Wxx3
Dauntless Award
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2013
- Messages
- 2,820
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Dauntless
- Vessel Make
- Kadey Krogen 42 - 148
Those numbers are not accurate at all. The best you can hope for is about 3.5-4 MPG that works out to 2200+- miles. We burn 1.9 gph at 6.8 knots at 48' LOA 30 tons. Those are stunning numbers. In the end it's not about fuel burn with any of these choices. It's about all the little things that makes the boat talk to you. You will know when you found the right boat.
Umm, when I calculated my numbers there are a few caveats I should explain.
1. Because I don't have a reliable program to give me actual distance traveled revert time, I will also use polar view to calculate the distance using the planner. This means that my actual distance will be higher then reported. So for the 700 nm, it wouldn't surprise me if it was actually 5% higher.
2. My calculated fuel burn also includes roughly an hour per day of going no where as I anchor, haul anchor, look at the sky, etc. On a passage, I would not have that waste.
3. With all that said, my 4 nm/gal is therefore pretty conservative.
4. If I reduce speed to 1400 rpm, that's about 5.5 kts and fuel burn will be about 1.1 gal/hr.
Let's see, 5.5 nm/hr divided by 1.1 gal/hr =
5.0 nm/gal times 700 gal = 3500 nm range.
So yes, those 39' numbers are possible.
Lastly, on the two engines versus one, I was/am willing to give up the security of a second engine to get the efficiency of one engine.
FOR ME, ,there was no point in getting a boat that I could not afford to put fuel in to go all the places we want to go. Even now, having to be in one place for a month drives me crazy. That's why I'm up at 2 a.m. posting to tf.
And that comment about the wet exhaust was a bit flippant.
Night all.