5.3 or 5.7

[ntx]

We are about to purchase a new 200. What are people seeing with the new 5.3? Concerns are with the new 5.3 power plant and long term reliability. I always worry about the first year of a new set up about getting all the bugs worked out (2014 mastercraft) We currently have a 5.7 in a 200 that struggles a little at 36 on a short set up. Will also be pulling a 180+ foot jumper. Would love to go to the 6.2 but the cost to upgrade is $$$ %#@!@#$

[skiinxs]

I did a back to back test last fall between my 2015 6.0 and a 2016 5.3 using two very strong jumpers in the ballpark you mentioned above, one jumping in jump mode, the other in slalom. With my 409 I could run a 4 power factor with the jump mode jumper and easily tweak him to 5.19's. For the slalom mode jumper I could get him to 5.20's or 5.21's by bumping the power factor up to a 5. With the 5.3 I duplicated the exact times with the exact jumpers and power factor/jump/slalom gate combinations. There is no way in hell that a 5.7 could do that. Bottom line, I believe that at 35.4 jump speeds the 5.3 and 6.0 are pretty much equals in torque and yield pretty close to the same results. Both jumpers said the 5.3 felt very strong. At top end I believe that the 6.0 has a 30 or 40 hp advantage as my 6.0 would run right at 50 and the 5.3 would run between 46 and 47. If you are pulling 180'+ jumpers you need at least the 5.3, the 5.7 will not get the job done. Now, with that being said, I have a 6.2 in my 2016 and it is insane! I have never been in a ski boat with that much power.

[Broussard]

Sounds like a used 6 or 6.2 would be your best bet. Especially with a 180+ft jumper.

[Horton]

If you have to have a 200 and the best pull possible but are unsure about the new stuff get the 6L. No one was ever sorry they got a 6L 200. It is my opinion that the 5.7 is not a the best choice in a 200.

 

There were rumbles that the early 5.3 engines were not playing with ZO correctly. I would assume that is long since fixed. If you demo a 5.3 and it skis good I say get it.

[ntx]

@ob1 The power options are 5.3L 355HP 5.7L 343HP 6.2L 450HP The upgrade charge is 10K increase to go from the 5.7 to the 6.2 The other problem is that this is a community boat and I can't get the rest of the slalom gods to step up to the 6.2L. They are all 34mph skiers and don't see the need. I have looked long and hard for a 2015 promo with a 6L. There is a pretty big increase to go to the 5.3.

[skiinxs]

@ntx I think you will be very happy with the 5.3. PM your phone number to me if you want a little more in-depth results of my testing.

[supergadget]

I have a new to me 2012 200 6.0L

Basically I can't believe how much better that motor is than the 5.7.

Quieter, easy to use power. Motor is hardly even working.

The 5.7 design is from the Stone Age.

[bkreis]

@ntx I have a 200 w 5.3 and it's awesome!!!! I couldn't say enough, I love it!!

[gsm_peter]

What is fuel consumption on 5.3 compared to 5.7?

We will replace our club boat, SN 196 from 2008 with a new 200 5.3 2016 this summer...

[skiinxs]

I would expect it to be considerably better than a 6.0, which is considerably better than a 5.7.

[lpskier]

My limited experience with the 5.3 is that it is a beauty to drive and gets up to speed in a heartbeat. No short lake issues. On the other hand, I thought that I got in a hole off the buoy and that I got gassed pretty hard off the second wake as the boat tried to make up time in the course. That was my perception skiing three rounds behind it over a two day period. I have no data to back up that perception. I had a hard time skiing behind it, and I am a Nautique guy that hates to say anything negative about Nautique boats. I ski C2, weigh 200 and ran maybe 3@35 behind it. That said, maybe C3, maybe a different prop, or maybe just time behind the boat would make a difference.

[skibug]

I skied a 5.3 last week; I did not care for it. I felt a lot of throttling at the wrong time with ZO C2 34 MPH. Might have just been the boat or the driver; but, it was a very popular and reputable ski school. With that said, it is only one data point to offer.

[The_MS]

Sounds like its time to look at ZO setting when I get a 5.3. I hope I get a shot at practice behind one and don't have to blow a few tourney sets to figure it out.

 

[ntx]

Anyone know for sure what nautique is telling the promo owners to get?? 5.7 5.3 or 6.2. Due to cost i can't imagine the 6.2 so.... I guess 5.3???

[dbutcher]

I'm not sure, but a quick look at Nautique's web site implies that the 5.7 is not even offered in the 200 for 2016. Historically, Nautique has let their promo people choose whatever AWSA tested engine that is available. My guess is that most will choose the 5.3.

[BRY]

I own a 2011 5.7 and have been lucky enough to have about 20 sets behind 3 examples of the 5.3. I thought it skied great. Tried a few other settings just to see but run the same C1 as on mine. Better hole shot but once on plane felt pretty much the same, maybe slightly smoother. Very, very subtle difference. Drivers and water (3 different sites) far overshadow the difference.

If I were to get a new one I would get the 5.3 or the 6.2. Have to ski a 6.2 but I really like the 6.0 200's so would be interesting. Had I been able to ski a 6.0 before getting mine I would have gone with the 6. But definitely the 5.3 over the 5.7 for hole shot and envisioned economy and resale.

[ntx]

@dbutcher I thought the same thing about the 5.7 this year also. I was wrong. They are still offering the 5.7. In fact our local dealer has one. I am not sure if it was a early model year build boat or if they had concerns of market acceptance of the 5.3. I am getting resistance from other owners on the 5.3. My choice is the 6.2 but the upgrade cost make that unattainable.

[Not_The_Pug]

Nautique Promo boats for 2016, it was either the 5.3 or 6.2. I have a few sets behind my 2016 and so far really like the 5.3. It is quite and have not has any issue with it gassing me (just getting back at it, so still feeling out skiing too). I run B2. Have not run through enough gas to make a determination on usage yet.

 

Can't wait to get more sets behind the boat, but rain this weekend in Nor Cal.

[bkreis]

@ntx my 5.3 is a favorite amongst most who both ski and drive, including someone VERY involved with ZO. @gsm_peter fuel is the same as 5.7. I ski b3 through 12m and just love the pull. also the driver variance has diminished greatly. I can almost the same rhythm regardless of driver...unless they move the boat trying to drive it!!!lol

[dbutcher]

@ntx if I were getting a new 200, I would definitely go with the 5.3 over the 5.7. My first choice, if I had the money, would be the 6.2 even though I don't jump. The 5.7 is darn good, but it's old technology with mixed metals. PCM and Nautique historically have been VERY GOOD about having a new product ready before it's released. I wouldn't hesitate a moment on either the 5.3 or the 6.2. One thing I like about the 6.2 over the old 6.0 is the cooling system. If I interpret the PCM website correctly, the 6.2 (and the 5.3) have full fresh water cooling. No antifreeze. The antifreeze system on the 6.0's has not been a problem for anyone that I've heard of, but it's just one more thing you have to check and maintain. Others on this forum no doubt know more than I.

 

If the 5.3 has the torque and HP it's supposed to have, any hard pulls after the second wake (in slalom) is likely a ZO problem, not a 5.3 problem. I don't know if all of the new single puck issues have been resolved. I'm sure they will be though.

[swc5150]

FWIW there was some rumbling over on planetnautique about the new DI engines and long-term issues (like Audi encountered). I personally would go 5.3 without hesitation, as we have three vehicles with DI engines (non-Audi), and two of them have 80k miles with no issues whatsoever.

[gsm_peter]

Thanks.

I guess the 200 requires more fuel than the 196 but the 5.3 is more efficient compared to the 5.7.

So in the end it is about the same??

[dave2ball]

As a promo person the 5.3 is perfect. Why would you go with a 5.7? You will be purchasing an obsolete motor. At least go with a 6 LTR. Don't know if its still available. Look at it this way pay now or pay later when your 16 with a 5.7 will not be worth as much as a 16 with a 5.3 or 6.2.

 

[Bill22]

forgive me if this has already been discussed. Is there any talk of putting the 5.3 in the Carbon Pro for '17? I checked the website and only the 5.7 and 6.0.

[Bill22]

@Horton may know about the Carbon Pro but he could be sworn to secrecy.

[oldjeep]

Out of curiosity what is the issue that causes a 5.7 to not be enough in a nautique? My boat weighs an easy 1000 lbs more and has no problem getting up to ski speed with 4-5 people in the boat. How in the world is a 5.7 not enough for a light little dd?

[oldjeep]

Be interesting to see if Malibu sticks with crusader for the txi or uses the Indmar raptor motors like every other Malibu.

[Bill22]

@oldjeep you have a 5.7 in your VTX?

[oldjeep]

Yup, as do about 90% of the rest of them.

[Horton]

It is my understanding that the Centurion will offer the 5.7 until the inventory is depleted. I have no information about when that will happen.

[Horton]

@oldjeep the 200 is a high drag hull. It pushes a lot of water. That is how they designed it to get flat wakes and make it so easy to drive. With a 6.0 it is hard to beat. I am not a fan of the 5.7 in a 200.

[The_MS]

@oldjeep I have not seen or experienced any issues with the 5.7 although I have not been at high elevation to try one.

[santangelo]

At the Okee tournament a few weekends ago, we had a 5.3 and 6.2 Nautique 200 and both boats performed great. I skied both of them, same day, and they felt very similar. I didn't hear a single complaint about the boats. If there is an issue with the pull not feeling correct, its not a horsepower issue as these are very adequate engines and Nautique has done a nice job fine tuning the prop and software for the new configuration.

[brettmainer]

I just put my 5.3 promo boat in the water for the first time this weekend. I took my 3rd and 4th sets of the year, and I am only running 32s, trying to get back in shape. The boat feels great, no problems at all with the pull or the gassing. I would have to ski some 38s behind it to say definitively, but so far I think it is great. Drives great too.

[jjackkrash]

Has anyone verified the top speed of a 200 with a standard approved prop and the 5.3l H5 with measurements? I am at or near sea level.

[bkreis]

@jjackkrash I have a 2016 200 at greater miami waterski club w a 5.3 and it's awesome! It's also for sale if you are looking...has 31 hours

[bigtex2011]

I skied behind a couple of different 6.2's at a ski school in Florida. One was butter. The other was a beast. Not sure why but it was significant. I own a 5.7 200. I love the wakes. Not a fan of the rpm and fuel consumption.

 

 

[skiinxs]

@jjackkrash right at 46

 

[jjackkrash]

@skiinxs. Thanks for the info. I really appreciate it.

[skiinxs]

You're welcome. (in jump mode)

[B_S]

I've had my 200 with the 5.3 for a full season, and it's an incredible machine. I don't know why people would be concerned with DI engines. They've been making them in large volumes for over a decade, and believe that about half of all automotive engines now come with them.

[ntx]

We got the 5.3 in our 2016. It is a much better option than the 5.7 in the nautique. In the 2017 boats, the old 6.0 is the standard motor, with the 5.3 and 6.2 DI motors as upgrades. We all agree the 5.3DI is good set up, but is it better than the 6.0???? What are the 2017 promo guys going with? 5.3DI? old 6.0? or 6.2DI? The torque numbers are slightly higher for the 5.3 over the 6.0

[dave2ball]

The promo guys have to go with the 5.3 or the 6.2. The 6.0 is not an option for them

[6balls]

That's crazy with the 6.0 standard I'd choose that every day and twice on Sunday before paying more for a 5.3 or 6.2.

[B_S]

Isn't a Promo Boat a way for the manufacturer to promote the brand? Wouldn't the manufacturer want to ensure that these boats had the latest and greatest in order to represent the brand to its fullest?

[jjackkrash]

I am looking real hard at a left-over 2016 with the H5/5.3 for a great deal. The boat has every option I want except the H6/6.2. The dealer basically said the H6 is awesome, but more money, and almost spooky and borderline dangerous in the hands of a driver who isn't used to the power.

 

I am tempted to pull the trigger on the H5/5.3, but I am wondering whether I will regret not holding out for the big engine. My wife and other family will drive the boat, however, and I am starting the think the 5.3 might be the better engine for me when there are less experienced drivers in the seat.

 

Damn I hate big decisions.

 

 

 

[B_S]

The 5.3 will have more than enough power for you.

[ntx]

@jjackkrash Unless you are pulling REAL big jumpers (200 foot plus) the 5.3 is plenty of boat. Even with a short set up at 36, it has enough for 99.9% of all skiers. The upgrade to the 6.2 can add several many $$$$ to the purchase price.