FloScan Closure

[Larry M]

I just received this from FloScan. It’s a tough market out there.

It is with regret that I must inform you that FloScan will be closing its doors at the end of February. We have had a great 40-year run but the past few years have been difficult to maintain operations and profitability. We are currently taking final orders up until the end of this month. However, the FloScan model type and quantity that we can build and ship will be subject to availability. Lastly, we are in negotiations with a buyer to take over supplying spare parts and will advise once this matter is finalized.

We sincerely appreciate your business over the past 4 decades and wish you well.

Regards,
Joe Dydasco
Sales Manager

 

[k9medic]

I hate to see this happen to any business but they have basically priced themselves out of business especially when compared to Garmin interfaces

 

[Larry M]

We replaced our old FloScan last year. Complete was $803. They did give us boat show pricing since we were replacing a 25 year old system.

Is Garmin’s system a stand alone or does it have to interface with theirs?

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
Last I checked, Garmin was only making flow sensors which interfaced with their GPS/sounders for gasoline engines. Is there a diesel option now? Bad news about Flo Scan....

 

[johnrupp]

Maretron makes NMEA 2000 compatible diesel fuel flow sensors. Bring your wallet.

 

[Comodave]

Most of the new engines have that built in so their sales are probably dropping because of that.

 

[CaptTom]

I hate to see this happen to any business but they have basically priced themselves out of business...

+1. The prices for these things are at least an order of magnitude greater than any possible combination of the components can justify.

Flow meters are pretty common in process control. You can buy a Raspberry Pi computer for a few bucks that could read and manipulate the input from a meter.

Maybe it's time for an open source development project?

 

[ssobol]

Lowrance makes a fuel flow sensor that can be networked via NMEA 2000 and/or use one of their display units (LMF-200, LMF-400).

However, I have found that once you use the flow meter a few times and find out what the flow is, the fuel flow meter rapidly becomes redundant.

 

[HopCar]

I’m sorry to hear that. I loved the Flo Scan I put on Possum. The one time I had a problem, they were extremely helpful. Nice people to deal with.

 

[yarradeen]

I have a spare metric flowscan unit and sensors. I removed due to engine upgrade that provides fuel management via its internal electronics.

Not worth shipping international but if any AU TF'ers are running flow scan and want like a spare.

Single engine diesel unit.

Y

 

[caltexflanc]

Most of the new engines have that built in so their sales are probably dropping because of that.

Exactly. Shame about FloScan though, they were nice people.

The key issue with metering diesels is allowing for the fuel returned to the tank, which all do to varying degrees; some, like the old Detroits, a whole lot. Simply metering the flow from the tank doesn't get it.

 

[sbu22]

It is a shame. Good eqpt and excellent support. First encountered FloScan in aircraft many moons ago. I was well aware of the cost of FS when I installed on my boat. Thought it was worth the premium.

 

[CaptTom]

I agree FloScans are good gear. And it would be great to have that information handy at the helm.

But at $400 and up for each of four sensors, I'm starting at a minimum of $1,200. Add the cost of the computer to calculate the flow, and I just can't justify it. My $15 steel electrician's fish tape works fine to stick the tanks, and I can do the math from there.

Bringing those sensors (meters) down to something like the cost of a non-marine equivalent would make all the difference.

 

[twistedtree]

I think they stood still while the market moved forward. Pretty much all diesels built since around 2008 have accurate metering built in that can be displayed on pretty much any display, big or small. And Maretron offers a similar system at a similar price, but it is part of a much bigger offering that can do way more where Flo Scan does only one thing.

 

[boathealer]

I think they stood still while the market moved forward. Pretty much all diesels built since around 2008 have accurate metering built in that can be displayed on pretty much any display, big or small. And Maretron offers a similar system at a similar price, but it is part of a much bigger offering that can do way more where Flo Scan does only one thing.

Bingo.

I see A LOT of companies doing this. It could certainly be an eyes-open exit-strategy / business decision, but I think a lot of them are not.

If one is only moderately paying attention, and monitoring the entirety of their own market, this stuff is obvious years ahead of time (easy for me to say sitting here in my armchair). It's like they have their eyes closed the whole time and then complain or ask for subsidies (don't get me started) because they can't stay in business.

 

[alesnloggers]

I had beers with the developer of this system recently. Interactio
No affiliation other than a mutual friend.

 

[Delfin]

Other than looking at it occasionally, FloScan data has marginal value for me. It was very helpful initially figuring out optimal running speeds/endurance, but the data doesn't really change. If my system fails, I am not sure I would replace it. Do others use fuel consumption data for some ongoing purpose?

 

[Larry M]

... Do others use fuel consumption data for some ongoing purpose?

Last year after the rebuild, the injector leak off pipe (return) at one of the injectors wasn’t torqued correctly. I would have recognized I had a fuel/oil issue sooner had the old FloScan system been working. I can judge when I need to clean the bottom. I also like having the electronic tach vs the VOA analog gauge.

 

[Tom.B]

I had beers with the developer of this system recently. Interactio
No affiliation other than a mutual friend.

Wow! That’s interesting. Thanks.

 

[k9medic]

Wow! That’s interesting. Thanks.

I had beers with the developer of this system recently. Interactio
No affiliation other than a mutual friend.

I am seriously thinking about this as an upgrade!

 

[bayview]

I wanted them initially but the price and complexity turned me off.

I realized that i could approximate the fuel gauge reading down to 1/16 th on a gauge labeled in 1/4 ths.

By reading the gauges as I filled the tanks and recording the 1/16ths and gallons I was able to get a reasonable repeatable estimate of fuel used that could be verified every time I filled up.

from that point on I never considered flowscans.

 

[O C Diver]

When repowering my boat, to keep the flowscan would have required new flow sensors. Then the old analog face would have been very hard to read do to the large scale for the previous engine's fuel consumption. New engine has digital readout of fuel consumption to a tenth of a gallon per hour. Seems a much better more accurate system without flow sensors and associated plumbing.

Use mine like an engine gauge to help determine everything is functioning properly. Can tell when the house bank goes off of absorption while charging as the power consumption drops dramatically. Normally I just set the throttle to 2 GPH and cruise at whatever that speed is.

Ted

 

[Ski in NC]

Sad to hear, but understand why. As others posted pretty much all engines sold new in the last ten years have electronic controls in which reside an algorithm that calcs burn rate. Does not measure it, but calcs it. And these readings have proven quite accurate.

On trawlers that burn 1-4gph, the Flowscan and other direct measurement tools have proven to be difficult to get an accurate reading. Two sensors, each with a certain % accuracy. Subtract two close numbers each with an accuracy of X and total error can magnify.

Say fuel supply flow is 20gph +/- 3%. So actual flow could be 19.4 to 20.6

Say burn rate is 2gph.

So return is 18gph measured at +/- 3%. Actual could be 17.46 to 18.54.

So take the extremes (not really likely, but trying to make a point) and measured flow rate could be 19.4-18.54= 0.86gph or 20.6-17.46=3.14gph.

Now you calc error and your 3% sensors give you a total error of 57%. Yuk.

Math way different for engine burning 30gph, they shine there, but that ain't my world.

 

[CaptTom]

I had beers with the developer of this system recently. Interactio
No affiliation other than a mutual friend.

Nice idea. Bluetooth to a phone app instead of a wired connection to a dedicated computer for analysis.

I see two drawbacks. First, the sensors still cost $1,400 CA (over $1,100 US) for four (twin diesels.) Second, Bluetooth communication is good for just a couple meters. I doubt it'll reach the flybridge from the engine room.

I keep hoping for a way to justify flow monitoring, but so far have come up empty-handed.

 

[FF]

"I keep hoping for a way to justify flow monitoring, but so far have come up empty-handed."

Any inaccuracy in the flo scan system seems to not change.

So with a bit of adjustment over time the amount of fuel in the tanks will be very close to real.

We have ( 2 ) 100G tanks and run down to 10-15 gal remaining.

The dipstick and gauge reading frequently come out with in a gallon.

Close enough to know the marina pump has not been "fixed" to read 10% or more high.

 

[virtualburton]

Nice idea. Bluetooth to a phone app instead of a wired connection to a dedicated computer for analysis.

I see two drawbacks. First, the sensors still cost $1,400 CA (over $1,100 US) for four (twin diesels.) Second, Bluetooth communication is good for just a couple meters. I doubt it'll reach the flybridge from the engine room.

I keep hoping for a way to justify flow monitoring, but so far have come up empty-handed.

Hi guys,

Disclaimer! I am a vendor and am the guy that alesnloggers had beers with.

I don't want to pitch anything but just wanted to address the bluetooth comment by CaptTom (above):

Bluetooth range is much more than a few metres. My sensor uses Bluetooth 4.2 set on medium power and has a range of approx. 100 feet. We have customers who installed in several 40+ foot twin diesels, the largest being a 57' Motoryacht. The sensors are mounted down in the engine room on the inside of the engine beds behind the gears and the owner uses his phone from the wheelhouse with no issues. The engine room is also sound insulated and completely closed and to my surprise he has not had any problems with range. To be honest, it's better than I thought it would be.

Safe boating everyone,
David

 

[CaptTom]

I don't want to pitch anything but just wanted to address the bluetooth comment by CaptTom (above):

Bluetooth range is much more than a few metres. My sensor uses Bluetooth 4.2 set on medium power and has a range of approx. 100 feet...

Sweet! I guess my knowledge of Bluetooth is outdated!

Thanks for chiming in. It's always good to have someone who really knows what they're talking about show up here.

Now, if you could do something about the cost of those flow meter sending units...

 

[Larry M]

...Now, if you could do something about the cost of those flow meter sending units...

I looked at their web site. $729 CND for a single diesel (2 sensors) and $1,390 CND for twin engines doesn’t sound too bad when compared to similar systems. I do like that the sensors can be mounted vertically or horizontally.

 

[CaptTom]

I looked at their web site. $729 CND for a single diesel (2 sensors) and $1,390 CND for twin engines doesn’t sound too bad when compared to similar systems.

No question they're good gear, and compare favorably to the competition.

I just can't justify the cost, given the value of the data to me. It's just telling me something I already monitor on a regular basis, but in real time. Nice, but not nice enough to cost the same as a radar system.

I compare it to other process control sensors used in factories and homes all over the world. One can monitor the flow of various liquids with any number of different sensors, starting at a tiny fraction of the price of one of these "marine-grade" diesel fuel sensors.

I don't even begrudge the cost of the computer to add and subtract the pulses. That's a specialized, low-volume item. But I can't fathom why the sending units can't be stamped out in large quantities at some factory in the developing world for a comparable price to all the other cheap sensors available today.

 

[virtualburton]

But I can't fathom why the sending units can't be stamped out in large quantities at some factory in the developing world for a comparable price to all the other cheap sensors available today.

Tom, believe me, I thought exactly the same thing you did when I started this but there are a myriad of reasons why. I'd be happy to explain them to you if you want, contact me any time.

As I said above, they are not a fit for some and it sounds like you have it covered so good on ya!

Cheers, David