| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 10:09:56 -0400 (EDT), "Harry Krause"
wrote: I wouldn't want to run those engines very long at 4000 rpm...they'll have a short, unhappy life. I'd bet the real cruise speed is under 20 mph. ===================================== Yes on both counts. The boat is under powered, and the fuel capacity of 225 gallons is on the light side for twin inboards of that size. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 10:09:56 -0400 (EDT), "Harry Krause" wrote: I wouldn't want to run those engines very long at 4000 rpm...they'll have a short, unhappy life. I'd bet the real cruise speed is under 20 mph. ===================================== Yes on both counts. The boat is under powered, and the fuel capacity of 225 gallons is on the light side for twin inboards of that size. My little parker holds 170 gallons of gasoline. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yes on both counts. The boat is under powered, and the fuel capacity
of 225 gallons is on the light side for twin inboards of that size. Out this way, that 225 gallons provides more than adequate range for extended weekend cruising. We aren't making high speed 60 mile runs offshore like an East Coast, Gulf, or SoCal sportfisher. Our typical weekend boater would seldom cruise more than 50-70 nautical miles roundtrip. With prudent fuel management, that 225 gal would get a boater from Seattle to the San Juans and back. Barely. Adequate fuel capacity depends a lot on intended use. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Off Topic: Republicans VS Democrats | General | |||
| Off Topic RE Killfile | General | |||
| on topic/off topic | General | |||
| On Topic: Anniversary of Jack London's death | General | |||
| For my on topic friends... | General | |||