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!

202/ A22 with M5 - dealer pushing OJ 1997 15x12 prop vs Standard


TommyTuna

Recommended Posts

Hi folks - need some advice on propping my soon to be ordered A22 /M5. Dealer added a “hi altitude torque prop” upgrade to the quote which is an OJ 1997 15x12. We are at 600 ft elevation but dealer insisting I need it if we want to plane up with boat totally full of riders and sacks full.

I am wondering if the “standard” prop Acme 2249 is a better choice. Here is my primary set of activities 

- 60 % cruising lake to sandbar with 4-8 ppl

-25% surfing - likely with no more then 8 people

- 15% tubing

i don’t expect to do any wakeboarding and if we do definitely not running a lot of ballast or ppl

I value getting decent economy and speed when cruising without pushing the engine too hard as we typically go 20 miles each way to the sandbar or town. 

let me know what the best prop would be for above. I realize this is always a series of trade offs but hope to find the sweet spot or maybe a prop in between the above

 

 

Link to post
wakesonthesnake

Order what you want.  You should have a spare anyway and after you use it a bit you will have a better idea what you need.

Link to post

From my experience, the high altitude prop makes it easier to hold a more consistent speed while surfing with full ballast and using the wedge.  The standard prop will give you a higher cruising speed and top speed, but it can cause some speed 'hunting' or surging from the set speed when the boat is heavily loaded and using the speed control.

Link to post

We had a 2020 22 LSV (your boat should heaver) with the M5 at about the same altitude, std prop, cant find what that was.  We usually had an 8 person crew, it worked very hard and to my ear sometimes seemed to struggle but always was able to plane.  I would not be shocked if you told me that with a full legal crew it would not plane.  My guess is that your dealer has had a customer have that experience and does not want to encounter it again.

With 60% (presume you mean time) running being cruse there is a big red flag on both prop selection and range.

Attached article is for the 23 MXZ with a fuel consumption chart that matches my impression of what happens with us RE fuel consumption.  We are running a 17x 15.5 behind an M6, the article tested an M5 in front of a 17 x 15.  Some of this is a hull thing and some of it is a rpm issue.  Your boat will be lighter but very similar hull.

If you go with an altitude  prop that increases RPM your fuel consumption will go up as well.  If you are really traveling 20 miles to the sandbar you need to look at how fast you will be running and how much play time you will have while there.  Our last lake trip we used 30-34 gallons a day (we have a 59 gallons tank, I think the A22 has 42, that is not usable, that is the tank size) the one day I had to run from a storm and ran at 34 mph rather than the usual 23 we used 42 gallons.  Our sprint was much less than 20 miles.  I would be really hesitant on going with a slower prop and run some numbers on how much fuel/range you have and where you can fill up when you get low.

https://www.boatingmag.com/story/boats/malibu-wakesetter-23-mxz-boat-test/

Link to post

I have a 15x13 Acme on my M5 at @ 340’ ASL. I can’t see how roughly 300’ and the blade construction difference between the OJ and the Acme could make much difference in performance, BICBW. If we are comparing apples to apples and if you truly only surf 25% and cruise 60% of the time you will absolutely HATE that prop for how you are going to be using the boat! With the 15x13 I typically live at @ 3800 rpm surfing and 3700ish rpm at 20mph cruising. If I were to switch to a 15x12 I bet it would raise my rpm by another 200 rpm. Crazy! On a whim I borrowed my buddies spare 16x15 from his SL400 Supra for a weekend. Holy 💩, but thats another story. IIWM, I would definitely consider another prop and best bet would be to drive the prop on the boat. With no other alternative before you order it, “I/me” would order the non HA prop and test another prop once you get the boat broken in. JM2C

Link to post
formerathlete

I’d stick with the 2249 and maybe go with the 15x13 ACME 2773 as a spare. 15x12 is overkill for what you’d be doing and not very economical. JM2C. 

Link to post

Thx folks for input - this really helps  - tend to agree that I should probably order with 2249 and then see how it goes as that is the standard prop with no up charge (dealer wants $350 $CAD upgrade for OJ vs standard).  I am assuming Malibu would be picking the standard prop based on mixed use and some testing of their own?

Then after breaking in if I see struggles surfing etc look at a spare prop more tuned to surfing. Agree that one should always have a spare on hand.

Q: is there a prop that is somewhere in between the 2249 and the OJ 1997?

Link to post
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Surf4FamFun said:

We had a 2020 22 LSV (your boat should heaver) with the M5 at about the same altitude, std prop, cant find what that was.  We usually had an 8 person crew, it worked very hard and to my ear sometimes seemed to struggle but always was able to plane.  I would not be shocked if you told me that with a full legal crew it would not plane.  My guess is that your dealer has had a customer have that experience and does not want to encounter it again.

With 60% (presume you mean time) running being cruse there is a big red flag on both prop selection and range.

Attached article is for the 23 MXZ with a fuel consumption chart that matches my impression of what happens with us RE fuel consumption.  We are running a 17x 15.5 behind an M6, the article tested an M5 in front of a 17 x 15.  Some of this is a hull thing and some of it is a rpm issue.  Your boat will be lighter but very similar hull.

If you go with an altitude  prop that increases RPM your fuel consumption will go up as well.  If you are really traveling 20 miles to the sandbar you need to look at how fast you will be running and how much play time you will have while there.  Our last lake trip we used 30-34 gallons a day (we have a 59 gallons tank, I think the A22 has 42, that is not usable, that is the tank size) the one day I had to run from a storm and ran at 34 mph rather than the usual 23 we used 42 gallons.  Our sprint was much less than 20 miles.  I would be really hesitant on going with a slower prop and run some numbers on how much fuel/range you have and where you can fill up when you get low.

https://www.boatingmag.com/story/boats/malibu-wakesetter-23-mxz-boat-test/

Wowsers - that is quite the fuel burn at 34 mph. We don’t mind cruising in mid 20s but even that seems like it could tax mileage / economy with the OJ 1997.  Thx for passing along above article.

I had a read and pleasantly surprised that the much heavier MXZ (5500 lbs vs 4500 lbs for A22) was able to hit 3MPG and top speed of 42 mpg with a M5!

Our current hurricane 19 ft deck boat with Etec on back does 3.7 MPG at 30MPH but much less space and not much fun anymore:)

I am assuming the A22 would put up better economy numbers then the Malibu in the article with M5 and standard prop.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by TommyTuna
Link to post

If you were coming from an older wake boat with like my 2010 350 Monsoon, the  DI M5 will definitely put up better fuel economy numbers and most likely better in the A due to less weight. Although in the new A series that might not be true anymore. MPG is a pointless buzz kill for me. I go by smiles per gallon and don’t worry about it. Top end with the 15x13 was 40 mph @4900-5000rpm which was all that my better judgement would reasonably allow me to run for just a few seconds. You can not wake board with this prop unless you run little to no ballast!

Link to post
formerathlete
1 hour ago, TommyTuna said:

Q: is there a prop that is somewhere in between the 2249 and the OJ 1997?

ACME 2773.

 

2249: 15x14.25 with .105 cup

1997: 15x12 with .120 cup

2773 15x13 with .105 cup

Its not perfectly in between but it’s close. That’d be my suggestion. But even then, I think you’re gonna be very happy with the 2249 for your application. 2773 would be a prop to throw on at higher elevation or if you’re going to be fully loaded and wakeboard. Again, JM2C. I have a ‘19 A22 with 409 and boat came with 2249. It’s a great prop for our boat when we really want to load it down or we are high elevation. Our everyday prop is a 2279 15x15.75 with .105 cup (more of a “speed” prop) and it’s enough for us to do just about everything we ever do and gets better fuel economy cruising big lakes here in WA and when reluctantly pull tubes (but we never wakeboard with ballast full). 

Edited by formerathlete
Link to post
8 minutes ago, formerathlete said:

ACME 2773.

 

2249: 15x14.25 with .105 cup

1997: 15x12 with .120 cup

2773 15x13 with .105 cup

Its not perfectly in between but it’s close. That’d be my suggestion. But even then, I think you’re gonna be very happy with the 2249 for your application. 2773 would be a prop to throw on at higher elevation or if you’re going to be fully loaded and wakeboard. Again, JM2C. I have a ‘19 A22 with 409 and boat came with 2249. It’s a great prop for our boat when we really want to load it down or we are high elevation. Our everyday prop is a 2279 15x15.75 with .105 cup (more of a “speed” prop) and it’s enough for us to do just about everything we ever do and gets better fuel economy cruising big lakes here in WA and when reluctantly pull tubes (but we never wakeboard with ballast full). 

How is your 2279 at surfing? I am similar in that I won’t wakeboard w/ full ballast but will surf and cruise with odd tube ride in between.

Link to post
formerathlete

We surf at around sea level for the most part (give or take a few hundred feet). Our typical crew is 2-4 adults and 2-4 young kids. Ballast plan for us when surfing is fill bow bag and center tank all the way (440 bag in bow) plus about 100# in observers compartment. If we have crew up in bow, we can fill rear tanks and 750 locker bags all the way. If no crew up front, we fill rear locker bags about 3/4. With all that, it does fine at 11mph. It sits around 3500 RPM with power wedge at “4”.  If too much weight in rear, it kicks up to 3800 but still does okay holding speed. 

Edited by formerathlete
Link to post
formerathlete

Just reread your OP, I don’t think you’ll need to go down in pitch for your spare. I think 2249 is all the prop you’ll need for those “heavy” days. I’m coming from a different motor but the M5 has more torque than the 409 and it’s peak torque is where you want it most…in the mid-3000 range. Is the gear ratio still 1.72:1 on the new M5/A22? All I mentioned above is assuming it is but I don’t know. 

Edited by formerathlete
Link to post
26 minutes ago, formerathlete said:

Just reread your OP, I don’t think you’ll need to go down in pitch for your spare. I think 2249 is all the prop you’ll need for those “heavy” days. I’m coming from a different motor but the M5 has more torque than the 409 and it’s peak torque is where you want it most…in the mid-3000 range. Is the gear ratio still 1.72:1 on the new M5/A22? All I mentioned above is assuming it is but I don’t know. 

Yes tranny is 1.72:1.  2249 sounds like good starting point until I break it in and see if anything is left to be desired. 

Link to post
3 hours ago, TommyTuna said:

Wowsers - that is quite the fuel burn at 34 mph. We don’t mind cruising in mid 20s but even that seems like it could tax mileage / economy with the OJ 1997.  Thx for passing along above article.

I had a read and pleasantly surprised that the much heavier MXZ (5500 lbs vs 4500 lbs for A22) was able to hit 3MPG and top speed of 42 mpg with a M5!

Our current hurricane 19 ft deck boat with Etec on back does 3.7 MPG at 30MPH but much less space and not much fun anymore:)

I am assuming the A22 would put up better economy numbers then the Malibu in the article with M5 and standard prop.

 

 

 

 

 

Our 2020 22 LSV M5 and 2021 23 LSV M6 both hit 38.x top speed tanks dry and me in the boat.

Link to post

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...