Wake 101
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (chrisbucklin)      Join Date: Mar 2012       03-21-2012, 2:17 AM Reply   
im lookin at buying a 2011-12 nautique,230. would the bigger motor b a buying point? i found one i like with a 343 in it but wouldnt want to b dissapointed. also im goin to this from a 210...lookin for advice.thank u
Old     (Brian)      Join Date: Jun 2011       03-21-2012, 5:26 AM Reply   
I'd go with the 409 in the 230, because no matter how much weight you throw in it, she won't struggle.

If your looking at a 210, the 343 is fine. I run 850 extra in the bow with an extra 1500 in the rear on top of the stock ballast and she does fine.
Old     (nautiboy614)      Join Date: Dec 2010       03-21-2012, 5:52 AM Reply   
you gotta go for the 409.....If you need it, it's there!
Old     (wakecumberland)      Join Date: Oct 2007       03-21-2012, 7:11 AM Reply   
I've spent quite a bit of time in and behind a 230 with the 343. We have loaded with 2500 on top of factory ballast and it had no problem getting on plane. No way would I spend and extra $6,000 or whatever Nautique wants for the 409. Brian A said above, the 343 is fine in the 210....but not in the 230??? If its ok in the 210, it should be ok in the 230. Look at the dry weights of both boats:

SAN 210 3900lbs

SAN 230 4400lbs

500 lbs is not much of a difference in a 4000 lb boat. I wouldn't waste the money on it.
Old     (DealsGapCobra)      Join Date: May 2010       03-21-2012, 8:01 AM Reply   
Having the extra power available is never a bad thing but it sure does come at a price. Why not test the one with the 343 and see what you think?
Old     (migs)      Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: SF Bay Area       03-21-2012, 8:31 AM Reply   
343 will do the job especially re-propped. But if u can swing it, 409 & dont look back.
Old     (Capt_Moe)      Join Date: Dec 2011       03-21-2012, 8:52 AM Reply   
It depends on location. Where do you plan on boating. If you are always at sea level, go with the 343. Nautique rec. 409 for all boats over 3000 elevation. Just sayin.
I wonder how the 343 will do with 4k of ballast in the boat?
Old     (chrisbucklin)      Join Date: Mar 2012       03-21-2012, 4:59 PM Reply   
Thanks for the input on the motors on the 230. I'm looking to but a 2010 or newer. Any reason to really look at the newer ones or 2010 ok? I have a 210 now and want bigger!
Old     (nautiquesonly)      Join Date: Sep 2007       03-21-2012, 6:20 PM Reply   
Dry weights may be close but a 230 holds like 52 gallons of gas which is probably 15-20 more than the 210. I would say that loaded with more gas more people and more junk, the 230 is probably 1200 to 1500 lbs heavier when fully loaded. Not to mention you would probably put more weight in the 230 to get the wake you want. If u aren't planning on slamming the boat it may not be a big deal. When I sold my 236 every buyer asked and seemed to want a zr6. U are looking at used so u won't pay 6k for that upgrade because of the depreciation the previous owner took. You may not get a ton more for it at resale but the bigger engine will help it sell quicker.
Old     (tdc_worm)      Join Date: Sep 2002       03-21-2012, 7:02 PM Reply   
follow this link for more anecdotal experience and less HP junkies:

in short, torque is more important than HP. look at the torque curves of the base engines as they are sourced from GM. at the RPM where we use our wakeboard boats, the torque diff in negligible. i have run 210s, 220s, and 230s with both engines and 2k+ extra ballast and a full load of ppl. with the correct prop i couldnt tell the difference between the two engines in any of the boats. prop: $500 or zr6: $6k? thats a no brainer.



GM supplies these engines to all the marinizers before they dress them up and remap the ecu, change the cam, etc...

Last edited by tdc_worm; 03-21-2012 at 7:04 PM.
Old     (BKinSoCal)      Join Date: Oct 2011       03-21-2012, 7:58 PM Reply   
I have the 409 in my 230 and wouldn't want to go with the 343. I've heard the 343 repropped with the power prop should do the job. However, I've also been told that the 409 is more efficient than the 343 because it doesn't have to work as hard so you'll save some $$$ on gas.

I personally would get the 409 again.
Old     (chattwake)      Join Date: Jan 2010       03-21-2012, 6:53 PM Reply   
Most order the 230 with the big motor. In my observation, the resale sucks on a 230 with the small motor. I owned 3 230s with the big motor option. I ran a lot of weight and I can tell you the big motor is worth the extra coin. Some will tell you that the 343 is sufficient, but I don't think so. Just my opinion.
Old     (chattwake)      Join Date: Jan 2010       03-22-2012, 5:46 AM Reply   
Brian, great point. While repropping to assist a smaller motor plane out with a heavily weighted boat is, certainly, a cheaper alternative than opting for the big motor upgrade, what you should keep in mind is that a more aggressive bottom end prop will cause you to run higher rpm's when towing a rider and when cruizing around. Higher rpm's will cause you to burn more fuel.

The 230 is an extremely high end and expensive boat. When I spec'd my '08, '09 and '10, I looked hard at resale values of prior model years to attempt to determine whether a used buyer would be willing to pay extra for the big motor. I determined that they would, and in my experience, they ultimately did. The perception of the 230 is that it is a big ass boat and it needs the big motor. Can you make it work with the small motor? I guess so, according to what was posted above. That being said, you will likely burn more gas if you plan on running the boat with a lot of weight an an aggressive prop, and you may find the boat harder to sell down the road. This is just my opinion.

Also, another thing to consider is the fact that the zr409 is a closed cooling motor - well at least the block and heater are. The manifolds still use raw water cooling. For winterization purposes, it really cuts down on what you have to do, and reduces the risk that the heater core will crack if you have a hard freeze.
Old     (lakesurfer)      Join Date: Jul 2009       03-22-2012, 7:18 AM Reply   
I have the 409 in an Enzo 244 and it is a great motor. We only surf, so we could probably get away with either motor. But if we were running a lot of weight at 22-25mph, the 409 would be an easy decision for me.
Old     (dhill)      Join Date: Aug 2010       03-22-2012, 7:36 AM Reply   
chattwake - excuse my lack of knowledge here, but how can i PM you regarding my ballast setup on a new-to-me 230 sante? just some questions about what you've done in the past. thanks, dhill
Old     (chattwake)      Join Date: Jan 2010       03-22-2012, 8:49 AM Reply   
D Hill, there are others on here who should be able to help you out more than me. Honestly, I had trouble getting my 230's to maintain a clean and consistent wake when I added a bunch of weight. Seems that the concensus is to ride at 80+ ft. at like 27+ mph with a lot of weight. I am more comfortable riding at 75ft @ 23.2 mph, so I never dialed in a ballast setup for that boat at a higher speed. In fairness, I have also heard that other folks have been able to keep the wake clean at lower speeds with added weight. Hopefully, someone who knows the right answer for you can chime in.
Old     (chattwake)      Join Date: Jan 2010       03-22-2012, 8:54 AM Reply   
Looking back, about the best weight setup I used for my 230's was 2 500's in the nose, a 500 on the floor, a 500 in each rear hatch, plus factory, plus a few folks in the nose. However, with this setup, we still had issues with the wake occasionally rolling over when cutting into it at 24mph at 75 ft. When it stayed clean the wake was really nice though.

Best of luck man!
Attached Images
Old     (polarbill)      Join Date: Jun 2003       03-22-2012, 9:03 AM Reply   
That looks really annoying to have that big and expensive of a boat and have to put bags that fill the entire bow and still not get a perfect wake.

Last edited by polarbill; 03-22-2012 at 9:06 AM.
Old     (durty_curt)      Join Date: Apr 2008       03-22-2012, 9:11 AM Reply   
this is not too old of a thread but should be of assistance.
Old     (dhill)      Join Date: Aug 2010       03-22-2012, 9:25 AM Reply   
first, sorry for high jacking the thread, i'll stop now. all - thanks for the help. sure we'll dial it in, starting hopefully this sat-sun since the air/water temps are so great.
Old     (dhill)      Join Date: Aug 2010       03-22-2012, 9:28 AM Reply   
fyi - thank you for the pics and link to the other thread. does look helpful.
Old     (migs)      Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: SF Bay Area       03-22-2012, 9:46 AM Reply   
Chatt that setup seems too heavy in the nose for a SAN - just at a glance. They like midship & rear weight. But im sure u guys tried a bunch of setups. Just a quick thought from seeing above.
Old     (tdc_worm)      Join Date: Sep 2002       03-22-2012, 2:03 PM Reply   
back on topic:

i will agree with Chatt that the closed cooling system on the Z engine is nice.

i will disagree about getting better fuel economy with the larger engine because it is not working as hard. the standard prop has too much pitch with either engine. the "Team Prop" (either a 1234 or 1235 ACME if i remember correctly) is a must with either engine if you are adding extra weight, and almost everyone that adds weight props them down immediately. the first thing i did with any of the ZR6s i have owned was prop them down for better holeshot.

at the end of the day, small block torque is always going to be limited by the small block and small block rotating assembly. to really feel the difference, you would have to jump up to a big block. i think this is where ilmoor has hit a home run. they are (re)introducing the 7.4L (454ci) engine for their new X Star. The 502 and 498ic big blocks are probably too much engine/fuel consumption for what we do on a daily basis, but a 7.4L may allow you to not prop down as much to retain some efficiency---what i think Chatt was getting at...

anecdotally, a couple of years ago, a friend of mine and myself both had 2006 220s. his had the excal, mine had the zr6. we both ran the same ballast plumbed on top of the factory system. we both had to prop down for acceptable performance. our fuel consumption was not noticeably different. we sold our boats at the same time, his had 425 hours, mine had 450 hours. they were both optioned the same. my interior was all brand new condition, marginally better than his. we had one buyer test our boats back to back. the buyer bought his over mine and they were identically priced, even though mine had the ZR6. guess what i learned? 1) color is more important than engine to the buyer (his was blue on black and mine was red on black) to the buyer. 2) not to option for the larger engine unless it is a big block, because i didnt see my $6k back.

that may not be the rule, but it is my experience.... would CC option an engine in a boat that was underperfoming? why does Buxton marine suggest to their customers to go with the Excal in the 230? food for thought....
Old     (chattwake)      Join Date: Jan 2010       03-22-2012, 2:30 PM Reply   
I agree that the color of a boat is the most important feature in terms of ease of resale.
Old     (polarbill)      Join Date: Jun 2003       03-22-2012, 2:54 PM Reply   
I think one thing that gets overlooked by people on this site is that 90% of the people buying these boats are families jsut looking to have a nice boat that fits everybody and can pull a tube as well as the occassional wakeboarder and surfer. I bet less then a quarter of the wakeboats sold ever see more then stock ballast. Obviously there are certain places and situations where the bigger motor would would help resale like it is actually need for the boat to perform at all(elevation or too big of a boat) or saltwater areas where FWC is nice to have. Having the bigger engine won't hurt your resale as compared to other similar boats with the smaller engine but you won't see the added money spent, especially if it is 6k. None of this takes into account how much the different engines burn fuel. That said if I bought a 75k boat and it didn't perform because the engine was underpowered I would be pretty dissapointed.
Old     (lakesurfer)      Join Date: Jul 2009       03-22-2012, 2:57 PM Reply   
I bet most of the Enzo 233s are ordered with PMC 343. I have not heard any complaints about it being under powered.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       03-22-2012, 3:18 PM Reply   
Even if you save 2 gallons an hour from one motor to another, and you pay $6 a gallon for gas, you don't even start to "save" money until you have 500 hours on the boat (giving no impact to the time value of money).
Old     (Erkoehler)      Join Date: Apr 2011       03-28-2012, 8:24 AM Reply   
We order all of our 230's with the bigger motor. It is nice to have, but unless you are adding an extra couple thousand pounds of ballast on top of factory it is not needed.


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:30 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home


© 2016 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us