HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Oct 10, 1:05?pm, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:49:07 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Chuck Gould wrote:
Your opinion has certainly "evolved" since the days when you
proudly
proclaimed your ownership of a Hatteras in rec.boats. :-)
Indeed, Chuck. After a four year war "for oil" that continues,
$3+ prices
at the pump, and the hard right working harder than ever to deny the
impact of global warming, it just seems "smarter" to downsize
one's energy
consuming toys. I wouldn't mind seeing a substantial luxury tax
or energy
surtax on oversized pleasure vehicles, luxury yachts, private
planes, et
cetera.
The surtax should be on the cost of the fuel in excess of X amount of
gallons used per month, not the item the fuel is used in.
Eisboch
Harry, if you're still reading - many of those trawlers are powered
with
small diesels, burning almost nothing. Do you consider Wayne's or
Chuck's
boats 'luxury yachts'?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I realize over 4 nmpg. I'd be surprised to learn that Harry's boat is
more economical than that.


Some small tests I've run on Son of Yo Ho indicate about 3.5 mpg at
26 mph. At your boat's speeds, my mileage goes down. 10 miles an hour
equals about 2 mpg.

Since you were talking about your lobster boat yesterday, what kind of
mpg and gph does your lobster boat get?


http://tinyurl.com/3dg

Harry,
That was not polite, I am just trying to understand your position on
this issue. You can't say you don't like slow cruising, that you really
like to go fast so you can get to your destination quickly, no matter
what the fuel consumption is, and then chastise someone else for using
less fuel by cruising slowly.

So what kind of mpg and gph does your lobster boat get?