 500 in cabin ( simulating a crew of 4) plus driver 

i make sure I get rid of any passive fill in front bag and it keeps it big snd rampy

we shift some lead in cabin to port to compensate for driver and we have a really equal Wake faster or slower speeds , it’s like that’s how the boats were built to operate and only the better riders need more 

Edited July 11, 2019 by granddaddy55

[boardjnky4]

I run a similar setup in my 2019 A22 and get on plane with full ballast including pnp 750s, wedge and 300lbs of lead. Wedge 4, wake is huge and fun. If an M5DI can't get it done, then that's a step backwards. I'm not sure I believe it though, as someone posted carb testing of the M5DI vs PCM 409 and the M5DI was more powerful.

Edited July 11, 2019 by boardjnky4

[wdr]

32 minutes ago, boardjnky4 said:

I run a similar setup in my 2019 A22 and get on plane with full ballast including pnp 750s, wedge and 300lbs of lead. Wedge 4, wake is huge and fun. If an M5DI can't get it done, then that's a step backwards. I'm not sure I believe it though, as someone posted carb testing of the M5DI vs PCM 409 and the M5DI was more powerful.

If both motors were tested on a dyno then the Malibu advertised specs for the M5 350hp/400lb ft ot torque @3800 rpm may look better. If the motors were actually used in an apples to apples comparison on different hulls, for example an ‘18 with the PCM and a ‘19 with the M5 then performance might be different. I don’t know the specific differences between the hulls, but do know the ‘19 is heavier.

[gregtay]

16 hours ago, The Hulk said:

I still wonder if the steeper prop angles are not helping these new boat's... 

Is the angle any different between a '17 and 18/19 23lsv?   It might be for the bigger boats (to run the larger props) but I didn't there there was a change for the 23

[IXFE]

3 hours ago, gregtay said:

Is the angle any different between a '17 and 18/19 23lsv?   It might be for the bigger boats (to run the larger props) but I didn't there there was a change for the 23

I was a bit stumped by @The Hulk‘s post as well. 🤔

[boardjnky4]

Yep the angle only change when the prop goes to 17”. And the increased prop size more than makes up for the increased angle.

[eubanks]

Thanks for the feedback.  I guess we need to keep playing with the setup.  I think I just perhaps had unrealistic expectations coming from a 2005 that I would buy a boat 14 years newer and at least be able to run stock ballast without any issues.  I know there are so many variables here and I need to get some more specific data, but I can only share our experience thus far.  I used to put 3,500-4,000 lbs. in our '05 23LSV with the Monsoon 350, and while slow, never had a problem getting the boat up to speed.

[wdr]

5 hours ago, eubanks said:

Thanks for the feedback.  I guess we need to keep playing with the setup.  I think I just perhaps had unrealistic expectations coming from a 2005 that I would buy a boat 14 years newer and at least be able to run stock ballast without any issues.  I know there are so many variables here and I need to get some more specific data, but I can only share our experience thus far.  I used to put 3,500-4,000 lbs. in our '05 23LSV with the Monsoon 350, and while slow, never had a problem getting the boat up to speed.

I have had to occasionally remind myself of the countless hours and dollars spent to get my ‘10 LSV to surf like my ‘19 LSV does out of the box. I have also had to rationalize why my new 2010 cost 1/2 as much as my 2019!