Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-22-2019, 01:47 PM   #61
Guru
 
Cigatoo's Avatar
 
City: Narragansett Bay
Vessel Model: Grand Banks 36
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by seighlor View Post
My boat has an older 375hp Cat engine. Cruising at seven knots, I average a burn rate of 2 gph.
Nice boat Seighlor. We looked at a couple of Wilbur’s. One was overly modified the other above my pay grade. Beautiful boats!
__________________
Advertisement

Cigatoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 01:49 PM   #62
Guru
 
City: Qualicum Beach, Vancouver Island
Vessel Name: Capricorn
Vessel Model: Mariner 30 - Sedan Cruiser 1969
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 1,856
You might want to read this article which will irritate some about gas versus diesel, you might be better with gas. One stereotype is that gas is the bomb in the back, guys who write this here on these forums after writing it, get in their car with a gas bomb in the back and drive all over. Gas explosions percentage wise on a boat is far less than gas explosions in a car. But in a car we have become used to gas in the back.

What you want to pay attention to is the servicing of diesel engines and the fact that it is expensive and often left undone.

https://www.yachtsurvey.com/GasDiesel.htm
__________________

rsn48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 02:44 PM   #63
Guru
 
jimisbell's Avatar
 
City: Ingleside-On-The-Bay, Texas
Vessel Name: Papillon
Vessel Model: 1978 Mainship 34 Trawler #95
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon J View Post
It takes the same amount of energy to push the boat at Hull speed, whether using 300 horse or 75 horse engines. I doubt you could motormuch more economically with smaller engine. 3 gallons an hour is not bad.

Gordon

Well, a NA Perkins 6-354 will push a 35 to 45 foot boat at 7 knots at about 1 gallon per hour.. My Bruce Roberts 44 Ketch used 3/4 gallon an hour on the NA 6-354 You can get a Mainship 34 with that Perkins engine (turbocharged) already installed (factory original) If you keep off the Turbo I would think at 6-7 knots you would get about 1 gph.
jimisbell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 02:48 PM   #64
Guru
 
jimisbell's Avatar
 
City: Ingleside-On-The-Bay, Texas
Vessel Name: Papillon
Vessel Model: 1978 Mainship 34 Trawler #95
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsn48 View Post
You might want to read this article which will irritate some about gas versus diesel, you might be better with gas. One stereotype is that gas is the bomb in the back, guys who write this here on these forums after writing it, get in their car with a gas bomb in the back and drive all over. Gas explosions percentage wise on a boat is far less than gas explosions in a car. But in a car we have become used to gas in the back.

What you want to pay attention to is the servicing of diesel engines and the fact that it is expensive and often left undone.

https://www.yachtsurvey.com/GasDiesel.htm

BUT the gas bomb in your car is not enclosed in a space ventilated by an electric fan!!!!! In fact it is very purposefully hung UNDER the car so fumes are dissipated safely!!!!
jimisbell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 03:12 PM   #65
Veteran Member
 
City: Saint George Island, FL
Vessel Name: TRIBE OF G
Vessel Model: ACADIA 32
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 50
Perkins

Back in the 80's I had a 34 foot steel tug that I converted to a cruiser. It has a 6-71 Detroit in it which was way more engine than I needed. I found a Massey Harrison 1106 up in Canada that had a 6-354 Perkins in it. I bought that engine for a little bit of nothing. Then I bought a water cooled manifold from Perkins, bolted that on, added a Vetus Water Lift muffler, piped it out the side of the boat and it worked great for many years. The boat had a dry stack exhaust that was hot and incredibly loud before the switch. In fact I kept the boat at Foxhaven Marina on Catawba Island for a long time. The Perkins burned about 1.5 gph running at about 6.5 knots. Lots of fun. Lakeside Marine, on Marblehead, which I think is gone now did a bunch of interior finish work for me. It was a great sea boat and paid no attention to the Lake Erie slop. It weighed 34,000 pounds.

One thing to keep in mind is that yes the engine swap is doable, but I was working with a steel boat which lends it self to shall we say, "cut and paste" type work, rather than fiberglass.

Do some more research but dont let the naysayers here scare you away from a cool project like that.
Gypsyjon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 03:12 PM   #66
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 9,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimisbell View Post
BUT the gas bomb in your car is not enclosed in a space ventilated by an electric fan!!!!! In fact it is very purposefully hung UNDER the car so fumes are dissipated safely!!!!
For grins I looked up BoatUS fire statistics. Dependent upon the period you look at, electrical fires outnumber all fuel related fires by a 10:1 margin.
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 03:18 PM   #67
Senior Member
 
RickyD's Avatar
 
City: Long Beach, CA
Vessel Name: Aquarius
Vessel Model: Californian 55 CPMY
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceK View Post
There is a reason Mainship installed a 300hp+- engine, and not a 77hp Perkins. I recently saw a 395 with a 385hp Yanmar which at displacement/trawler speed was quite economical. Are you sure you know more about engine requirements than the builder/designer?
And balance the cost of the changeover against the possible fuel savings, a kind of cost benefit analysis.You won`t be just swapping engines, there are engine bearers,mounts, exhaust, gearbox mounts, fuel supply, raw water supply, prop shaft modifications, instrumentation and senders, lots of knock on changes to consider.
Maybe run it for a while after you buy one, and see how it looks then.
I agree with Bruce. Just cut back on the throttle and enjoy the economical ride. I had a 47 Lien Hwa with twin Ford Lehman 375's and at 10 knots I got about 1 gallon per mile. Now I have a Californian 55 with twin Cat 3208's with 425 horses each and at about 10 knots I get...….about 1 mile per gallon. I can crank it up to 18 knots. Lord knows how much fuel I'd be burning. When I had the boat hauled for purchase they said it weighed 64,000 lbs. I did have completely full fuel tanks at the time. 650 gallons.

Have fun with what ever you decide to do.
__________________
Aquarius 1991 Californian 55 CPMY Long Beach CA
RickyD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 03:24 PM   #68
Senior Member
 
BIG CAT's Avatar
 
City: Kiln,MS
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 457
my 2¢.

changing the engine is not going to change the amount of fuel needed to move the boat at x speed. the only advantage going to a smaller engine would be in the fuel required to turn the engine. bigger engines take more fuel to turn at x rpm. now with that said, the amount of fuel you will save will be very minor compared to the cost of swapping from one engine to the other. if you were starting from a blank slate it would make more sense but on an already running boat with no know issues you would be pissing away money that could be better spent stocking the bar.
BIG CAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 03:38 PM   #69
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 18,114
I still think kooking for a boat more suitable to your needs would be best.
Short of that running the existing engine slow should work fairly well.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 04:09 PM   #70
Guru
 
OldDan1943's Avatar
 
City: Aventura FL
Vessel Name: Kinja
Vessel Model: American Tug 34 #116
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 7,589
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimisbell View Post
BUT the gas bomb in your car is not enclosed in a space ventilated by an electric fan!!!!! In fact it is very purposefully hung UNDER the car so fumes are dissipated safely!!!!
If necessary, one can leave the car that is on fire and run on solid ground to escape. I still cant run on water nor change water into wine.

Your money, your boat, your choice. Enjoy what ever you buy, please.
__________________
The meek will inherit the earth but, the brave will inherit the seas.
OldDan1943 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 05:30 PM   #71
Guru
 
Woodland Hills's Avatar
 
City: Jacksonville
Vessel Name: Alzero
Vessel Model: Hatteras 63' CPMY
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,721
If gasoline is so deadly, why aren’t we seeing an uptick in boat explosions with all the new multi outboard CCs? Sure, the powerhead is in the open air, but there are hundreds of gallons of gas under the floor. And they are never grounded when fueling like an airplane.
Woodland Hills is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 06:16 PM   #72
Member
 
Rosborough 35's Avatar
 
City: Galveston, Texas
Vessel Name: Dream Catcher
Vessel Model: 1995 Rosborough RF35 Atlantic Trawler
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 18
Like most everyone that has responded, I too would stick with the larger engine that the boat has in it now. I have a Rosborough 35 trawler, with a Cummins B210 engine. The Rosborough 35 is similar to the Mainship 35, but maybe a little heavier. The Cummins B210 has been a good, economical engine for me. To give you an idea of fuel consumption versus speed for my boat with the Cummins B210:

1000 RPM, 77 HP 1.7 gph 4 Knots

1600 RPM 161 HP 3.5 gph 6.5 Knots

1800 RPM 183 HP 4.6 gph 7.4 Knots

The hull speed for my Rosborough 35 is 7.5 Knots (8.6 mph), so to cruise at hull speed, I actually need 183 HP. I never run over 1,800 RPM, unless I'm trying to blow the soot out of the turbo. The engine makes a lot more noise and burns a lot more fuel at higher RPMs (11.9 gph at 2600 RPM), but because it's a displacement boat, it doesn't go much faster at all. Running at the higher RPM is just a waste of money. We normally cruise with the engine running between 1600 and 1800 RPM. I would not want a 77 HP engine in my boat and be stuck at 4 knots. Running at 7.5 Knots, I can cover 86 statute miles per day and I have enough power to deal with an incoming tide and also to get out of the way when I need to.
Rosborough 35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 06:38 PM   #73
Guru
 
BruceK's Avatar
 
City: Sydney
Vessel Name: Sojourn
Vessel Model: Integrity 386
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 12,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodland Hills View Post
If gasoline is so deadly, why aren’t we seeing an uptick in boat explosions with all the new multi outboard CCs? Sure, the powerhead is in the open air, but there are hundreds of gallons of gas under the floor. And they are never grounded when fueling like an airplane.
From explosion reports I`ve seen,some were associated with refueling,some with work being undertaken,others just while running. I think the replacement of carburetors with EFI helped by eliminating some sources of leakage.
Gas mixture can be too rich or too lean to explode,sometimes moving the boat after refueling admits more air and the mixture becomes potentially explosive.
All said, I would not have enclosed gas engines. I`ve seen the aftermath,met survivors (a baby died, all the adults survived), seen the injuries of people fired 20ft into the air, the huge changes it made to their lives,it`s not a risk I`d take.
__________________
BruceK
2005 Integrity 386 "Sojourn"
Sydney Australia
BruceK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 07:02 PM   #74
Guru
 
City: Qualicum Beach, Vancouver Island
Vessel Name: Capricorn
Vessel Model: Mariner 30 - Sedan Cruiser 1969
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 1,856
Larger engine, lower RPM's necessary to push boat at a given speed. I just had Volvo give me a hard time about wanting to put a V6 into my boat, they felt the motor (240 hp) would be too stressed pushing my heavier 29 foot boat. Read the article I linked to above, as the old saying goes - "there is no replacement for displacement."

I got a Mercury 6.2 litre 350 hp stern drive gas and lets say at 7 knots, the 240 Volvo engine would have higher rpm's to get the same speed versus the Merc. Again read the article.

There is more to an engine than just the ability to push the boat, there is also longevity.
rsn48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 09:16 PM   #75
Guru
 
City: Hampton, va
Vessel Name: Didi Mau
Vessel Model: 2003 Ocean Alexander 456
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,041
Ski could tell you better and has

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimisbell View Post
Well, a NA Perkins 6-354 will push a 35 to 45 foot boat at 7 knots at about 1 gallon per hour.. My Bruce Roberts 44 Ketch used 3/4 gallon an hour on the NA 6-354 You can get a Mainship 34 with that Perkins engine (turbocharged) already installed (factory original) If you keep off the Turbo I would think at 6-7 knots you would get about 1 gph.
Not sure what you are trying to say. 35 - 45 foot boat covers a lot of ground. Your ketch is a full displacement boat which is not what we are talking about. Putting more hp on your sailboat would not give you much more speed, just noise.

Turbos improve fuel efficiency as well as output. That is why engines come with them. More bang in a smaller package.
Gordon J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 10:06 PM   #76
Veteran Member
 
City: cincinnati
Vessel Name: deja vu
Vessel Model: 1987 senator 35 sundeck
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 71
first of all, you didn't state that you were a long time boater. if you and your wife are new to boating I would buy the boat you like, see if you enjoy boating. at the same time, cruise a lot at a snails pace, 6-7 knots. check your fuel burn then decide if you can save enough by repowering to make it worth while. remember to factor in the loss of resale value.
tn6437 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 10:23 PM   #77
Technical Guru
 
Ski in NC's Avatar
 
City: Wilmington, NC
Vessel Name: Louisa
Vessel Model: Custom Built 38
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 6,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosborough 35 View Post
Like most everyone that has responded, I too would stick with the larger engine that the boat has in it now. I have a Rosborough 35 trawler, with a Cummins B210 engine. The Rosborough 35 is similar to the Mainship 35, but maybe a little heavier. The Cummins B210 has been a good, economical engine for me. To give you an idea of fuel consumption versus speed for my boat with the Cummins B210:

1000 RPM, 77 HP 1.7 gph 4 Knots

1600 RPM 161 HP 3.5 gph 6.5 Knots

1800 RPM 183 HP 4.6 gph 7.4 Knots

The hull speed for my Rosborough 35 is 7.5 Knots (8.6 mph), so to cruise at hull speed, I actually need 183 HP. I never run over 1,800 RPM, unless I'm trying to blow the soot out of the turbo. The engine makes a lot more noise and burns a lot more fuel at higher RPMs (11.9 gph at 2600 RPM), but because it's a displacement boat, it doesn't go much faster at all. Running at the higher RPM is just a waste of money. We normally cruise with the engine running between 1600 and 1800 RPM. I would not want a 77 HP engine in my boat and be stuck at 4 knots. Running at 7.5 Knots, I can cover 86 statute miles per day and I have enough power to deal with an incoming tide and also to get out of the way when I need to.
Those HP numbers are are way off. A B210 makes about 17-19 hp per gph consumed. 183hp at 4.6gph is almost double that.
Ski in NC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2019, 10:30 PM   #78
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 18,114
tn6437,
A smaller engine could be a gain in resale value.
There was a GB 36 that had been repowered w two 55hp Yanmars a few years back and it seemed to sell rather quickly. The smaller engines have important benefits over just low fuel consumption. Our poster here may not be the only one wanting a boat powered to go the displacement speed. Most trawlers go slow 95 to 99 % of the time. Or 100% of the time.


Ski,
Almost everyone under reports their fuel consumption. Only one thing to do ... ignore it.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2019, 08:26 AM   #79
Veteran Member
 
MICH MIKE's Avatar
 
City: WIXOM
Vessel Name: INCOGNITO
Vessel Model: 34 MARINE TRADER
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 31
for sale, Marine Trader 32. less than 150 hours on completely overhauled Lehman 80.
__________________
Mike Koski
32' Marine Trader........... 34' Marine Trader
" Curvaceous "............... " Incognito "
Newport, MI ................. Marathon, FL
MICH MIKE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2019, 08:26 AM   #80
Senior Member
 
City: MN and FL
Vessel Name: Serendipitous
Vessel Model: Mainship 390 and Bayliner 4788
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 267
Need to rethink before repower.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gfr51 View Post
New guy here from Ohio.
The Wife and I are Ready to buy a boat. Our intent is to motor around
here and there and all over.
Narrowed it down to a 35 0r 39 Mainship single engine. <snip>

Re: "Problem...300 and some horses apparently eat 3 to 13 gallons per hour. I am thinking maybe an engine swap down to Maybe a 4 cylinder Perkins."

The idea that a smaller engine will burn meaningfully less fuel is a very common misconception.

Engines burn fuel depending on how much horsepower they are producing.

A single-engine Mainship 390 running at 7 knots is going to burn the same amount of fuel regardless of what the size of the engine is.

That is because the horsepower required to move the boat through the water at 7 knots is the same no matter what the engine size is.

Yes...this seems counter-intuitive, but it is true, and it bears repeating...

Engines burn fuel depending on how much horsepower they are producing.

Now...there will be a miniscule (low-single-digit percentage) improvement due to the weight savings.

Just because a particular engine is capable of producing, let's say, 370 horsepower (like the Yanmar 6LYA in our MS390) does not mean that it will be doing that all the time, it only means that that power is available when needed.

As you work through the details and think about how you will use the boat, and learn about operating in adverse weather and rough seas, you will quickly discover that there are times you are going to need WAY more than 77 hp in a Mainship 390.

Not to worry though, have a look at these fuel-burn numbers:

Note that the numbers at 900 and 1,200 rpm are wrong due to a spreadsheet error. I learned this in correspondence with Capt. Bill Pike, who wrote the article. You need to double the gph at the 900 and 1,200 speeds, but overall this picture tells the story.

If you really want to save fuel, spend the money on a slick bottom-job, propeller balance and tuning and (most of all) GO SLOW.
Attached Thumbnails
MS390_Single_Fuel_Burn.JPG  
__________________

__________________
RiverGuy~~
Riverguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



» Trawler Port Captains
Port Captains are TF volunteers who can serve as local guides or assist with local arrangements and information. Search below to locate Port Captains near your destination. To learn more about this program read here: TF Port Captain Program





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012
×