In my outboard motor experience (fair amount of outboard experience and currently have an I/O - no experience with inboards YET), I have noticed that in some cases you can actually purchase a larger HP engine and achieve better mpg/gph depending on average RPM/speed/weight/etc. If you are pushing a smaller engine hard, it may be that a bigger engine may actually give you better fuel economy. I cannot stand to be under powered so as I begin my search for a real wake boat, was wondering what your experience is along these lines (i.e. pay for the power up-front and you will not notice a big difference in fuel economy or you may get better economy since it is used under load most of the time). Before you call me out, I assume some may make the statement that if you can afford a wake boat, you should not ask about fuel economy - I have money but am still cheap. <BR> <BR>Thanks in advance for the feedback.

When considering HP, make sure you test with FULL ballast and FULL people/gear load....I don't hear too many compaints about too much HP...

Do not buy an underpowered boat. You will regret it. If you buy and underpowered boat, your fuel economy will suck as well because the engine will be working hard all the time.

It depends on how much you will be loading the boat, IMO 310-330hp is more than enough for the average rider in most wakeboard boats with a 2500lbs load. Plus the correct Propeller.

There are so many factors, you cannot get a hard and fast rule, but you are right, many times more HP does not mean decreased fuel economy. Case in point, my old boat was 20ft with a 5.7l (350) in it. My father in law had an 18 with the 3.0l in it. Both i/o. We would go out for the day. At then end of the day my boat had more hours, typically under heavier load (he did not pull boarders) and yet, mine would have burned less gas.

Here is a silly question. Why would a reputible WAKE boat company sell a boat that is under powered? <BR> <BR>If it has stock sacks and is rated for 11 people, you would hope that their minimum engine/prop configuration would be acceptable (maybe not as fast and maybe take a little longer to pull you out of the water - but still acceptable). I can see them recommending a larger engine if you ALWAYS ride with 11 people and full sacks. <BR> <BR>Soooo...what is the point of offering 2 or 3 engine options? <BR> <BR>And don't forget my original question about GPH and Horse Power. <BR> <BR>Just trying to get educated before the plunge. <BR> <BR>Thanks...

You sort of answered your own question. Wakeboat manufactures offer more engine choices for those that will routinely load there boat to the max weight and beyond. <BR> <BR>Perhaps the better question is why they build boats that beg to be loaded past the coast gaurd rating. <BR> <BR>As far as GPH vs. HP, there is once again, no such thing as a hard and fast rule. My current boat is 400 hp from 6.1l, and uses more than 340 hp from 5.7 l, but less than 450 hp from 8.1l. So for my specific boat, the larger (8.1) will never burn less fuel than my 6.1. <BR> <BR>The only exception I can see to this is the Northstar motor offered in MC. It uses technology that is nature more fuel efficient.

On the far other end are the Toyota boat engines. Many of those Northstar traits but in a real small displacement - 4.0L. 300HP and 315 ft/lbs. I just averaged 3.3 GPH over 30 engine hours at Havasu. This was not all channel cruising, and we did do a lot of over 30mph cruising and some lightly-ballasted riding. My normal consumption is under 4GPH with a small crew and 1600 pounds. Pretty sure no 8.1 is gonna ever touch that. <BR> <BR>OTOH, if you like to ride with a pro wake, my little Lexus will never satisfy you, and it'd never push the big new boats out of the hole. It got 3000 pounds out with a stock prop, but the third guy in the boat had to walk forward ;-) <BR> <BR> <BR>It seems hard to me that anyone would pass up implementing things like variable valve timing, quad cams, hemi, distributorless ignition, 10.5:1 compression, etc. in any size engine. Mine's all-aluminum which is cool in terms of cooling and trailering, but bad if you like running in salt. <BR> <BR>It'd be great to have all this stuff with a 5.7L, fo sho, but to just throw a zillion pushrod, two-valve cubic inches at the problem can't be good for fuel economy. My vote's for Northstar.