Finally got my trims tabs working and the boat feels like it's getting up ok fine. At almost WOT and approximately 4k, I hit 25 mph. Couple of healthy males on the flybridge and 1.75 tanks of gas, and full water tank. How does that compare? Thanks.
-
-
My 3218 has 305s. I generally run at a whopping 6kts. (6.9 mph) Saves a lot of gas
I get 15-17 kts (17.25-19.5 mph) at 3500 rpm depending on wind and tides. Burns a lot of gas. :sorrow:
At WOT, (4200 rpm) I get 22-23 kts. (25.3-26.45 mph) Burns even more gas and is hard on the engines.
I only take it up to WOT a few times a season and only as a test to see how the engines are preforming.
-
Yah that was my one and only test this season. Then I turned around and got more gas. Anyway, sounds like my boat is pretty normal cept for the fat old men on the flybridge.
Comment
-
Yep, sounds like your boat is running good.:coo-iceclimber wrote:
Yah that was my one and only test this season. Then I turned around and got more gas. Anyway, sounds like my boat is pretty normal cept for the fat old men on the flybridge.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
OH YEAH, We got old fat guys also
Comment
-
Iceclimber,
Where are you? Salt water or fresh? If fresh what altitude? Stock 305's rated at 225 HP? What gear boxes? What props? How much did the boat weigh at the time? How is the weight distribution, as in where is the "at rest" water line with respect to the boot stripe? Hard top? Bridge enclosure? Gen set? What were the sea and wind conditions? Tides and or currents? What is the condition of her bottom (as in clean)? How are you measuring speed? One run only or average of several?
I'm not trying to give you a hard time here. I'm just trying to point out that even with relatively similar boats any of the above things can skew the results of performance tests drastically.
Having said all that, 25 MPH @ WOT for a '32 is quite respectable and seems to be about average. Going much faster would require a rather light boat or a bunch more power.
Comment
-
Ha, I figured someone would ask all that technical stuff. 25 mph is just fine for a stock 305/225 with a genset on a lake. No idea on the props. I was just seeing if I did have something unusual going on, and I don't. I used a GPS. I can promise you I will not see 25 mph again any time soon unless I'm in a car.RJH wrote:
Iceclimber,
Where are you? Salt water or fresh? If fresh what altitude? Stock 305's rated at 225 HP? What gear boxes? What props? How much did the boat weigh at the time? How is the weight distribution, as in where is the "at rest" water line with respect to the boot stripe? Hard top? Bridge enclosure? Gen set? What were the sea and wind conditions? Tides and or currents? What is the condition of her bottom (as in clean)? How are you measuring speed? One run only or average of several?
I'm not trying to give you a hard time here. I'm just trying to point out that even with relatively similar boats any of the above things can skew the results of performance tests drastically.
Having said all that, 25 MPH @ WOT for a '32 is quite respectable and seems to be about average. Going much faster would require a rather light boat or a bunch more power.
Comment
-
Hmmm, my 32xx does 50 mph.
Comment
-
Mine actually did 60 but it was on a trailer.MidnightSun wrote:
Hmmm, my 32xx does 50 mph.
Comment
-
I would say that fat old guys would be unusual for me.iceclimber wrote:
Ha, I figured someone would ask all that technical stuff. 25 mph is just fine for a stock 305/225 with a genset on a lake. No idea on the props. I was just seeing if I did have something unusual going on, and I don't. I used a GPS. I can promise you I will not see 25 mph again any time soon unless I'm in a car.
I prefer skinny young ladies on my boat.
Comment
-
green650 wrote:
I would say that fat old guys would be unusual for me.
I prefer skinny young ladies on my boat.
I'm generally only permitted one skinny young lady, as she is the admiral. Occasionally, we have guests.
Comment
-
My 3270 did 60-65 for almost 1200 miles. Mostly fresh air, didn't burn a drop of gas. Although there were no skinny gals or old guys just the guy driving the er ah truck.
My 3270 is a 1986 has Volvo BB225B/MS3C 1.54 ratio 3 blade 16x14 NiBrAl props with a medium cup it does about the same, 4250WOT 150 gal gas 50 gal water usually see 24-24.5 KTS. 27-28 statute miles per hour. The dingy was not on it plus it doesnt have a fly bridge enclosure or a hard top. The last time I checked in fresh water was 2008 I got a mile per hour better there. Lake Superior. I noticed a difference when I removed the layers of old bottom paint and went with a thin paint. (Interlux VC-17) in cold fresh water it worked great. I am not sure how it would do here in the puget sound full time. Since I am at Dagmars it's worked ok.
I believe the admiral would reintroduce keel hauling if there were any young skinny females involved.
Comment
-
Interesting, you are about 3 mph faster than me. Not so interesting that I'll stay up at night, but you are getting a little bit more go.Mikalkc wrote:
My 3270 did 60-65 for almost 1200 miles. Mostly fresh air, didn't burn a drop of gas. Although there were no skinny gals or old guys just the guy driving the er ah truck.
My 3270 is a 1986 has Volvo BB225B/MS3C 1.54 ratio 3 blade 16x14 NiBrAl props with a medium cup it does about the same, 4250WOT 150 gal gas 50 gal water usually see 24-24.5 KTS. 27-28 statute miles per hour. The dingy was not on it plus it doesnt have a fly bridge enclosure or a hard top. The last time I checked in fresh water was 2008 I got a mile per hour better there. Lake Superior. I noticed a difference when I removed the layers of old bottom paint and went with a thin paint. (Interlux VC-17) in cold fresh water it worked great. I am not sure how it would do here in the puget sound full time. Since I am at Dagmars it's worked ok.
I believe the admiral would reintroduce keel hauling if there were any young skinny females involved.
Comment
-
Not fair....he doesn't have old fat guys on board.:thumbiceclimber wrote:
Interesting, you are about 3 mph faster than me. Not so interesting that I'll stay up at night, but you are getting a little bit more go.
I think my boat probably has 24 years of paint on the bottom....it's at least an 1/8" thick in places if not more. I was gonna have it soda blasted.....until I got the price quote.
I decided that it wasn't worth the money for a couple extra kts at WOT.
Since I mostly run at hull speed, weight is not as big of an issue as it is when running on plane. If you find the right hull speed for the particular hull design, you are slipping through the water, not trying to push it out of the way or trying to lift the hull out of it. The boat could weigh 5 tons or 15 tons and the same engine could push both boats at hull speed with very little difference in rpms. That's why you see so many large trawlers powered by relatively small single engines.
The 32s are neither a true displacement hull or a planing hull. Consequently, they don't perform either task well. A true displacement hull would easily get 2-4 times the ktm per gallon at hull speed as our hulls do.
The most efficient way to run these boats is to travel at hull speed (6-7kts) and on one engine.
Comment
-
Or buy a diesel boat oh oh :livid:R&Jonthebay wrote:
Not fair....he doesn't have old fat guys on board.:thumb
I think my boat probably has 24 years of paint on the bottom....it's at least an 1/8" thick in places if not more. I was gonna have it soda blasted.....until I got the price quote.
I decided that it wasn't worth the money for a couple extra kts at WOT.
Since I mostly run at hull speed, weight is not as big of an issue as it is when running on plane. If you find the right hull speed for the particular hull design, you are slipping through the water, not trying to push it out of the way or trying to lift the hull out of it. The boat could weigh 5 tons or 15 tons and the same engine could push both boats at hull speed with very little difference in rpms. That's why you see so many large trawlers powered by relatively small single engines.
The 32s are neither a true displacement hull or a planing hull. Consequently, they don't perform either task well. A true displacement hull would easily get 2-4 times the ktm per gallon at hull speed as our hulls do.
The most efficient way to run these boats is to travel at hull speed (6-7kts) and on one engine.
Comment
-
A few years ago I did some single vs both engine economy tests. My findings agree with Reed. The biggest difference was at about 3 kts which decreased to zero at about 7 kts. Above that, running on a single engine burned more fuel than running on both. This seems to be typical for almost any semi displacement boat in that around displacement speed is the cut off point for single engine economy.
Fuel consumption numbers for the 305,350 GM and 351 Fords are quite similar. The V6 GM is better and the 4 cyl Volvos are better yet, but they are limited in the speed department.
Comment
Comment