2023 23LSV Prop swap report

[mikehos]

We recently upgraded our beloved 2007 21 VLX to a 2023 23LSV.  Loving the new features of the new boat and also missing a few things from the OG.

One thing I didn't love about the new boat was the cabin noise and high RPM's while surfing and wakeboarding, and the loss of the great exhaust note from the strait pipes of the OG to the surf pipe.  I understand the benefits of the surf pipe and will learn to live with it.  

Objective for changing out the props was to lower RPM's and lessen the cabin noise without loosing performance.

Our 23 LSV is equipped with the M6Di motor and came with the OJ 1718 which is a 17" x 15.5" pitch prop.

The elevation of our local lakes range from 450 to 700 feet. Depending on the lake we choose.

After reading several opinions on this forum and consulting with my local prop shop, Nettles, I chose the ACME 2805 which is a 17" x 17" 

https://www.nettleprops.com/store/p/2220-Acme-2805-Propeller-4-Blade-17-x-17-LH-1-1/4-Bore-105-Cup.aspx

Conclusion

A significant decrease in cabin noise and an appreciable decrease in RPM's.  RPM's dropped by ~ 500 RPM's. 

The Motor at our elevation handles it perfectly with 0 appreciable loss in hole shot.

Everyone in the boat commented on the significant decrease in noise.

The swap exceeded my expectations.  I also highly recommend Nettles online store. The price was great and the new prop delivered in two days.

 

Additional info.

We had 7 people onboard.  Our ideal surf settings are, full ballast, including piggybacks at 100% except for the opposite surf side rear at 25%.  1 person in the bow and wedge between 3-5. 11.2 MPH

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 6, 2023 by mikehos

[NWBU]

The 2805 is a great prop - good write-up!

[dizzygti]

Thanks for sharing.  I'm torn between 17x17 and 18x16....arrghhhh decisions decisions.   

[Swatski]

On 8/6/2023 at 12:24 PM, mikehos said:

We recently upgraded our beloved 2007 21 VLX to a 2023 23LSV.  Loving the new features of the new boat and also missing a few things from the OG.

One thing I didn't love about the new boat was the cabin noise and high RPM's while surfing and wakeboarding, and the loss of the great exhaust note from the strait pipes of the OG to the surf pipe.  I understand the benefits of the surf pipe and will learn to live with it.  

Objective for changing out the props was to lower RPM's and lessen the cabin noise without loosing performance.

Our 23 LSV is equipped with the M6Di motor and came with the OJ 1718 which is a 17" x 15.5" pitch prop.

The elevation of our local lakes range from 450 to 700 feet. Depending on the lake we choose.

After reading several opinions on this forum and consulting with my local prop shop, Nettles, I chose the ACME 2805 which is a 17" x 17" 

https://www.nettleprops.com/store/p/2220-Acme-2805-Propeller-4-Blade-17-x-17-LH-1-1/4-Bore-105-Cup.aspx

Conclusion

A significant decrease in cabin noise and an appreciable decrease in RPM's.  RPM's dropped by ~ 500 RPM's. 

The Motor at our elevation handles it perfectly with 0 appreciable loss in hole shot.

Everyone in the boat commented on the significant decrease in noise.

The swap exceeded my expectations.  I also highly recommend Nettles online store. The price was great and the new prop delivered in two days.

 

Additional info.

We had 7 people onboard.  Our ideal surf settings are, full ballast, including piggybacks at 100% except for the opposite surf side rear at 25%.  1 person in the bow and wedge between 3-5. 11.2 MPH

 

 

 

 

 

Great writeup and thank you for sharing.  Great price on the 2805!

I just did something very similar for very similar reasons, the boat is my new 2022 23 lsv with an M5, I'm under 50 hours and was quite disappointed with performance with the factory prop (3537 - "torque prop" or something - 15" x 14??) clearly seemed underpropped.  This being my first ever inboard/v-drive I was just not sure (my other boats are/were outboards and/or yamaha jetboats.

The M5 seemed very high revving to the point of being annoying.

I switched to acme 17x17 (2805) and the boat is a different animal. Absolutely better setup and all-around improvements, to me.  I'm still able to surf with full ballast plus PNPs and wedge any position. We surf at 10.8 at barely over 3k RPM now. It's great! and super quiet. Fully ballasted (factory + PNP + 500+ lead) the hole shot is slower but the cruise and top speed is awesome. Really feels like a different boat. 

Keep in mind, this is all with M5 and regular fuel (87 octane) under 1,000' elevation. I'm assuming your numbers would be with premium gas w/M6? I'm not having a lot of luck finding good info on M5 octane actual requirement, if it's tuned to benefit from higher octane as M6 is. 

[Swatski]

FWIW - I find the M5, so far, to be more than adequate in this boat. We have had 10+ crews and I have the PNPs and lead and no issues. with the 2805 top speed is over 40mph w/reg gas.

The boat was a dealer leftover which came optioned with everything I would want EXCEPT the M6, so I was a bit torn buying it.

I had no idea what to expect, there is only that much you can get out of a sea trial. Everything seemed to work great, but I was surprised it came underpropped.

BTW - it is the opposite to what happens in outboard world - new boats with outboards tend to come over propped from factory/dealer. I guess different scenarios they are concerned with, the Bu needs to pull a big crew and ballast, in salt it's more about speed and fuel economy.  

EDIT: the 2805 made a huge difference. Given it is w/ an M5, I can not think of one reason this prop would not be a go-to in M6 23 boats, other than at extreme elevations. 

Edited August 10, 2023 by Swatski

[dizzygti]

1 hour ago, Swatski said:

Keep in mind, this is all with M5 and regular fuel (87 octane) under 1,000' elevation. I'm assuming your numbers would be with premium gas w/M6? I'm not having a lot of luck finding good info on M5 octane actual requirement, if it's tuned to benefit from higher octane as M6 is. 

Where'd you see this?  

Edited August 10, 2023 by dizzygti

[teamerickson]

From the Axis webpage. https://www.axiswake.com/go-all-out/malibu-monsoon-engines

"The team at Axis Wake Research designed the M5Di and M6DI engines to work with Regular 87 Octane with up to 10% Ethanol — which means you can fill up your Axis at any local fuel station. While the M5Di and M6Di will run all day long on regular fuel, to reach peak performance, premium fuel will help you get that last bit of torque and horsepower out of your engine."

Edited August 10, 2023 by teamerickson

[dizzygti]

1 hour ago, teamerickson said:

From the Axis webpage. https://www.axiswake.com/go-all-out/malibu-monsoon-engines

"The team at Axis Wake Research designed the M5Di and M6DI engines to work with Regular 87 Octane with up to 10% Ethanol — which means you can fill up your Axis at any local fuel station. While the M5Di and M6Di will run all day long on regular fuel, to reach peak performance, premium fuel will help you get that last bit of torque and horsepower out of your engine."

Yeah, that's all real generic marketing stuff, and doesn't clearly state that M6 will benefit from higher octane and M5 won't, which is what Swatski implied.   

 

If you watch the video here @ ~1:30 mark, the calibration engineers specifically state both are tuned on 87 octane.   Whether you think this means they tune on 87 and will gain on higher, or that you will lose performance compared to higher if you run on 87, it begs the question of how much does the performance vary either way?   I just had never seen anyone say the M6 was more capable on octane flexibility compared to the M5.   

[Swatski]

1 hour ago, dizzygti said:

Yeah, that's all real generic marketing stuff, and doesn't clearly state that M6 will benefit from higher octane and M5 won't, which is what Swatski implied.   

 

If you watch the video here @ ~1:30 mark, the calibration engineers specifically state both are tuned on 87 octane.   Whether you think this means they tune on 87 and will gain on higher, or that you will lose performance compared to higher if you run on 87, it begs the question of how much does the performance vary either way?   I just had never seen anyone say the M6 was more capable on octane flexibility compared to the M5.   

I have zero expert knowledge on the subject and just some rudimentary info coming from online chats such as this one: https://www.tahoeyukonforum.com/threads/best-octane-fuel-for-fuel-eceonomy-5-3l-only.120104/

Totally showing my ignorance! 

From what I think I understand the automotive 5.3 and 6.2s can both run on regular; the 6.2 can benefit substantially from premium gas, at least in part due to the ability to adjust timing and other parameters based on ignition feedback (knock etc.); it is not necessarily the same for the much less advanced 5.3 which may or may not show substantial gains with premium (vs regular)

 

What I actually know is this:

I took a bold step of switching from the factory-equipped "torque" prop (3537, 16.5" x 14") to a much larger wheel (2805, 17" x 17"), in part based on reading this forum and how well those 2805s work in other boats. 

My experience, so far, indicates the M5 (2:1 transmission) in my 2022 23 lsv works extremely well with the 2805. 

That made me wonder: how much actual difference is there in peak torque and power between the 5.3 and the 6.2 (M5 vsM6) running at low elevation w/regular gas. I would not be surprised if it isn't much (if  the M6 underperforms on regular while the M5 is at its peak, or close to it)?

 

Just sharing my non-expert observations, don't kill the messenger, lol

Edited August 10, 2023 by Swatski

[bcoppess23]

I would think the biggest difference you may see would be the load that the same prop would put on the different motors - or potential octane levels.  It sounds as if the m5 runs the Acme 2805  / OJ 1770 (similar) around 3-3300 rpms and that is true of the m6 with the 1770.

[Swatski]

3 hours ago, bcoppess23 said:

I would think the biggest difference you may see would be the load that the same prop would put on the different motors - or potential octane levels.  It sounds as if the m5 runs the Acme 2805  / OJ 1770 (similar) around 3-3300 rpms and that is true of the m6 with the 1770.

It looks like the OJ 1770 is the same size and pitch (17x17) as 2805, nominally, albeit 1770 has more aggressive cupping. pretty close overall. 

As the OP indicated 2805 works great in his M6 23 lsv. I find that the 2805 also works great with the M5 23 lsv. I don't have any meaningful data on fuel consumption other than the lsv sips gas compared to my edgewater 280cx with twin F300s, lol

 

I had many reservations buying the 23 lsv, yet gradually fell in love with the boat. it's a keeper. perfect size and performance, once I swapped the prop. 

Edited August 11, 2023 by Swatski

[dizzygti]

16 hours ago, Swatski said:

I have zero expert knowledge on the subject and just some rudimentary info coming from online chats such as this one: https://www.tahoeyukonforum.com/threads/best-octane-fuel-for-fuel-eceonomy-5-3l-only.120104/

Totally showing my ignorance! 

From what I think I understand the automotive 5.3 and 6.2s can both run on regular; the 6.2 can benefit substantially from premium gas, at least in part due to the ability to adjust timing and other parameters based on ignition feedback (knock etc.); it is not necessarily the same for the much less advanced 5.3 which may or may not show substantial gains with premium (vs regular)

 

What I actually know is this:

I took a bold step of switching from the factory-equipped "torque" prop (3537, 16.5" x 14") to a much larger wheel (2805, 17" x 17"), in part based on reading this forum and how well those 2805s work in other boats. 

My experience, so far, indicates the M5 (2:1 transmission) in my 2022 23 lsv works extremely well with the 2805. 

That made me wonder: how much actual difference is there in peak torque and power between the 5.3 and the 6.2 (M5 vsM6) running at low elevation w/regular gas. I would not be surprised if it isn't much (if  the M6 underperforms on regular while the M5 is at its peak, or close to it)?

 

Just sharing my non-expert observations, don't kill the messenger, lol

Why is the 5.3 much less advanced?   They're both 11:1 compression ratios, both have same cam phasing, I assume both the same ignition systems.  I would say it's a safe bet that the only difference between the engines is the bore size and piston size.   

[teamerickson]

or a tune?

[dizzygti]

What's frustrating is the lack of documentation on everything but especially the engines!   

[Swatski]

7 hours ago, dizzygti said:

Why is the 5.3 much less advanced?   They're both 11:1 compression ratios, both have same cam phasing, I assume both the same ignition systems.  I would say it's a safe bet that the only difference between the engines is the bore size and piston size.   

Are you sure the compression ratio is the same? I believe the 5.3 is lower, the 6.2 is high. at least the automotive versions are. 

that'd be a major factor when running lower octane, the 6.2 may not tolerate it well due to higher compression as ECU adjusts timing and other parameters to reduce knocking, while 5.3 would be much less susceptible to that (if it uses lower compression ratios). 

consequently, if that is the case performance delta for M6 running regular vs premium gas would be larger than M5 so the two may have power/torque outputs closer than it would appear based on stated values in Malibu manuals. 

[dizzygti]

On 8/11/2023 at 4:29 PM, Swatski said:

Are you sure the compression ratio is the same? I believe the 5.3 is lower, the 6.2 is high. at least the automotive versions are. 

that'd be a major factor when running lower octane, the 6.2 may not tolerate it well due to higher compression as ECU adjusts timing and other parameters to reduce knocking, while 5.3 would be much less susceptible to that (if it uses lower compression ratios). 

consequently, if that is the case performance delta for M6 running regular vs premium gas would be larger than M5 so the two may have power/torque outputs closer than it would appear based on stated values in Malibu manuals. 

Everything I've seen has said they are both 11:1.  On the left, about 2/3rds down and above the videos....

https://www.malibuboats.com/discover-malibu/malibu-monsoon-engines

[Swatski]

1 minute ago, dizzygti said:

Everything I've seen has said they are both 11:1.  On the left, about 2/3rds down and above the videos....

https://www.malibuboats.com/discover-malibu/malibu-monsoon-engines

That's interesting, Malibu changed the compression ratio of the GM 5.3 small block engine (to match the 6.2) after several decades in automotive production?

[EchelonMike]

On 8/10/2023 at 10:08 AM, Swatski said:

FWIW - I find the M5, so far, to be more than adequate in this boat. We have had 10+ crews and I have the PNPs and lead and no issues. with the 2805 top speed is over 40mph w/reg gas.

The boat was a dealer leftover which came optioned with everything I would want EXCEPT the M6, so I was a bit torn buying it.

I had no idea what to expect, there is only that much you can get out of a sea trial. Everything seemed to work great, but I was surprised it came underpropped.

BTW - it is the opposite to what happens in outboard world - new boats with outboards tend to come over propped from factory/dealer. I guess different scenarios they are concerned with, the Bu needs to pull a big crew and ballast, in salt it's more about speed and fuel economy.  

EDIT: the 2805 made a huge difference. Given it is w/ an M5, I can not think of one reason this prop would not be a go-to in M6 23 boats, other than at extreme elevations. 

This is really helpful feedback for me.  We found a similar boat we love that has everything we want except for the M6.  Our elevation and use seem to match yours so good to know that with a prop change we can have it do what we want it to do.  Thanks for sharing.

[EchelonMike]

On 8/10/2023 at 9:56 AM, Swatski said:

I just did something very similar for very similar reasons, the boat is my new 2022 23 lsv with an M5, I'm under 50 hours and was quite disappointed with performance with the factory prop (3537 - "torque prop" or something - 15" x 14??) clearly seemed underpropped.  This being my first ever inboard/v-drive I was just not sure (my other boats are/were outboards and/or yamaha jetboats.

The M5 seemed very high revving to the point of being annoying.

I switched to acme 17x17 (2805) and the boat is a different animal. Absolutely better setup and all-around improvements, to me.  I'm still able to surf with full ballast plus PNPs and wedge any position. We surf at 10.8 at barely over 3k RPM now. It's great! and super quiet. Fully ballasted (factory + PNP + 500+ lead) the hole shot is slower but the cruise and top speed is awesome. Really feels like a different boat. 

I just put my 2022 23 LSV with the M5 in the water for the first time.  On the test drive, I noticed the same thing - that the boat felt under-propped.  I couldn't see what prop was on the boat when I test drove it before buying.  Once I bought it and got the window sticker, I saw it was the same as yours (3537).  This thread was so helpful for me - I ordered the 2805 about a month ago.

Before launching yesterday, I swapped to the 2805 and wow, what a different boat.  So quiet and turns much fewer revs.  With 100% fuel and two people it easily hit low 40s too.  I have the Sumo 650 PnP bags installed and it easily got on plane with full wedge and all ballast full.  Really excited about how well it performed!  Bring on summer!

 

[NWBU]

17 hours ago, EchelonMike said:

I swapped to the 2805 and wow, what a different boat.  So quiet and turns much fewer revs.

Very nice! Why every 23 LSV doesn't come with that prop as stock is one of life's mysteries. 

Such an easy way to surprise and delight customers, rather than leave them underwhelmed and potentially frustrated after a huge and exciting purchase.  

[Swatski]

On 4/28/2024 at 7:51 PM, EchelonMike said:

I just put my 2022 23 LSV with the M5 in the water for the first time.  On the test drive, I noticed the same thing - that the boat felt under-propped.  I couldn't see what prop was on the boat when I test drove it before buying.  Once I bought it and got the window sticker, I saw it was the same as yours (3537).  This thread was so helpful for me - I ordered the 2805 about a month ago.

Before launching yesterday, I swapped to the 2805 and wow, what a different boat.  So quiet and turns much fewer revs.  With 100% fuel and two people it easily hit low 40s too.  I have the Sumo 650 PnP bags installed and it easily got on plane with full wedge and all ballast full.  Really excited about how well it performed!  Bring on summer!

 

Great feedback, thank you.

My 3537 is now a spare. I took it to a reputable prop shop and they are adding some pitch and cup. I'll report the results back.