R5 - R6 Performance Numbers

[BobRae99]

It sounds better than 380!
Bigger is better! Or largest available as they say.
I think surf it makes sense to have the extra hp. But that 380 has it going on for some reason even though every bit of the engines are the same? 1 while second quicker that's a big deal. The gear ratio is diff on the 430. Drop a pitch it will be a stump puller? Program only thing diff? Still not sure I buy that but yes I know all parts show are the same. R7 had a different pitch prop from 380 to 430
Myself I would go down a pitch if I didn't think it was good enough. But this r6 time to plane is terrible. With less dead rise it was supposed to be better not worse. Goes to show how much weight they added.
I would wait to see what the merc shows. It might be worth the wait.
Honestly right now that 380 is the choice going by charts.
Again I sure wish we had a side by side real life comparison.

I'm not sure what gear ratio you are referring to. From the chart, it looks like both have 2.32 gearing and the same props.

I wish we could see the torque curves for both engines (380/430). Maybe the 430 has more torque available down low, but if it did, then why isn't it getting on plane quicker?

I suppose there is value in waiting for the Mercruiser numbers but it seems to me that both manufacturers seem to have similar power from their powerplant

Perhaps when Cobalt tells me the best engine for the boat is the 380, maybe they know something? They know me already and know this would be my 3rd boat in 4 years so I don't think they'd be down selling me in engine size to make the price more appealing. Maybe they think if I spend less on engine I'll spend more on Cobalt options that they have more margin on?

I could have had a bit more speed with a 380 in my current boat, but the 350 has provided plenty of power and decent speed @ 51 mph and I doubt spending an extra $5,000 was going to get me even half that back on trade.

The whole thing is a mystery.

What bbp was referring to is the 380 uses the 2.32 gear ratio and the 430 is a 2.14. So a wider gear would explain why the 430 takes longer to plane.

I'm sorry, I wasn't being clear; for the R6 the props and gearing are the same for 350/380/430 yet there is no difference in time to plane between the 380/430.

I agree, it would be nice to see the prop charts for the Mercruiser. With 430HO at 4,600 - 5,000 doesn't that translate to 490 lb ft (@4,600rpm) vs 375 @ 6,000 rpm for the VP430?

[Big Block Power]

Ok enough about this time to plane. Did anyone see a timing laser on a lake. It's all relative. How quick is your finger on a stop watch?
Count 1001. Ok that's the diff. Are you going to feel that heck no. Put the darn charts away. Quit reading books and buy the biggest baddest engine you can afford. Bbp out!

[BobRae99]

Ok enough about this time to plane. Did anyone see a timing laser on a lake. It's all relative. How quick is your finger on a stop watch?
Count 1001. Ok that's the diff. Are you going to feel that heck no. Put the darn charts away. Quit reading books and buy the biggest baddest engine you can afford. Bbp out!

I thought I would with my next boat but I need Volvo or Cobalt to tell me what the advantage of the 430 is in the R6 (they have already said the 380 is the right power). For $9,000 I can add a windlass, electric flush toilet, and sink (so we are legal for liquor - OK the pump out porta-potty would fill that requirement). But you get the idea.

If I could get a high-performance 550HP engine in the boat for an additional $15,000 that would push the boat above 60 mph, I'd have a look at it. But $9,000 for .7 mph seems a bit much.

[Big Block Power]

Ok enough about this time to plane. Did anyone see a timing laser on a lake. It's all relative. How quick is your finger on a stop watch?
Count 1001. Ok that's the diff. Are you going to feel that heck no. Put the darn charts away. Quit reading books and buy the biggest baddest engine you can afford. Bbp out!

I thought I would with my next boat but I need Volvo or Cobalt to tell me what the advantage of the 430 is in the R6 (they have already said the 380 is the right power). For $9,000 I can add a windlass, electric flush toilet, and sink (so we are legal for liquor - OK the pump out porta-potty would fill that requirement). But you get the idea.

If I could get a high-performance 550HP engine in the boat for an additional $15,000 that would push the boat above 60 mph, I'd have a look at it. But $9,000 for .7 mph seems a bit much.

Just get a 350 and let's pull it out and stick 15k worth of upgrades to it! We will get more than 550hp out of it! I promise 65mph

[BobRae99]

Ok enough about this time to plane. Did anyone see a timing laser on a lake. It's all relative. How quick is your finger on a stop watch?
Count 1001. Ok that's the diff. Are you going to feel that heck no. Put the darn charts away. Quit reading books and buy the biggest baddest engine you can afford. Bbp out!

I thought I would with my next boat but I need Volvo or Cobalt to tell me what the advantage of the 430 is in the R6 (they have already said the 380 is the right power). For $9,000 I can add a windlass, electric flush toilet, and sink (so we are legal for liquor - OK the pump out porta-potty would fill that requirement). But you get the idea.

If I could get a high-performance 550HP engine in the boat for an additional $15,000 that would push the boat above 60 mph, I'd have a look at it. But $9,000 for .7 mph seems a bit much.

Just get a 350 and let's pull it out and stick 15k worth of upgrades to it! We will get more than 550hp out of it! I promise 65mph

That's a thought

[Tuscany]

Until you go to twin engines....its all just splitting hairs...

[lespaulrob]

While we are on topic and I'm pretty much locked into the 380 at this point...Any major issues to look out for in the 380? I've heard nothing but great things about the 350's and would expect the same out of the 380.

I'm coming from a 240 v6 Merc on my Chaparral with an Alpha drive (KAAA CHUNK -when shifting). It was always seeming to need gear lube oil though. Anything like this with these Volvos?

[Big Block Power]

While we are on topic and I'm pretty much locked into the 380 at this point...Any major issues to look out for in the 380? I've heard nothing but great things about the 350's and would expect the same out of the 380.

I'm coming from a 240 v6 Merc on my Chaparral with an Alpha drive (KAAA CHUNK -when shifting). It was always seeming to need gear lube oil though. Anything like this with these Volvos?

No klunk with a volvo drive nor Bravo drive anymore. Smooth as silk. Be careful putting it in reverse. It's a rocket. They go very fast backwards.
Only issues ive heard of has been on a surf model. A few engine have hydro locked. I have my own theory of why.

[tgrace98]

While we are on topic and I'm pretty much locked into the 380 at this point...Any major issues to look out for in the 380? I've heard nothing but great things about the 350's and would expect the same out of the 380.

I'm coming from a 240 v6 Merc on my Chaparral with an Alpha drive (KAAA CHUNK -when shifting). It was always seeming to need gear lube oil though. Anything like this with these Volvos?

I’ve got the 380 in my r7. I like it a lot. Digital throttle so no chunk going in or out of gear. Dual props so easier to dock. Only thing that takes some getting use to is since the motor wraps out to 6k rpm’s you will cruise at a higher rpm’s than a merc motor

[okielaker]

While we are on topic and I'm pretty much locked into the 380 at this point...Any major issues to look out for in the 380? I've heard nothing but great things about the 350's and would expect the same out of the 380.

I'm coming from a 240 v6 Merc on my Chaparral with an Alpha drive (KAAA CHUNK -when shifting). It was always seeming to need gear lube oil though. Anything like this with these Volvos?

No klunk with a volvo drive nor Bravo drive anymore. Smooth as silk. Be careful putting it in reverse. It's a rocket. They go very fast backwards.
Only issues ive heard of has been on a surf model. A few engine have hydro locked. I have my own theory of why.

BB, I missed the post with your theory... can you post a link, or else post your theory?

[Big Block Power]

While we are on topic and I'm pretty much locked into the 380 at this point...Any major issues to look out for in the 380? I've heard nothing but great things about the 350's and would expect the same out of the 380.

I'm coming from a 240 v6 Merc on my Chaparral with an Alpha drive (KAAA CHUNK -when shifting). It was always seeming to need gear lube oil though. Anything like this with these Volvos?

No klunk with a volvo drive nor Bravo drive anymore. Smooth as silk. Be careful putting it in reverse. It's a rocket. They go very fast backwards.
Only issues ive heard of has been on a surf model. A few engine have hydro locked. I have my own theory of why.

BB, I missed the post with your theory... can you post a link, or else post your theory?

I posted it long time ago when the guys had there issue. So one happened loading it on the trailer. So the trailer in the water, bow up and transom down and could have the ballast still in?
But anyways I think the water line got above the risers, then he was on and off the gas hard and quick and boom water reversion.

Second one same way still had ballast and was coming into a no wake zone and backed off fast and water reversion happened.
Get the rear end down low and back off. Just not a good combo. That's my theory.

[sailor55330]

In my humble opinion, you guys are overthinking the time to plane. Since Malibalt is now using one hull for BR, surf, and OB versions and have flattened the bottom (less deadrise), they are expecting the boat to push through the water at lower speeds to make the wave, not get on top of the surface. That's what they feel everyone wants now. Looking for top speed or fastest time to plane is not as relevant as it once was based on marketing data is my guess hence the emphasis on the surf models and hulls. Besides, in most cases listed in the time to plane graphic you are talking about tenths of a second between engine and drive combos. I'm more concerned about the new weight for those of us who trailer on a regular basis.

Any of the engines will move the boat adequately in the eyes of Malibalt or they wouldn't offer it. If you need bigger engines or HP in your mind, then get it, if not, buy what fits the budget and move on.

[lespaulrob]

In my humble opinion, you guys are overthinking the time to plane. Since Malibalt is now using one hull for BR, surf, and OB versions and have flattened the bottom (less deadrise), they are expecting the boat to push through the water at lower speeds to make the wave, not get on top of the surface. That's what they feel everyone wants now. Looking for top speed or fastest time to plane is not as relevant as it once was based on marketing data is my guess hence the emphasis on the surf models and hulls. Besides, in most cases listed in the time to plane graphic you are talking about tenths of a second between engine and drive combos. I'm more concerned about the new weight for those of us who trailer on a regular basis.

Any of the engines will move the boat adequately in the eyes of Malibalt or they wouldn't offer it. If you need bigger engines or HP in your mind, then get it, if not, buy what fits the budget and move on.

Top speed isn't a real issue for me as I rarely will run it hammer down. Not sure if I'd even be able to tell the difference on the top end between 49 and 53 though...it just wouldn't matter than much on my little lake.

[tgrace98]

In my humble opinion, you guys are overthinking the time to plane. Since Malibalt is now using one hull for BR, surf, and OB versions and have flattened the bottom (less deadrise), they are expecting the boat to push through the water at lower speeds to make the wave, not get on top of the surface. That's what they feel everyone wants now. Looking for top speed or fastest time to plane is not as relevant as it once was based on marketing data is my guess hence the emphasis on the surf models and hulls. Besides, in most cases listed in the time to plane graphic you are talking about tenths of a second between engine and drive combos. I'm more concerned about the new weight for those of us who trailer on a regular basis.

Any of the engines will move the boat adequately in the eyes of Malibalt or they wouldn't offer it. If you need bigger engines or HP in your mind, then get it, if not, buy what fits the budget and move on.

Top speed isn't a real issue for me as I rarely will run it hammer down. Not sure if I'd even be able to tell the difference on the top end between 49 and 53 though...it just wouldn't matter than much on my little lake.

More top end and more HP just means you are working the motor less at cruising speed. That is always my thought when picking a motor/drive combo.

But also like Tuscany said earlier. When talking single motors we are splitting hairs as we are talking about a mph or 2. I went with the 380 in my R7 and have no regrets. Would I love to tell people I have the 430 sure. But am very glad I didn't get the smaller 5.3/350

[FirstStar]

Can someone explain the R5 prop chart showing two different performance numbers for the same engine, gearing, and props? Catalyzed vs non?

Did I miss the explanation?