Gould 0738 wrote:
Seriously, my experience more closely matches BOATING mag's.

It will vary from hull to hull, but if you're just breaking plane at 70-75%
throttle, you need to lighten ship. :-)


The Parker planes in the 16-17 mph range, but if the conditions warrant,
I typically "cruise" the boat at 25-30 mph. The engine seems to have a
wide "cruise groove" range between 4000 and 4500 rpm, but will redline
at 6000 rpm. Actually, I watch the flow gauge more closely..I try to
cruise at no more than 10.1 gph, which corresponds to 4000-4500 rpm. WOT
produces 39.9999999999999999999999999999999 mph. The same boat with a
250 hp Yamaha produces about 42 mph, and with a 300 hp, 44-45 mph. But
to run at those speeds, you need to be an oil sheik.

If I am "driving" from the cockpit, I might run a tad faster, but up
forward (way forward) in the cabin, the ride is bumpier over the chop.


--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

The Parker planes in the 16-17 mph range, but if the conditions warrant,
I typically "cruise" the boat at 25-30 mph. The engine seems to have a
wide "cruise groove" range

Your Parker gets better fuel economy at 25-30 mph than on plane at 16-17?

Very unusual, indeed. I'll have to see if there are some test results that show
others have had a similar experience in the same boat. Could it be that trim or
something is unnaturally and seriously *reducing* your Parkers nmpg at the
slower velocity?

Gould 0738 wrote:
The Parker planes in the 16-17 mph range, but if the conditions warrant,
I typically "cruise" the boat at 25-30 mph. The engine seems to have a
wide "cruise groove" range

Your Parker gets better fuel economy at 25-30 mph than on plane at 16-17?



Very unusual, indeed. I'll have to see if there are some test results that show
others have had a similar experience in the same boat. Could it be that trim or
something is unnaturally and seriously *reducing* your Parkers nmpg at the
slower velocity?


I'll take some notes, but, yes, I'm pretty sure I'm getting more mpgs at
the higher rpms.

My car has a fuel flow gauge, too. I get better mpgs at 60 than at
50...according to the gauge.


--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

Gould,
I thought you got better gas mileage in gallons per hour right after a
planning hull gets on plane, but you got better gallons per mile at
"cruising speed". I was wrong.

I checked out the actually gas consumption used in boat tests and it appears
that while the gallons per mile varies from boat to boat some being better
at planning speed, some better slightly higher than planning speed, and some
are actually higher at 4000 rpm, with Cruising Speed being 3000 rpm.

So it would appear that Gould's statement cruising speed is based upon the
highest RPM that will not stress the engine is correct, but their are some
boats that actually got better MPG at higher than cruising speed.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
The Parker planes in the 16-17 mph range, but if the conditions warrant,
I typically "cruise" the boat at 25-30 mph. The engine seems to have a
wide "cruise groove" range

Your Parker gets better fuel economy at 25-30 mph than on plane at 16-17?

Very unusual, indeed. I'll have to see if there are some test results that
show
others have had a similar experience in the same boat. Could it be that
trim or
something is unnaturally and seriously *reducing* your Parkers nmpg at the
slower velocity?