Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: fx ho vs fx sho

  1. #1

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    684
    +1
    7

    fx ho vs fx sho

    i am going to sell my ultra 260x in the spring. it has been nothing but problems since i got it. first it got a milkshake, then one of my friends broke the hood off of it, and i waited half the summer to get the parts to fix the hood. when i finally got it all back together the supercharger is locked up. so i am done with this POS. im between the fx ho and the fx sho. i ride in the LI sound around the new rochelle BX manhattan areas. always saltwater and almost always some chop. how much of a performance difference is their between these 2 skis? i do not plan on doing any mods, but keeping the ski bone stock. how are they in the chop compared to the ultra? is it even worth going for the blown yamaha if im not going to mod it? also, do the yamahas require as much maintenance as the kawis? i was not told by the dealer, and it is not in the owners manual that the sc needs to be fogged after every ride. i want something with less maintenance.

    my list of priorities is basically: 1. relability 2. rough water performance 3. stoarge capacity.


  2. #2
    lukygomes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Luanda - Angola
    Posts
    74
    Hi,
    As you may know, the kawasaki's hull (250/260) is the best for offshore riding.
    Now regarding yamaha, I've tested the FX sHO and it handles pretty well in chop conditions and it makes you feel pretty confident, even at WOT
    The HO is going to have less of top end speed (around 3 mph less than the SHO, I guess).
    In stock condition, they are very reliable.
    As for storage, the FX HO and the FX SHO have the same capacity I think.
    So I will depend on your budget and on whether you want more top speed. Apart from that they'll handle pretty well in the chop and have the same storage capacity

  3. #3

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    684
    +1
    7
    after reading that the sc clutch issue has been fixed on the sho, are there any other problems with this ski? my ultra was great in the chop, but i only got to put 24 hours on it this whole year, while i put over 40 on my wave venture. the POS kawasaki was either sitting at the dealer while they got the milkshake out of it, or sitting on the trailer waiting for backordered parts. the sc pulley is completely rusted, and the blower is locked up. i ran it with the sc cover off, and always flushed it with tons of water and it still rusted. im a yamaha guy, should have stayed with them.

  4. #4
    Hello,
    Staying on the topic can anyone reply on fuel consumption between the two? About how many miles per tank? I know it depends on how you run them, but say a average 30-40MPH day and pulling a sausage with 3-4 adults for hours. I'm also deciding on the HO/SHO? Which one has the best change of lasting 7 years with the least maintenance issues? I have read the top end speed differences of the two which are minimal, but what else sets them apart enough to make one want the SHO. I see the SC as another moving part with the potential to fail in time and increased gas use. However if the response of the SHO is double that of the HO out of the hole and twice the acceleration and it can pull harder with faster acceleration than the HO than perhaps its worth the future maintenance risk. Thanks!

  5. #5
    TennR600's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Nashville, TN\Boynton Beach Fl
    Posts
    173
    Quote Originally Posted by Connective Tissue View Post
    Hello,
    Staying on the topic can anyone reply on fuel consumption between the two? About how many miles per tank? I know it depends on how you run them, but say a average 30-40MPH day and pulling a sausage with 3-4 adults for hours. I'm also deciding on the HO/SHO? Which one has the best change of lasting 7 years with the least maintenance issues? I have read the top end speed differences of the two which are minimal, but what else sets them apart enough to make one want the SHO. I see the SC as another moving part with the potential to fail in time and increased gas use. However if the response of the SHO is double that of the HO out of the hole and twice the acceleration and it can pull harder with faster acceleration than the HO than perhaps its worth the future maintenance risk. Thanks!
    The FX HO (1100cc) at 8,000 rpm will cruse near 40mph, you can expect 7.2-7.5mpg. The SHO will get you 5.5 ish. HO will run about 120+ miles on a tank at this speed. The SHO will get you about 90 miles. (The 1800cc HO uses about 10% more fuel than the 1100cc) All three jets have the same size fuel tank, and use regular grade fuel. Top speed not that much differant. A properly installed RIVA rpm kit will have your HO (1100cc) running about 64ish and does not noticeabley hurt fuel mileage. If you are crusing you dont need the sponsons. I also do not run the ride plate yet. All speeds and distances using GPS. Hope this helps

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    2
    Newbie to the forum, been lurking for a while.
    I'm facing the same question. The last ski I rode was my GP1200R in 2004. I'm about to buy a pair of somethings. Narrowed it down to the FXHO due to fuel consumption for tubing and cruising and only 3mph give up on top end. Then this past weekend I rode my buddy's '07SHO. His girlfriend has an fx cruiser but it was stuck in kiddie mode and the remote was at home so I didn't get a good comparison. I wanted to get a feel for the difference, although the ho would fall in between it would give me an idea. Probably going for a pair of SHO leftovers as soon as I sell my boat. Decisions Decisions. Big question would be how much difference in the feel of hole shot. I know the posted data. If no mods are planned is it worth the money and fuel mileage give up to get the SC ski?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. 2009 FX HO vs 2009 FX SHO Fuel consumption
    By smittyj01 in forum Yamaha Open Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-09-2010, 05:18 AM
  2. FX SHO vs. FX HO?
    By Bostonfan32 in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (4-stroke)
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 04-01-2010, 12:30 PM
  3. Quickness difference 2008 FX HO vs SHO
    By skeeterzx225 in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (4-stroke)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-23-2009, 04:56 PM
  4. 09 FX HO vs SHO
    By inothome in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (4-stroke)
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-01-2009, 12:27 PM
  5. '08 FX HO vs. '08 SHO
    By jwafer21 in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (4-stroke)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-03-2008, 12:30 AM

Posting Permissions

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