340 vs. 360HT

[turbonine]

I think they should stop rating these things by HP and give us some TQ numbers. I know they are related but that is what tow boats really need, torque.

Agree 100%.

It was rumored that Indmar's 350 Monsoon and 383 Hammerhead had roughly the same torque curve. Who really knows the answer to this since it isn't published and there is really know way to dyno these things.

[Ruune]

I think they should advertise both torque and horsepower.

However, since I'm hearing that the 360 isnt all that much of an improvement over the 340, I'd be willing to bet that numerical difference is negligible... especially since theres no easy way to find out. That said, if they published the numbers and people realized that theres only a slight difference between the two, customers might be less inclined to opt for the 360.

Still, that might promote an upsell to the 6.0L, which should have quite an increase in torque- due to the longer stroke.

Regarding the 8.1L- wow! I'll bet that thing is going to be a demon in that RZ4! Even at high altitude, that beast should have plenty of torque. I do wonder if a CDI turbodiesel would be better in that situation though.

[Timmy!]

Any idea what the torque is on the 340hp motor? I would guess it would be near 400lb/ft or so?

[Coach]

Here is my take. I have the 340 on the RZ2 and with the added weight of stereo equipment I am close to 4200 lbs without passengers. The boat has a great hole shot and pulls without any problem. I find I go much slower everywhere with this boat compared to my jet with a 454 Mag running 415 HP. I have a top speed of 41mph right now but find I normally am crusing between 30 and 35 mph. I don't miss the speed as much as thought I would coming from a 60mph boat. Unless you want a little better top end the 340 will be just fine. I think the GPH numbers for the RZ2 vs 22Ve are a gas comparision of the 360 on the RZ2 and 340 on the 22 Ve on BoatTest and the numbers are huge! There is a thread on this and the accuracy of the test but none the less the numbers have been posted. I think the RZ4 would be fine with the 340 and if I were to upgrade it would be to a 8.1 vs 6.0

[Timmy!]

I have a top speed of 41mph right now but find I normally am crusing between 30 and 35 mph.

What are the RPM's at when you're cruising? I saw that it's cruising speed should be around 25mph (too slow for me) and I was wondering about changing the prop (537 on it now I think) so the RPM's are down some. I am new to v-drive's so I could be completely off-base on that statement.

[G-MONEY]

I have been on a Bu with a 8.1 and all its good for is ripping the rope out of your hands wile attempting to get up and sucking more fule..... IMO go with the 340 and if you feel you need more power get a new prop.....

[da.bell]

I think the RZ4 would be fine with the 340 and if I were to upgrade it would be to a 8.1 vs 6.0

I agree. I have the 240 with an 06 24Ve. Now, the RZ4 will be about 100-200 pounds more but I am very happy with what I have and the added 200 lbs shouldn't make a difference at all.....

[anhaney]

I have been on a Bu with a 8.1 and all its good for is ripping the rope out of your hands wile attempting to get up and sucking more fule..... IMO go with the 340 and if you feel you need more power get a new prop.....

G-Money I guess you just could'nt resist you had to make an AVITAR change.

[Matt Garcia]

It would be nice to know torque numbers especially when comparing the 340 vs the 360.

The way I look at it is the RZ4 will be about 400 pounds heavier (+/-) and with a bigger boat your more than likely going to have more people out as well.

[turbonine]

I just put the change order in with Tige and I got lucky. They had a 360 in stock that they could put in my boat. I really got to thank Charlie at Tige AZ for doing this for me. I made the mistake of assuming that the RZ4 I ordered was with the 360, but was actually the 340. I noticed this when Tige sent pictures of my boat in production and I saw 340 written on the transom.

I decided that with the extra 400lbs in the RZ4 when compared to the RZ2 the 360 would make up. Also I will always be using ballast and occasionally making trips up to Powell(altitude) so figured the 360 would also be beneficial in these areas too.

I also talked to Marine Power and they said that there is little difference in fuel consuption between the 340 and 360 and that the extra HP and TQ is achieved by a different cam with higher roller rockers.

[Ruune]

It would be nice to know torque numbers especially when comparing the 340 vs the 360.

The way I look at it is the RZ4 will be about 400 pounds heavier (+/-) and with a bigger boat your more than likely going to have more people out as well.

400lbs heavier than the RZ2 or the 24ve?

If form follows fashion, the RZ4 should be around 50lbs heavier than the 24ve:
2007 22ve: 3850 lbs
2007 RZ2: 3900 lbs

[Matt Garcia]

400lbs heavier than the RZ2 or the 24ve?

If form follows fashion, the RZ4 should be around 50lbs heavier than the 24ve:
2007 22ve: 3850 lbs
2007 RZ2: 3900 lbs

Ruune when I guessed that I was comparing a 22ft (22Ve) boat with a 24ft(24Ve) boat.

So the RZ4 would weigh roughly 400 pounds more than an RZ2. Again, all speculation though.

[anhaney]

Ruune when I guessed that I was comparing a 22ft (22Ve) boat with a 24ft(24Ve) boat.

So the RZ4 would weigh roughly 400 pounds more than an RZ2. Again, all speculation though.

One way to know for sure it to give Andrew or Harvey a call at TIGE' it only takes them a minute to tell you. In fact I just called him. Left a message as soon as he gets back to me I will post the differences.

[RID22]

I just put the change order in with Tigé and I got lucky. They had a 360 in stock that they could put in my boat. I really got to thank Charlie at Tigé AZ for doing this for me. I made the mistake of assuming that the RZ4 I ordered was with the 360, but was actually the 340. I noticed this when Tigé sent pictures of my boat in production and I saw 340 written on the transom.

I decided that with the extra 400lbs in the RZ4 when compared to the RZ2 the 360 would make up. Also I will always be using ballast and occasionally making trips up to Powell(altitude) so figured the 360 would also be beneficial in these areas too.

I also talked to Marine Power and they said that there is little difference in fuel consumption between the 340 and 360 and that the extra HP and TQ is achieved by a different cam with higher roller rockers.

Good Call, especially if you're going to big water lakes like Lake Powell. If you can afford a bigger motor, do it. I've never read a thread on Tigeowners were someone is complaining about their boat being too powerful!

[Ruune]

I'd be interested in knowing how big the fuel tank is on that beast!

...and whether or not the fuel gauge works!