New Boat: What should I Get, 23 LSV, 23 MXZ or 25 LSV?

[JeffK]

46 minutes ago, asnowman said:

Did you order it with the throttle control switch, like on the 2020's?

I did.  It was a $300 upgrade IIRC

[NorNevRider]

You guys are forward thinking for sure. I’m curious about your 2019 25s. How does the 6.2 liter work in those boats and what is your daily fuel consumption for a full day of surfing? What speeds to you typically surf? My buddies 24 MXZ has a 6.0 in it and it is good on fuel. It surfs well at about 11.5 mph, full of passengers and ballast,  with the wedge 3 down.

 

Thanks

[Slurpee]

12 minutes ago, NorNevRider said:

You guys are forward thinking for sure. I’m curious about your 2019 25s. How does the 6.2 liter work in those boats and what is your daily fuel consumption for a full day of surfing? What speeds to you typically surf? My buddies 24 MXZ has a 6.0 in it and it is good on fuel. It surfs well at about 11.5 mph, full of passengers and ballast,  with the wedge 3 down.

 

Thanks

It's questions like that that make me so happy I collect all this data.

Surfing Goofy in a '19+ 25LSV with the 2805 prop and a M6Di at 800' altitude (PNP Full, Wedge at 3, 600lbs of lead midships and bow, family of 5 and a dog) at 11mph will run you 3100rpm and 10.2gph.  Knock the Wedge to 2 and that goes to 3100rpm and 9.7gph.

Switch to Normal with the same configuration and Wedge at 3 and you will get 3350rpm and 12.1GPH.  

Top end with that prop and engine is 39.4mph at 5600rpm.

Stay away from the 3077 prop on the 23LSV or 25LSV.  Get the 2805 unless you're at very high altitude.  Then get the 2749.

[jammer]

Why the advice to avoid the 3077 on a 23LSV in favor of a 2749 at altitude?

[NorNevRider]

33 minutes ago, Slurpee said:

It's questions like that that make me so happy I collect all this data.

Surfing Goofy in a '19+ 25LSV with the 2805 prop and a M6Di at 800' altitude (PNP Full, Wedge at 3, 600lbs of lead midships and bow, family of 5 and a dog) at 11mph will run you 3100rpm and 10.2gph.  Knock the Wedge to 2 and that goes to 3100rpm and 9.7gph.

Switch to Normal with the same configuration and Wedge at 3 and you will get 3350rpm and 12.1GPH.  

Top end with that prop and engine is 39.4mph at 5600rpm.

Stay away from the 3077 prop on the 23LSV or 25LSV.  Get the 2805 unless you're at very high altitude.  Then get the 2749.

Cool stuff. Can someone weigh in on higher altitudes with the 6.2 motor. We surf at ~4500 feet. Also, can you guys tell me at the end of the day how many gallons you use.
Our group is pretty big, we stop occasionally to jump in and cool off and a bite or two. Overall, we run pretty steady for about 5 to 6 hours of constant surfing in a day. Our Raptor 6.2 has used 55-60 gallons in a day when we have the “A” Team going all day. We have the 2249 prop and surf 11.2 to 11.5 mph between 3400 and 3800 RPMs ~. We put an extra 1K bag in the main compartment when we have less than 8 people and my rear plug and play bags hold 750-800 lbs. We usually get on the water by 8:30 am and pull off the lake by 7 pm and occasionally until sunset. Pyramid is a pretty big lake, so sometimes we might surf around for perfect conditions all day. 
I know we are off topic for this post a bit, but it’s somewhat related.

[asnowman]

53 minutes ago, NorNevRider said:

I know we are off topic for this post a bit, but it’s somewhat related.

Because we weren't off topic before?

Sorry i can't help with altitude or accurately gauge fuel use. Our lake is at 270' elevation, and we fill up if we are near the gas dock, what I will tell you is our 25 with the m6 uses less fuel per hour than our vtx did for surfing.

 

[NorNevRider]

1 hour ago, asnowman said:

Because we weren't off topic before?

Sorry i can't help with altitude or accurately gauge fuel use. Our lake is at 270' elevation, and we fill up if we are near the gas dock, what I will tell you is our 25 with the m6 uses less fuel per hour than our vtx did for surfing.

 

I hear you on the M6. My buddies MXZ uses a lot less fuel than my boat. Direct injection is just awesome and the OHV motors are so quiet, but have that nice Chevy growl. I think my wave is longer and stronger though. But, I’m packing a lot of weight and that makes the wave better and burns fuel.

[Slurpee]

3 hours ago, jammer said:

Why the advice to avoid the 3077 on a 23LSV in favor of a 2749 at altitude?

It was a sample of 1, but the 3077 lost its efficiency on plane (I.e. slipped a LOT) and burned 1.5x the fuel of the 2749 and 2805. They all perform similar surfing. So design flaw is my guess. The 2749 has almost no slip across the board. Very solid. But being a lower pitch burns a bit more fuel and has a bit less top end. In TX you want the 2805. 

[Sparky450]

5 hours ago, Slurpee said:

It's questions like that that make me so happy I collect all this data.

Surfing Goofy in a '19+ 25LSV with the 2805 prop and a M6Di at 800' altitude (PNP Full, Wedge at 3, 600lbs of lead midships and bow, family of 5 and a dog) at 11mph will run you 3100rpm and 10.2gph.  Knock the Wedge to 2 and that goes to 3100rpm and 9.7gph.

Switch to Normal with the same configuration and Wedge at 3 and you will get 3350rpm and 12.1GPH.  

Top end with that prop and engine is 39.4mph at 5600rpm.

Stay away from the 3077 prop on the 23LSV or 25LSV.  Get the 2805 unless you're at very high altitude.  Then get the 2749.

At sea level I had problems with 2805. I ran a 3077 all last season. I posted on here annual average was High 5gph if I remember correctly.  Same as my 07 21 LSV with a 1235 at 4K in ballast. Ninja style @Afun😂 I run heavy. About 750 in lead. 500 lead wake and 4 big lead bricks do not really sure how much. 550 plug and play. I will say the only time I had to drain is when I had 8-10 people in the boat wakeboarding. And surfing at about 1400’. I had to use the wedge even while surfing. Yes it helps. 

[bbattiste247]

21 hours ago, NorNevRider said:

You guys are forward thinking for sure. I’m curious about your 2019 25s. How does the 6.2 liter work in those boats and what is your daily fuel consumption for a full day of surfing? What speeds to you typically surf? My buddies 24 MXZ has a 6.0 in it and it is good on fuel. It surfs well at about 11.5 mph, full of passengers and ballast,  with the wedge 3 down.

 

Thanks

I am not sure what you mean by "it is good on fuel," but I had a 2017 23 lsv and now a 2019 25 lsv and we go through twice as much gas on the 25lsv. These bigger boats and bigger motors are not good on fuel in my opinion, but it is the price you pay to enjoy time on the water with friends and family. 

Our '19 25 lsv went through a lot of fuel this year surfing, full ballast, 550lbs of lead,  3 clicks from lift, 11.3-5 mph, and half full of people. About 3 - 2 hour sessions and we had to fill it up again with 65 gallons in an 80 something tank. 

Edited January 9, 2020 by bbattiste247

[TallRedRider]

21 hours ago, Slurpee said:

It's questions like that that make me so happy I collect all this data.

Surfing Goofy in a '19+ 25LSV with the 2805 prop and a M6Di at 800' altitude (PNP Full, Wedge at 3, 600lbs of lead midships and bow, family of 5 and a dog) at 11mph will run you 3100rpm and 10.2gph.  Knock the Wedge to 2 and that goes to 3100rpm and 9.7gph.

Switch to Normal with the same configuration and Wedge at 3 and you will get 3350rpm and 12.1GPH.  

Top end with that prop and engine is 39.4mph at 5600rpm.

Stay away from the 3077 prop on the 23LSV or 25LSV.  Get the 2805 unless you're at very high altitude.  Then get the 2749.

Am I the only one that gets my head spinning with prop numbers?  I prefer diameter X pitch, which is also printed right on the prop.  I have the 3077 (17 X 15.5) and have a spare 2805 (17 X 17) sitting in the boat.  At 2700 feet, I would not consider the 17 X 17 (2805).  I struggle to get on plane with a boat full of ballast and no wedge with the 3077 (when done surfing and heading back to the dock).  My RPM's are a little high when foiling at 23 MPH with no ballast and no wedge, but I think it is all a tradeoff.  The 3077 surfs well for me with 250 pounds of lead and anything from 3 people to 10+, so I never have considered messing around with props. 

@Slurpee, you feel that if I went to a 2749 (17 X 14.5), it would perform better than my 17 X 15.5 without losing top end, despite the lower pitch?  

20 hours ago, NorNevRider said:

Cool stuff. Can someone weigh in on higher altitudes with the 6.2 motor. We surf at ~4500 feet. Also, can you guys tell me at the end of the day how many gallons you use.
Our group is pretty big, we stop occasionally to jump in and cool off and a bite or two. Overall, we run pretty steady for about 5 to 6 hours of constant surfing in a day. Our Raptor 6.2 has used 55-60 gallons in a day when we have the “A” Team going all day. We have the 2249 prop and surf 11.2 to 11.5 mph between 3400 and 3800 RPMs ~. We put an extra 1K bag in the main compartment when we have less than 8 people and my rear plug and play bags hold 750-800 lbs. We usually get on the water by 8:30 am and pull off the lake by 7 pm and occasionally until sunset. Pyramid is a pretty big lake, so sometimes we might surf around for perfect conditions all day. 
I know we are off topic for this post a bit, but it’s somewhat related.

Your numbers are going to be different here since you have the older transmission ratio.  

I've not gotten all scientific since I pretty much don't care how much it costs, within reason.  The fuel is a fraction of my boat ownership expense, so I just pull out the wallet and pay.  Having said that, I think it is about 6-8 gallons per engine hour.  

 

Edited January 9, 2020 by TallRedRider

[G Spot]

1 hour ago, bbattiste247 said:

I am not sure what you mean by "it is good on fuel," but I had a 2017 23 lsv and now a 2019 25 lsv and we go through twice as much gas on the 25lsv. These bigger boats and bigger motors are not good on fuel in my opinion, but it is the price you pay to enjoy time on the water with friends and family. 

Our '19 25 lsv went through a lot of fuel this year surfing, full ballast, 550lbs of lead,  3 clicks from lift, 11.3-5 mph, and half full of people. About 3 - 2 hour sessions and we had to fill it up again with 65 gallons in an 80 something tank. 

What prop and what elevation? Your experiences are very different than mine in Texas with the 2805.

[NorNevRider]

1 hour ago, bbattiste247 said:

I am not sure what you mean by "it is good on fuel," but I had a 2017 23 lsv and now a 2019 25 lsv and we go through twice as much gas on the 25lsv. These bigger boats and bigger motors are not good on fuel in my opinion, but it is the price you pay to enjoy time on the water with friends and family. 

Our '19 25 lsv went through a lot of fuel this year surfing, full ballast, 550lbs of lead,  3 clicks from lift, 11.3-5 mph, and half full of people. About 3 - 2 hour sessions and we had to fill it up again with 65 gallons in an 80 something tank. 

By good on fuel, his 24MXZ  with the M6 uses 40 gallons when we use 55-60 on the same day. We go out with his family a lot and we fill our boats  with people, gear, and ballast. I’m not complaining and I agree with your statement about quality time. 
 

Your answer about your boat does help as it sounds like our uses may be similar. I can see you are at lower elevation but I’m assuming your party is large and hour usage looks equal. I will also assume you have a naturally aspirated GM 6.2?

[NorNevRider]

17 minutes ago, TallRedRider said:

Am I the only one that gets my head spinning with prop numbers?  I prefer diameter X pitch, which is also printed right on the prop.  I have the 3077 (17 X 15.5) and have a spare 2805 (17 X 17) sitting in the boat.  At 2700 feet, I would not consider the 17 X 17 (2805).  I struggle to get on plane with a boat full of ballast and no wedge with the 3077 (when done surfing and heading back to the dock).  My RPM's are a little high when foiling at 23 MPH with no ballast and no wedge, but I think it is all a tradeoff.  The 3077 surfs well for me with 250 pounds of lead and anything from 3 people to 10+, so I never have considered messing around with props. 

@Slurpee, you feel that if I went to a 2749 (17 X 14.5), it would perform better than my 17 X 15.5 without losing top end, despite the lower pitch?  

Your numbers are going to be different here since you have the older transmission ratio.  

I've not gotten all scientific since I pretty much don't care how much it costs, within reason.  The fuel is a fraction of my boat ownership expense, so I just pull out the wallet and pay.  Having said that, I think it is about 6-8 gallons per engine hour.  

 

Thanks,

So our averages are similar, and I think our elevations are similar.  Do you love the new boat? We have really enjoyed ours.

[bbattiste247]

16 minutes ago, G Spot said:

What prop and what elevation? Your experiences are very different than mine in Texas with the 2805.

We are at 1000 ft. and run the 3077 prop. On my 23 lsv, I used the 2401 prop that had a higher pitch, but we had difficulty getting on plane. On my 25, I went with the mid pitch; it easily gets on plane, but operates at higher RPM's. 

[Slurpee]

@TallRedRider, Amen, the numbers really abstract things.  The 2749 (14.5" pitch), 3077 (15.5" pitch), and 2805 (17" pitch) were the three props I tested out here in Texas with a Fuel Gauge this past fall.  What I found was that these big props have no problem grabbing the water.  So in general you can be a bit more aggressive with pitch than we used to say 10 years ago.  And in fact we need to because the transmission ratios are up to 2:1 now.  We'd run out of RPM before the prop ran out of ability.

I'll get a graph up here in a second for you to geek over if that's your thing.  The first prop we tested was the 14.5" pitch.  Rock solid.  I expected going to the 15.5" pitch would result in a bit of slip, but a higher top end (and lower RPMs).  It was a dog.  A big surprise.  Ate lots of fuel and needed lots of HP for no gains at all we could figure.  So we went and tested the 17" prop.  All things being close to equal you'd expect the same behavior, but even more pronounced.  Instead, it was where we expected it.  More top end, lower RPMs, and still able to get a 25LSV loaded up moving no problems.  My conclusion is that the brand spanking new out of the box 15.5" pitch prop was either in horrible shape (could be... it's a sample set of one), or there's something bad about the design of it that is letting it flex in the water and loose it's characteristics.

Let me get some graphs up here for folks to debate. 

[Slurpee]

Disclaimer:  These are all controlled tests, but on single samples.  Lots of averaged data.  But only on one boat/prop combination.  I wish I had bigger samples sets.

I stripped the old curves out ('16-'19 boats and props) so we're just looking at some heavy boats with the three props of interest.  There's going to be a bit of variation that needs to be allowed since two props were on a 23MXZ (I was thinking of buying one back then so that's what we rode that day) and a 25LSV.   What I'd like to point out as the takeaway is that all the boats are running very close to the same RPMs across the speed range.  The higher pitch one of course (2805) starts to get better with good results at the highest speeds.

So given the relatively similar engine loads and RPMs we can squint and say fuel consumption is going to equal energy needed by the boat.  The lighter weight 23MXZ with the 14.5" prop does pretty well.  Best of all these three tests.  The heavier 25LSV with the 17" prop takes a bit more speed to get up on plane, but afterwards has a very similar curve.  You would expect that the 15.5" pitch prop would be bang in between those two curves.  But instead look how the fuel consumption runs away.  We could see this during shots out of the hole when we were doing surfing tests.  It'd really pull a lot of power (eat gas) for some reason until it got up to the set point.

This one below is just for propeller geeks.  There's an ideal slope for a prop with no slip at all.  Obviously props slip, especially before you're on plane.  When the slip starts cancelling out the effect of more pitch you've probably hit the limit for you boat/altitude/use/etc.

Notice the 14.5" pitch prop unsurprisingly actually converges with it's ideal speed at high speed.  The other two props are pretty similar.

So What about Surfing?  Here's what we measured.  Us goofy surfers definitely get a GPH advantage.  No surprise.

The 14.5" pitch prop is running the most RPMs.  No surprise.

The 15.5" pitch and 17" pitch are running similarly.  The 25LSV with the 2805 is doing the best of the two.  And it's a heavier boat and we were running more weight in it than we did with the 23MXZ.

If the 3077 is struggling to get you up on plane in your use case, I have to wonder if that weird runaway behavior is kicking in under stress (if it's real on all props) creating a wall you can't get through.  At higher elevations I can see the 2805 not being a realistic choice for folks who slam the boat.  The 2749 is pretty solid, but you'll be paying an RPM penalty of 200-300rpms against where the 3077 should be if it could get you up and running.

[shawndoggy]

On 1/8/2020 at 2:51 PM, NorNevRider said:

Cool stuff. Can someone weigh in on higher altitudes with the 6.2 motor. We surf at ~4500 feet. 

FWIW, Pyramid is only 3800 ASL https://waterdata.usgs.gov/nv/nwis/dv?referred_module=sw&site_no=10336500

[TallRedRider]

Is there a difference in the cup of those props that might explain something that just the pitch does not?  

[Slurpee]

The 3077 has a 0.150” cup. The other two 0.105”. Not sure how to reconcile that though without more tests of different props. Maybe there is such a thing as too much cup on a 17” prop? Just speculation.  

[jwl019]

4 hours ago, Slurpee said:

The 3077 has a 0.150” cup. The other two 0.105”. Not sure how to reconcile that though without more tests of different props. Maybe there is such a thing as too much cup on a 17” prop? Just speculation.  

Makes me wonder why the 2401 vs the 2277 on my '18 doesn't perform like the 2805 does on the 19+.  Same pitch and cup on both props compared to the 17" versions you listed but thd 2401 is at its limits running at sea level on my boat.  Pulling a heavier surfer up is harder with when I run the 2401 and tops out around 11.2 with full ballast. If I drop ballast in the rear to 3/4, then it definitely helps it get ip past 11.2.

[Slurpee]

14 hours ago, jwl019 said:

Makes me wonder why the 2401 vs the 2277 on my '18 doesn't perform like the 2805 does on the 19+.  Same pitch and cup on both props compared to the 17" versions you listed but thd 2401 is at its limits running at sea level on my boat.  Pulling a heavier surfer up is harder with when I run the 2401 and tops out around 11.2 with full ballast. If I drop ballast in the rear to 3/4, then it definitely helps it get ip past 11.2.

That I have pondered over, and the answer that makes sense to me is that the surface area is huge on a 17” prop compared to 15.5”. More surface area means much less slip. So larger pitches work better. The 2401 didn’t do it for me either. The 2277 can even be over loaded if I make an effort to try to do it. That is don’t have any bow weight and slam the back. 

Edited January 11, 2020 by Slurpee

[NorNevRider]

On 1/9/2020 at 8:04 PM, shawndoggy said:

FWIW, Pyramid is only 3800 ASL https://waterdata.usgs.gov/nv/nwis/dv?referred_module=sw&site_no=10336500

Hey Shawn,

My wife beat you to that correction. 

[TallRedRider]

On 1/10/2020 at 2:01 PM, Slurpee said:

The 3077 has a 0.150” cup. The other two 0.105”. Not sure how to reconcile that though without more tests of different props. Maybe there is such a thing as too much cup on a 17” prop? Just speculation.  

I have not quite understood why the 3077 on my Malibu seemed equivalent to the 17 X 17 that came on the G23.  Roughly the same weight boat, similar 6.2 liter DI engine.  Maybe that increased cup on the Malibu prop is what makes them function so similar.  Now @Slurpee has me wanting to put my spare on with more pitch, but less cup and see if it performs better.  Maybe the increased cup does not perform the same as just increasing the pitch.  

[Slurpee]

32 minutes ago, TallRedRider said:

I have not quite understood why the 3077 on my Malibu seemed equivalent to the 17 X 17 that came on the G23.  Roughly the same weight boat, similar 6.2 liter DI engine.  Maybe that increased cup on the Malibu prop is what makes them function so similar.  Now @Slurpee has me wanting to put my spare on with more pitch, but less cup and see if it performs better.  Maybe the increased cup does not perform the same as just increasing the pitch.  

I’d love to hear the results. Please share when you do. My results were repeatable on two different boats with the same exact prop. And it was a new prop shiny out of the box. But it was a sample of one.