I was telling a friend the other day I was installing FloScan ... He looked at me and said why?... I can tell from here your burning diesel.. He said when you get low on fuel just put some more in.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No... I was just saying there are always two points of view. Some people don't care about burn and cost and some do... it doesn't make either one right.Did he change your mind?
To me it's not about cost of fuel. It's about a boat that runs at it's potential vs. one with problems, and then those problems being accepted as normal.
I run around .35...lolGreat Lakes, I know where you live. If you post that your boat runs like that too, I WILL STEAL YOUR PROPS BEFORE LAUNCH DAY!
I have a twin engine Floscan to keep an eye on things but it is deceiving in the sense you see a point in time gph and not an average. I would say that most recreational boaters have some percentage of motoring off plane where the gph is a lot better. So, on average.....fuel burn is better than what they see on a Floscan at 3200-3500 rpm.
The difference between .5 and .65 represents less than one fillup to me a year.
I don’t know if this is true, but I have heard the plain v-drive system is better for long term maintenance costs. Yes, you might pay more for fuel, but lower maintenance and lower initial price make up for higher fuel costs? I am not sure it makes sense to purchase a large boat and then have to pull it out of the water every year to get an expensive maintenance done on the pod drives, by a special mechanic. Maybe this has improved, maybe if you live up north where you have to pull it out anyway? I have no first hand knowledge of this, just relaying what I have gleaned from other posts.The 2005 39 Sundancer gas is a redesign from older years - not the same as your boat. The chart I posted was conservative too. I've since had a running gear overhaul. But cruising is still about 0.65 MPH at best. This is the way 2005-2006 era 390 / 40 sundancers perform with gas. C'est la vie. Looking forward to my next diesel boat with IPS or Zeus.
That is a cool display. If I had it to do over again.....that would definitely win.
If I take your gallons per hour and your speed I get .69 mpg which is great number for a 40' boat. In fact, it is the best number I have seen on a 400DA.
Why is your Starboard engine burning more gas?
That's why I like my NMEA meters. The constant calculation of economy and range are right in my face. I don't have to "worry" about it - I just use it. (this is an old screen shot. My new system calculates to the hundredth, so none of this rounding-up stuff)
Maybe so, but the difference between .5 and .65 is what, 20-something% !?! That's a LOT! Not to mention the very-real possibility of attaining higher, while going faster and further.
what brand is that fuel setup ?was thinking about foxmarine setup for my twin 7.4 efi
The new display is even cooler. I don’t have a good screenshot though. I’ll take one this summer.
27.5 mph / 36.2 GPH is actually .75, so my MFD rounded-up. That was under ideal circumstances. Light on fuel, waste, water and passengers, clean bottom...
If I dig the tabs way down and throttle down to the high 2000’s, hitting .75 MPG is easy even when heavy.
Good catch on stbd’s burn. She suffered a mechanical issue many years ago that reduced compression in cyl 7. Runs great, as you can see, but a little more thirsty than her sister. The meters help me keep an eye on it.