454 Big Block yea or neh?

I’m looking at a BFN with the 454 as a v-drive.  Do I pull the trigger on this rig or is the big engine a big fuel suck and nothing else.  I only ski, BF & occasionally pull the kids on the tube but they are outgrowing that (thank God).  No doubt it’s a kick ass rig but I would love some input from those of you who have owned this engine in a D-drive SN or V-drive BFN.

Thanks for the input ultrarunner!  The kids all ski 3 of 4 slalom ages all 13 yrs and younger.  The v-drive BFN is attractive to me with the rear pylon freeing up the back seat and more space overall than our ‘82 SN.  Plus the BFN just seems bad ass.  It’s not the last boat I will buy but seems like an ok stop off point on the way to newer gt40s in the year 2000 era Nautiques.

Rule of Thumb, no one ever claims they wish they got a smaller engine.  Power is addictive.  These are not race engines, they are just larger with more power all the time.  They idle smooth and act timid till you pour on the coals and then they deliver.

If the kids like to slalom or you enjoy watching them enjoy that, run from that boat because its the fast track to hating slalom skiing. 

I have to agree with Tom… the v-hulls do not lend themselves to any kind of slalom, even beginner/intermediate. As a big block fan and owner, the difference in fuel consumption is substantial- it approaches 2x that of a small block in a comparable boat. In a v-drive configuration, holeshot will not be good with the weight of a 454 in the rear.

The big block barefoot boats are certainly desirable, but unless you’re using them as intended (barefooting), they’re not nearly as versatile or enjoyable as the more common flat bottom small block boats. I would reconsider looking for something more appropriate to your use.

Even the DD barefoot SUCKS for slalom (SB or BB).

That's so true Skier. I made a point to keep my previous Sport as light as I could when I went out to "ski". Ballast empty, half a tank, and nothing in the rear trunk. That worked pretty well. 

The No Wood Stringer note is important.  Stringers can rot out and that repair can take months of hard work, pretty much makes a boat worth about 25% value compared to a solid stringer boat.  There are many old boats with wood stringers that are perfectly OK but there are many also out there with rotted stringers.  Do some homework on this one.

It blew up??? Like, drop a valve? Spin a bearing? Blown head gasket?

Don’t know for sure, the owner thought maybe crankshaft broke after initial inspection today. I’m the furthest thing from a mechanic, but the owner certainly knows his stuff.  It was a sad day for a fine boat & machine. 

just like my 1967 SS396 Chevelle!

Too bad, yes hopefully the damper.
Boat's better for wakesports.
Was behind one at a barefoot endurance tournament, at 36 mph wanted to get back into the wake, but gave up, needed a stepladder. It looked knee high.

Sorry, I assumed when maybe an explanation was needed.  Long Line in Water Skiing is standard 75 ft rope.  Barefooters sometimes use 100’ but waterskiers use 75’.   15’ off is the first take off length to shorten the 75’ foot rope.  Deeper refers to very short lengths,  So 22 off, 28 off etc, I think the current ski record for the course is 41.5 off but maybe I am out of date.   If you are making the course at 15 off and go deeper you are jumping to 22 off, I think is the next jump shorter.  As a recreational skier I never made it past 28 off 6 balls at 36 MPH so that leaves me in the non competitive group.  The older Nautique had better wakes the shorter the rope was.  The barefoot Nautique was designed for strong pull at faster speeds with footers but has a no so good ski wake.  As your skiing improves in the ski course you shorten the rope to increase the difficulty.

LongLakeWI wrote: There was a loud thud/thump like you hit a log or something.  The engine lost all power and wouldn’t run or restart.  There was a fair amount of oil & water in the bilge.

Feel bad for the owner of the boat but consider yourself lucky on this one.