ACME 540 or 542 for show skiing?

So I have been through a bunch of threads on this topic, but I want to check one last time before I wip out the credit card. I am using a 75 SN with the 351W. My agony is over the small difference between the 542 and the 540. I would like as much power as possible to pull pyramids and ballet lines, but I do not want to mess up the finesse acts. Will the 542 produce undesirable effects on doubles or swivel chicks? How about the barefooters? Will it make ATB's harder? I know it will be better for the wakeboarders.
Tom

Hey HW,
That is what I wanted to hear. I know you mentioned the 542 a couple weeks ago, but then the more research I did, the 540 kept coming up. The boat is running really well right now after a "Backfoot Special" tune up, and now that everyone is getting used to it, the boat is pulling larger acts, so I wanted to make sure it was prepared to get the ladies off the dock!
Tom

seacamper wrote: I wanted to make sure it was prepared to get the ladies off the dock! Tom

Get smaller ladies and you won't have to pull as hard

Reminds me of the old joke...how do you get a (insert college football rival here) cheerleader into your dorm room?

Grease her hips and push!

So the 542 will give top end numbers desirable for barefooting? If you go with a 542, man I gotta check that out!

I gotta agree with the 542. Especially on a show ski boat. It'll still have enough speed for show footing. You want the extra holeshot for pulling more people on that boat. If it was more for personal use I'd say the 540.

Good to hear it's running good for you yet Tom. I did notice when we tuned that up that it was a little lazy right out of the hole but then I'm used to JBears and my boat. I haven't driven a 240HP stocker in a very long time.
Remember that we can always throw a set of GT40P's on it and an intake and that thing would easily pull a four high pyramid then.

Orlando76 wrote: backfoot100 wrote: Good to hear it's running good for you yet Tom. I did notice when we tuned that up that it was a little lazy right out of the hole but then I'm used to JBears and my boat. I haven't driven a 240HP stocker in a very long time. How much of that could because of possible water in the foam?

Todd,
Some have pulled their boats over a truck scale to get a rough idea how much extra weight there is in the boat.

540

Thanks guys for all the inputs. Todd, on the foam thing, I found that on the narrow body boats like ours, there just does not seem like all that much foam compared to the bigger boats starting in 82 with the 2001 series. I just don't see it as that much of a problem compared to my old 89 that I finally weighed just to relieve myself of the nagging doubt. It weighed out fine (I forget the numbers I used) but on this 75, it sits in the water well with the platform high and dry and uniform, so I am not worried about the foam.
84SNautique, what are you using the boat for? The short answer from all the research says that on that boat, you will get an immediate increase in performance with either the 540 or 542, the decision you need to make is the 540 is for more general skiing, and the 542 is for more torque for lower speed activities like wakeboarding at 20-24 mph or in my case, pulling larger groups of skiers. What I found from cruising the web is that on that 2001, both props reduce vibration, increase hole shot, the 540 may give you 1 or 2 mph and the 542 may subtract 1 mph. Both props seem to stop the boat faster because of the drag from the greater surface area, and some folks have noticed the boat "walks" a bit more in reverse (whatever that means).
Tom

Tom, walk is the direction the boat goes when in reverse. Since the prop isn't designed to work backwards it sort of "bats" at the water with the fat trailing edge hence pushing the boat in the direction of the reverse propeller rotation.

CC boats back left all others and later model V drive CC boats back to the right.

This is a huge PITA at our docks because we need to back to the left in a short area to head out of the channel. I hated every minute we had dads Mastercraft because of that and I let him know it every day.

I didn't really notice mine walking anymore than before but it does really make reverse throttle input much more responsive if you get into a situation you need to move backwards quickly.

It's amazing how lazy a junk federal can make a boat feel coming out of the hole and in the midrange (even more so with a load behind you) if you're used to running Acmes. That will wake the boat up big time- that and a healthy 351w (even at 240hp) in the small 2gen hull is a strong performer. More so than even the performance upgrades- though that is a good 2nd step to consider if you want more pulling power.

You guys are killing me about all the benefits and performance out of the 540 It's going to be a long couple of months before I try my new 540 out At least I could stare at it on the trailer

seacamper wrote: It will be hard to sneak that one under Mrs Seacamper's money radar.

Tom,
Separate checking accounts and credit cards are the key. It's worked for me all my married life!

seacamper wrote: If it lasts another year I may consider that. It will be hard to sneak that one under Mrs Seacamper's money radar.

Jesus Tom, you're a pilot. Another trip to the mile high club and what money radar are we talking about?

Such a stealthy boat addict haha.

8122pbrainard wrote: phatsat67 wrote: Good thing your Wife doesn't read the forums Pete !! haha. I hear Mrs. Seacamper rules the money roost with an Iron Fist! My only concern is when the package shows up at the front door. Many times I will have items shipped to work.

THAT is why I come here. For sage wisdom!