3 liter versus 4.3 liter?

JimS123

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
7,952
Some 3.0s are dogs. To be honest, mine does just fine. 19' boat ... 4 on board and one on skis and we are moving along. Not breaking any speed records, but it's not a dog in the least.
Our 19 footer has a 3.0. Best engine I ever had in 48 years of owning a boat.

Its all about propping it right.

The year my buddy didn't have a boat, we often spent Sundays on mine. Four adults, 2 teenagers and 2 pre-teens. Yeah, 8 people in a 19' Stingray with a 3.0 140 HP. No problem planing at all.
 

jkust

Rear Admiral
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
4,942
Our 19 footer has a 3.0. Best engine I ever had in 48 years of owning a boat.

Its all about propping it right.

The year my buddy didn't have a boat, we often spent Sundays on mine. Four adults, 2 teenagers and 2 pre-teens. Yeah, 8 people in a 19' Stingray with a 3.0 140 HP. No problem planing at all.

And that is with 140 flywheel HP which is less than a modern 130 prop horsepower 3.0. My boat is a power and torque monster especially considering its weight and it would even feel 8 on board.
 

nola mike

Vice Admiral
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
5,023
Depends on the type of skiing. My 3.7 170hp in a 19' Glastron has a tough time getting me up on a 66" slalom ski with 1 aboard, but has no problems getting folks up on 2, or wakeboard. Also planed quickly with 1200# worth of people/gear last week. Doubt I'd be able to get up behind a 3.0.
 

oldjeep

Admiral
Joined
May 17, 2010
Messages
6,455
Depends on the type of skiing. My 3.7 170hp in a 19' Glastron has a tough time getting me up on a 66" slalom ski with 1 aboard, but has no problems getting folks up on 2, or wakeboard. Also planed quickly with 1200# worth of people/gear last week. Doubt I'd be able to get up behind a 3.0.

I skied behind a 2005 3.0L Bayliner 195 for 7 years, no issues getting up behind it on my 67" slalom ski with 3-4 in the boat. It does require more technique since there is more drag. That said, the pull up from my current Malibu is a whole lot better.
 

jkust

Rear Admiral
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
4,942
I skied behind a 2005 3.0L Bayliner 195 for 7 years, no issues getting up behind it on my 67" slalom ski with 3-4 in the boat. It does require more technique since there is more drag. That said, the pull up from my current Malibu is a whole lot better.

Back before everyone had huge power available, we all skiied behind the trusty 85 hp bayliner. It was always loaded and pulled up slalom without too much fuss. A bit of technique but 85 hp is practically a kicker by today's standards. A 130hp 3 liter with its accompanying torque would have been a dream. Can't really tell I'm pulling anybody up with my current boat no matter what it is which is a far cry from the 80's.
 

nola mike

Vice Admiral
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
5,023
I skied behind a 2005 3.0L Bayliner 195 for 7 years, no issues getting up behind it on my 67" slalom ski with 3-4 in the boat. It does require more technique since there is more drag. That said, the pull up from my current Malibu is a whole lot better.
Hah. I must have a *lot* more drag than you.
 

roffey

Commander
Joined
Nov 22, 2012
Messages
2,184
5.8 220,lol. I'm what you might consider a fat guy, that's why I need a 4.3. Bahaha
 

slag

Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
471
Our 19 footer has a 3.0. Best engine I ever had in 48 years of owning a boat.

Its all about propping it right.

The year my buddy didn't have a boat, we often spent Sundays on mine. Four adults, 2 teenagers and 2 pre-teens. Yeah, 8 people in a 19' Stingray with a 3.0 140 HP. No problem planing at all.

I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I'd have to see a video to fully take in what you are saying. 8 people on a 19 foot boat with a 3 liter.. no problem planing.. um.. ok, sure.. lets see the video.
 

oldjeep

Admiral
Joined
May 17, 2010
Messages
6,455
I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I'd have to see a video to fully take in what you are saying. 8 people on a 19 foot boat with a 3 liter.. no problem planing.. um.. ok, sure.. lets see the video.

No problems with the one we owned either with that type of load. I mean jeeze the 3.0L topped out our 19ft at about 47MPH. Only 6 in the boat in this picture, but room for a couple more since the 2 back seats were empty. Once again these are not 200+lb people but it is 4 adults and 2 teens

IMG_2026.JPG
 

jkust

Rear Admiral
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
4,942
Keep in mind that the weight of the boat will have some bearing on performance when loaded. My last 18 foot boat weighed 3000lbs bone dry which was in some cases 700lbs heavier than competing boats of the same loa with the exact same power package. You can bet than when you loaded it up and you were already the weight of a loaded boat starting off then adding another 700lbs, it wasn't going to do as well. Hulls i.e. stepped and notched like the Stingray and weights are all very different as are props.
 

JimS123

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
7,952
I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I'd have to see a video to fully take in what you are saying. 8 people on a 19 foot boat with a 3 liter.. no problem planing.. um.. ok, sure.. lets see the video.
No, I'm sure you don't believe me or you wouldn't have posted the reply. Makes no difference to me what you think.

When the events I mentioned were happeneing I didn't even own any equipment to make a video. The pre-teens I talked about are now mothers with several kids of their own. I would say the average weight of the 8 people at the time was about 140 pounds. I was the only fat one and I weighed about 175 back then,

Remember the boat is a Stingray, which is noted for performance. Also, the engine is a 140, not the later 130. And finally, the prop is SS, custom pitched so I get exactly the max spec rpm at WOT.

I go the boat show every year....most years 2 and some years 3. I always say if I see a better boat I'll buy it on the spot. I have traded PWC's several times as the technology improved, as well as a bass boat / fishing boat upgrade a few times. The Stingray has weathered the test of time.

Way back when if the old girl had given me planing problems, she wouldn't have lasted the season.
 

bruceb58

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
30,454
Remember the boat is a Stingray, which is noted for performance.
LOL..is that because they leave out a lot of fiberglass that higher quality boats keep in their hulls? Let me guess...this high performance boat is the one you put the doel fin on?
 

southkogs

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 7, 2010
Messages
14,783
... let's watch the rock throwin' y'all.

I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I'd have to see a video to fully take in what you are saying. 8 people on a 19 foot boat with a 3 liter.. no problem planing.. um.. ok, sure.. lets see the video.

I don't have any video, but mine'll plane out with 7 on board (max) with little problem. Two of us at least banking in over 200#. She won't hit 40MPH easily (maybe not at all) loaded out like that, but we'll cruise in the early 30's all day long. (I say "little" problem because it typically jumps outta' the hole and all loaded out it doesn't come out quite as fast ... but doesn't "fight" up on to plane either).
 

bruceb58

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
30,454
On future new boats, you are going to be hard pressed to find a 3.0 anymore. For the size boat that used the 3.0s will all be outboards or they will have a V6 in them. The 3.0 is going the way of the dodo bird.
 

jkust

Rear Admiral
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
4,942
LOL..is that because they leave out a lot of fiberglass that higher quality boats keep in their hulls? Let me guess...this high performance boat is the one you put the doel fin on?
Jim's Stingray is a very early one...wonder if they had the notched hull back then like they do today. I get why they are fast today, light weight but more efficient hull if at the expense of some other handling characteristics but wonder if they were fast in the early 80's because they were just lightly built?
 

JimS123

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
7,952
On future new boats, you are going to be hard pressed to find a 3.0 anymore. For the size boat that used the 3.0s will all be outboards or they will have a V6 in them. The 3.0 is going the way of the dodo bird.
I thought GM discontinued manufacture of the 3.0. That's why you won't find one any more. Because of that, and also the added EPA equipment required, has made outboards come back again.
 

JimS123

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
7,952
Jim's Stingray is a very early one...wonder if they had the notched hull back then like they do today. I get why they are fast today, light weight but more efficient hull if at the expense of some other handling characteristics but wonder if they were fast in the early 80's because they were just lightly built?
That's right, mine is not the ZP hull. So, is light a bad thing? After 33 seasons of usage, with a lot in Great lakes Erie and Ontario, there's not a single hull defect anywhere. I've seen heavier boats with spider cracks all over, with not nearly as much use. Back in about 1983 Powerboats magazine did a review of my particular model. They noted that the hull had thin ner sides, but admitted that the bottom (where the boat runs) was quite stout. In any event it won a boat of the year award. Makes no difference to me. After 33 years I'm quite satisfied. How many others can say they kept the same boat that long?
 

oldjeep

Admiral
Joined
May 17, 2010
Messages
6,455
I thought GM discontinued manufacture of the 3.0. That's why you won't find one any more. Because of that, and also the added EPA equipment required, has made outboards come back again.

Mercruiser still lists the 3.0 as a current engine
 
Top