On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 18:57:04 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


wrote in message
oups.com...


Someone should tell the Gilmore Girls that viagra is a lot cheaper
than double diesels, and probably just as effective. Anyway, to
sherrif chuckies point, my children (the next generation of spenders)
and many or their peers are moving toward greener play across the
board. Kayaking (touring), indoor rock climbing, and bike trips are
big, vacations are no longer Daytona, but New Orleans for cleanup and
culture. Many of the local water ways are making provisions for much
smaller boats, and recreation and motor restrictions are getting
tougher every day. The overindulgent will still have their big boats,
but they will pay though the nose, be subjected to more restrictions,
and their numbers will drop due to financial attrition. I don't know
that the situation will ever improve for them from this point on. Once
the big manufacturers tool down, I don't see them coming back.


I am curious. What makes you think that a 20'-25' outboard or I/O powered
boat being used for it's intended purposes is any more fuel efficient than a
40'-50' twin diesel cruiser being used for it's intended purpose? The
truth may surprise you.

You know what was interesting to me on this whole twin engine deal I
did today?

We used less fuel (diesel) than I would have used on the Contender
doing the same kind of stuff.

On the other hand, the Contender would move a hell of a lot faster and
cruised higher than the Topaz's top end.

I think overall, the diesels would be cheaper in the long run, but you
just can't get the oommph you can with outboards. :)