sundeck 270 - pros/cons?

J

jpcjguy

New Member
Jun 30, 2015
21
Richmond, VA
Boat Info
boatless
Engines
boatless
Hi all,

So I am keeping an eye out on the sundeck 240 model in the 2003-2006 range. I recently came across a 2006 270 with the 8.1 and "Silent choice" (???). The price is lower than the 240s I have been looking at - is there any issues with them? the motor? Never really considered a 270, but.... (no problems towing for me as I have a 7.3 Excursion) -

Thanks
Joe
 
never has a man said: "I wish my boat was smaller"
Biggest issue will be fuel consumption. The 496 is a thirsty monster and the 270 is bigger/heavier.
 
very true. my ideal isa 240 with the 5.7 (over the 5.0 - because there are 5 of us plus friends).
Yet - for the right price the 270 seems sweet. So regarding fuel consumption - what are we talking about? Let take an example day on the lake. Some cruising around looking that the lake houses, some tubing/water skiing, and then some floating time swimming, etc. Nothing extreme in any one activity. (kids are 6, 6, and 3). So over the course of a 10am- 7pm day - would we be talking about a 3-4 gallon consumption more or 20 gallon?
 
The 270 with a 496 weighs about 1500 lbs more. It is a slightly better rough water boat, but the 240 is great for that as well. The 270 is 4 inches wider, and a little more floor space inside, even though they are roughly the same length, because the 240 has a longer swim platform that is included in the length measurement.

The 496 comes standard with switchable exhaust. The fuel difference is something I have never noticed. That boat cost over $100K new, and another $5 a day for fuel is invisible.

There aren't very many 270's for sale, because, I think, that is the boat that people wait their entire life to own, and no one wants to sell theirs.
 
The difference at typical cruise would be around 11 gal/hr versus 13 gal/hr.
Use 2 gal/hr increased consumption as a rough estimate to figure out what that might mean for you.
 
all about fun said:
http://www.boat-fuel-economy.com/mercury-mercruiser-3.0-181-fuel-consumption-us-gallons


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

When we were deciding to go from the 240 to the 270 (and the 350 to the 496) those fuel burn rate differences scared the crap out of me. Those are WOT and I run that about 1% of the time on the water. Because the 496 has tons of torque skiers get up quicker and tubes plane faster. Plus I cruise at lower RPMs. We literally had no increase in our fuel burn and the only reason fuel costs went up after we made the switch was due to fuel prices. FWIW. Your mileage may vary.
 
Tim,

That is my observation as well. Skiers pop right up at 3/4 throttle. 3400 RPM cruise is 10 GPH at 32 MPH. Fuel burn difference is not really noticeable. At WOT, there are huge volumes of gas running through the engine, but no one would ever run there.
 
Silent Choice is simply a switch between thru-hull and thru-prop exhaust. My wife calls it the a$$hole switch.

At 3000rpm I'm at around 28-30mph burning 11-11.5gph. At 3800rpm I'm at around 38mph burning around 15.5gph. Both of these numbers hover around 2.5mpg within a few tenths so if you have a destination in mind, fuel burn is about the same throughout that range. It starts falling off the cliff above that. Can I spend the day out and use only a few gallons? Yep. Can I blow through half a tank in a few hours? Yep. I agree with Tim-the larger engine really wont consume much more in normal use than a smaller one due to lower cruising rpms.

I have had no problems with my 270 that are notable or anything I would consider specific to this model. Its hard to come up with any annoyances either. The motor is hard to service because it is large and jammed in there. The surround under the seat comes off after removing many screws and that helps. The 496 also loves to eat spark plugs-figure every 100 hours.

All in all, its been a fine boat.
 
I forgot to say that kids LOVE the small berth on the 270 that the 240 does not have. I have a 7yr old and that is "his" room. Kind of nice when they all disappear while your underway.
 
Not sure if it matters, but do you plan to trailer the boat? If so you will be over the 8'6" wide limit most states have.
Just a thought.

Chuck
 
chuck1 said:
Not sure if it matters, but do you plan to trailer the boat? If so you will be over the 8'6" wide limit most states have.
Just a thought.

Chuck
Click to expand...

With a tower and wakeboard racks you are way over the limit but oversized permits are not particularly expensive.
 
Thanks for all the feedback. I did think of the width and trailering. I am I Virginia so would a 270 on a trailer be too wide?
 
Looks like we are in the same situation. I'm in the market for an 04-? 240 SD with the 350MAG engine. Budget is about 25K as there are definitely deals out there to be had if you shop around. I'd love a 270 but they seem to be going for 30K at the very least and the 496 engine only adds to the price!

I've looked at a few already and have yet to pull the trigger. Hoping to look at 2-3 more this week. PM me if you want to compare notes on the boats out there.
 
Yes the 270 had a 8' 10" beam so you are going to be over.



Per the WV site it looks like
Width:

  • 8’6″ Interstate and designated roads
  • 8′ on non-designated
Not sure what non-designated is. I've not had to worry about that one in the states i've hauled before.

You still have the same restriction as most states about times you can travel, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,186
Messages
1,428,188
Members
61,098
Latest member
Klawson83
Back
Top