Butch Davis wrote:
Thanks, Harry. Just what I was going to point out to the K. The HP an
engine makes is dependent upon the fuel it is flowing. If a boat is running
at cruise speed the engine is far from operating at WOT, and is therefore
flowing far less fuel than that required to make the rated HP.

Seems impossible I know but are you as mad as Krause???

Again the claim is at a 22 mph cruise it uses 6-7 usgal/hr & at "max"
the boat does 40 mph on 11 usgal/hr.

Why are you thanking the lying idiot?? he posted crap about a totally
different engine, an engine with a max power of 260 HP!!! NOT 315 HP or
are you so stupid you think the engine that makes 315 HP doesn't use any
more fuel???

Clearly the K failes to read the entire data sheet... she simply looks for
anything that supports her position and presents it as though it is the only
fact(?) that matters.

The data sheet is for a 248-260 HP engine & the fuel graph shows at
max power it uses 16 usgal/hr (0.06153 usgal/hp/hr) which is much more
than the Cummins & much much more than the Cat

So now it seems these spruikers are even worse than I suspected, they
really are using chuckster gals!!!

So using their own figures at 315HP which is max it uses 19.38
usgal/hr!!! so their 11 gal/hr at max was is & until there's some huge
technology breakthrough will remain just marketing BS for magazine
dreamers like you & Krause.

It's too funny that she rants about the money I've lost because I bought a
FICHT in 1999. I'll have been running the engine for six years this spring.
No problems have appeared of any kind. My only expense has been for fuel
and oil and annual lower unit oil changes. Call me a liar, I changed plugs
as a preventive maintenance action last March at my annual maintenace
interval. I may rework the water pump this spring but probably not. Our
climate allows me to use the boat year round so idle time is not an issue.
I've no idea how much cost I've avoided through increased fuel and oil
economy. Depreciation is a non-factor for a boat/engine of this age and if
my health continues to allow I'll run this rig for many more years.

What's with the K and FICHT?

BTW, K, Where did you read in anything I wrote that I admit that magazines
do not do fuel flow testing on diesels. It is such an amazingly simple test
to run that I can't imagine why they would not run the test?

I sorta agree but they DON'T!!! because they can't use a fuel flow
meter & if the tank is anything but almost dry then their BS article
won't be impressive enough so the advertising might suffer:-).

Happy Hols to you to!!.

K


Happy Holidays.

Butch
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

K. Smith wrote:

Butch Davis wrote:


Diesel engine manufacturers know and publish very accurate fuel
consumption data. Competition keeps them honest.


Agreed & that's exactly why Yanmar "aren't" making this claim, some
seller & dreamers' magazine are.


A given engine in good tune will burn a given quantity of fuel at a
given load or power level. Load being a factor of speed vs weight
generally.

Lot's of conditions contribute to load on a boat. Windage, bottom
condition, type of water, altitude, temperature, etc. That's why data
is generally published for a standard set of conditions.

Manufacturers sometimes have the benefit of testing fuel consumption for
a specific hull under varying conditions. They often publish the
findings. Boat builders often share the data if favorable to them. The
potential liability for publishing false data is sufficient to keep just
about everyone honest.


So now you're saying that the magazines don't actually "test"
diesel??? OK progress at last!!! They certainly word their claims like
they already know they're suspect numbers, the infamous chuckster's
"about" gallons, in his world they must be huge, how many litres in a
chuckster gallon??? or gees louise I suppose there's chuckster litres
there too??:-)


In my previous life I was a PM for the construction of a towboat. We
opted for large twin Cats. Cat predicted with very high accuracy
exactly what fuel consumption we would have with the engines.


Yes that's true & I'm well familiar with fuel consumption of marine
diesels that's why when just strolling past the thread I near fell over.

So now all you or anyone need do is find a proper Yanmar link which
claims anything like 315HP on 11 usgal/hr, I can't but hey Butch you
bought a Ficht so I'm sure you'll lead us all to one in a jiff.


http://www.yanmarmarine.com/products..._TechnData.pdf


The URL listed above shows the 315 hp Yanmar produces about 250 hp at 3400
rpm and burns around 11 gph. The max rpm for the engine is 3800 rpm, but
only an idiot would run that diesel higher than cruise for sustained
periods.

Thus, the engine under whatever standard conditions are for it burns 11
gph at a high cruise rpm.