No I conceded they might be measuring in chuckster gallons:-) You are a
classic example of how magazine writers just print nonsense in the hope
of not offending the marketers.

K

Wrong, again. I don't state fuel consumption figures without identifying the
source of the information. Sources can be
fuel consumption tests done by the engine mfg during commissioning,
observations of
fuel flow meters underway, or anecdotal remarks by a marketing representative.

Your difficulty seems to center around statements like, "The factory claims the
vessel burns 4 gph at 10-knots," (or) "My dockmate repowered with a 300HP
Gruntngroaner and he says his fuel consumption has dropped from 22 gph to
17." If the statements are properly identified as third party claims, why
should the writer or poster be barbecued alive because your textbook theory
would appear to question the numbers?

It's one thing to express some skepticism, but another entirely to convert a
discussion of fuel efficiency to a personality oriented flame fest.

When you watch television news and some reporter says "The local Aussie
politician claims he has single-handedly revitalized the economy of SE
Australia," and you disagree with the politician's boast, do you damn the
reporter for "spreading lies"?