Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19
  1. #1

    FX HO dependability vs FX SVHO dependability

    Hi, trying to decide between 2015 Yamaha FX HO and 2015-FX SVHO. Did side by side comparison and for me it comes down to wanting to keep long term. Does anyone have a feel for maintenance requirements and dependability for SVHO (FX SVHO Super charger) versus dependability of a non-supercharged (aspirated) Yamaha FX HO.

    Thanks!


  2. #2
    infamous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    2,036
    +1
    336
    The SVHO are fairly new but someone on here has a SHO motor with 500+ hours original SC clutch ect... If you take care of it and get extended warranty either motor should last a while.

  3. #3
    Ski Hacks MG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    5,253
    +1
    990
    Its a Yamaha. Either way, the reliability is proven. Pick one and ride.

  4. #4
    Lake Lion
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Dirty Jerzey
    Posts
    773
    +1
    118
    Unless you are going to take full advantage of the super charger with a reflash and other supporting mods, I would get the HO. Still has great power and less things to worry about.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by hotbutta View Post
    Unless you are going to take full advantage of the super charger with a reflash and other supporting mods, I would get the HO. Still has great power and less things to worry about.

    This! plus the HO will use about a third less fuel....

    but if you're going to use the power of the SVHO, it's a great machine.

    We use ours mainly for long distance cruising with friends so we got the HOs and they are perfect for what we do.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Siesta Key, Fl
    Posts
    1,066
    +1
    155
    If you want to feel acceleration get the SVHO. Everyone gets all crazy about the top MPH they can hit but biggest difference between an SVHO and the others is how fast it gets to those speeds.

    Reliability will be fine with the SVHO if you are just out riding it normal, but since it is a SC ski if you beat on it then you have a higher chance of more maintenance. With that said if you are not modding it (which if you are considering a HO you have no need to) you will have the warranty for up to 5 years so nothing to worry about

  7. #7
    zone5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    West of Blue Mountains, Australia
    Posts
    373
    +1
    36
    I would buy the HO if you really need every bit of the fuel economy, but the difference isn't quite as big as some of the folklore - our HO averaged 17 litres per hour over a year, the SHO/SVHO both about 28 litres per hour of mixed riding. I do not ever expect to do supercharger maintenance...

    We bought a 2012 HO for all the sensible reasons - look what we ride now. The SVHO is awesome stock, no mods required to take full advantage of what it's got.

    As the a Dark Lord said - "Resistance is futile..."
    Last edited by zone5; 03-15-2015 at 07:57 AM.

  8. #8
    Click avatar for tech links/info, donation request K447's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    near Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    36,599
    +1
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by zone5 View Post
    I would buy the HO if you really need every bit of the fuel economy, but the difference isn't quite as big as some of the folklore - our HO averaged 17 litres per hour over a year, the SHO/SVHO both about 28 litres per hour of mixed riding...
    Quote Originally Posted by jetboater View Post
    ... the HO will use about a third less fuel....

    ... We use ours mainly for long distance cruising with friends so we got the HOs and they are perfect for what we do
    28/17 is about 60% greater fuel burn

    So the supercharged cruise range would correspondingly be about 60% less distance per tank than the HO models? Need to review my math on this ...

    1/3 less fuel burn with HO or 2/3 greater fuel burn (supercharged) is a significant difference. I get that riding styles vary, but 60% less range would be a huge factor for myself.

    Math note: The supercharged engine using 1/3 less fuel than HO is the same, mathematically speaking, as the supercharged engine using 50% more fuel than the HO engine.
    Last edited by K447; 03-15-2015 at 05:39 PM.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Siesta Key, Fl
    Posts
    1,066
    +1
    155
    I laugh when people talk about fuel talk on jet ski's. If you want good distance you better not be going WOT and better stick to cruising on any ski. Hell the SVHO actually gets better MPG than the SHO when you are at its cruising speed.

    But lets be real we did not buys ski's to just go one speed and to not play on them. If you wanted more distance on a SC ski you can always add another fuel tank. If you want to be happy with your ski, make sure you are buying one you will enjoy riding.

    If you were looking for a sporty car and picked a Focus Hybrid over the ST I bet you would not be happy. Same goes if you are looking for a commuter car and bought a Mustang GT instead of a Prius you also probably would not be as happy.

    Decide what you want before you sign the papers. I recommend going to a Demo day so you can try them out. After riding a SC ski I can not go NA. I enjoy the acceleration way to much.

  10. +1 by:


  11. #10
    zone5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    West of Blue Mountains, Australia
    Posts
    373
    +1
    36
    I'm with SS 110% on this... If you have a specific need for the fuel economy then the HO is great (Fisherman? Long distance cruising?), but he is quite correct that at typical cruise speeds the SVHO is even better than the SHO - tested and confirmed. Oh, and mixed riding includes a fair bit of WOT pulls, if you were "just" cruising the range difference would not be 60% I think, though I have not specifically tested range, only average FF.

    But his vital point is that while 95% of the time the HO will probably do just as good a job as the SVHO, that's an odd way to look at it... if you just ride for the fun then your riding experience is almost certainly defined by that "other" 5%...

    Be careful, take it from someone who's gone down that road - changing your mind later is more expensive.

    ** Heavy Sigh **
    Last edited by zone5; 03-15-2015 at 04:36 PM.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. FX-svho vs. FX-sho
    By phenoyz in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (4-stroke)
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 06-22-2014, 05:10 AM
  2. 2014 fzr svho vs 2014 fx svho
    By thereturn in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (4-stroke)
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 04-05-2014, 04:12 PM
  3. 2012 FX HO Cruiser vs. 2008 FX HO Cruiser
    By ldippi in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (4-stroke)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-22-2012, 04:48 PM
  4. 04 FX HO Cruiser vs. 05 SeaDoo GTX Limited Super Charged
    By CaptainReza in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (4-stroke)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-03-2010, 09:49 AM
  5. '09 FX HO Cruiser vs '06
    By Bits&Bytes in forum Yamaha Open Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-21-2009, 08:24 PM

Posting Permissions

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