Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1

    Yet another fuel question

    Hey guys how are we all. Just wondering if I could get some answers from experienced people running these sc seadoos. I currently have a 16 gti 130 that I have owned since last year and have now sold. I am ready to buy a new toy and having a hard time deciding on na or sc due to the price difference of $500 or so between the 2020 Gtx 170 or 230.

    I have done a lot of reading on here and having trouble finding the answer. I understand that at wot, na or not they will use about the same amounts of fuel?. So in other words these things drink 18 to 20gph at max rpm. So what about playing around down low etc, are they drinking much more than a na would just playing around sliding or on waves etc?

    I guess my worry is I really donít think itís worth it if itís going to cost me 200 a day in fuel cause I have to fill up twice. The gti 130 even when riding it hard would last all day no worries.

    Appreciate any input on this as itís a hard choice to make and rather buy the right one without regrets.

    btw it will be 90% salt water use in the bay/ocean

  2. #2
    tiderider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Usa
    Posts
    860
    +1
    47
    Sounds like you can't afford to buy either if your concerned about fuel consumption on either stock machine..

  3. #3
    Yes correct, I made the post because I can’t afford either of them. Finally I found someone with some common sense left in the world. Appreciate it

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    178
    +1
    27
    From my experience thats backwards, at wot the SC bikes use significantly more fuel (they are going significantly faster) cruising around the they are almost the same.


  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by 711jrp View Post
    From my experience thats backwards, at wot the SC bikes use significantly more fuel (they are going significantly faster) cruising around the they are almost the same.
    Agreed. Just putting along @ 40 MPH or so, doesn't use a lot of fuel at all but pin that throttle (as we ALL will) and they rip through it.

  6. #6
    88-jac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    153
    +1
    21
    Order a Spark..

    Cheaper to buy.
    Cheaper to run.
    just as much fun!

    Infact - get two 👍

  7. #7
    tiderider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Usa
    Posts
    860
    +1
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevej View Post
    Yes correct, I made the post because I can’t afford either of them. Finally I found someone with some common sense left in the world. Appreciate it

    And what exactly will you do with it when it breaks down? They are expensive to repair even if you do it yourself, parts are very pricey.

  8. #8
    I think you still seem to be confused? This conversation\question is about how much more fuel a sc ski will use over a na model like I previously had and can personally compare it too because I do not want to spend $200 a day on fuel if that’s what the sc will use. Not because I can’t afford fuel or the ski itself. I am sure you have a nice 300 like most and are happy to fill the tank 2 or 3 times a day and I am happy for you. But If you are not interested in replying to help then why bother?

  9. #9
    moparguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Niagara Falls, Ontario
    Posts
    2,133
    +1
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevej View Post
    I think you still seem to be confused? This conversation\question is about how much more fuel a sc ski will use over a na model like I previously had and can personally compare it too because I do not want to spend $200 a day on fuel if thatís what the sc will use. Not because I canít afford fuel or the ski itself. I am sure you have a nice 300 like most and are happy to fill the tank 2 or 3 times a day and I am happy for you. But If you are not interested in replying to help then why bother?
    If you are cruising and under 6000rpm, essentially out of boost. Your fuel economy will be very similar, n/a vs s/c. However if you pin it to win it, their is a drastic difference in fuel economy. With regards to fuel costs, i have to agree with Tiderider. If that is a concern/ major contributing factor, maybe a boat/pwc isn't for you. Between my 2 s/c ski's and my wakesurf boat. I spend between 6-10k a season on fuel. If I looked at fuel costs, I wouldn't enjoy this hobby. Just my 2 cents


  10. #10
    tiderider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Usa
    Posts
    860
    +1
    47
    So what did you decide??

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Fuel Pump Fuel Line Question
    By dmueller9834 in forum Polaris Open Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-19-2014, 02:44 PM
  2. question on a 96 gtx, fuel sending unit on LOW FUEL..
    By Alex3012red in forum 2-Stroke Performance
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-14-2011, 09:35 PM
  3. Rude Fuel Controller Fuel Prgramming Question
    By Laundryboy in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-05-2010, 10:15 PM
  4. Fuel Question???
    By 1bad90notchback in forum Polaris Open Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-19-2008, 04:08 PM
  5. Fuel question
    By seadoo951 in forum 2-Stroke Performance
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-12-2007, 08:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •