| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 969.1 | Fuel is a relatively minor cost when you count up EVERYTHING ! | HYDRA::BURGESS | | Mon Apr 27 1992 18:00 | 24 |
| re <<< Note 969.0 by MQOSWS::M_CHEVRIER "Michel A. Chevrier 632-3707 Montr�al" >>>
> -< Fuel consumption: Outboard VS I/O >-
> All things being equal from what type do one
> gets better fuel consuption?
From best to worst...
Sail (-:
Electric trolling motor
Diesel
4 stroke (Inboard)
4 stroke (I/O)
2 stroke (Outboard)
Bigger (-:
|
| 969.2 | | UNIFIX::BERENS | Alan Berens | Mon Apr 27 1992 18:23 | 4 |
| I once made a 180 mile passage using only 0.05 gallons of diesel fuel.
Sailing, of course.
:-)
|
| 969.3 | Not in Canada, more specifically in Qu�bec | MQOSWS::M_CHEVRIER | Michel A. Chevrier 632-3707 Montr�al | Mon Apr 27 1992 18:40 | 6 |
| Fuel being very close to double the price of what
it is in the US.
Thanks
Michel.
|
| 969.4 | stale old joke :-) | TOOK::SWIST | Jim Swist LKG2-2/T2 DTN 226-7102 | Tue Apr 28 1992 09:30 | 5 |
| Like he said.
I have a late-model Johnson 115 (V4) O/B. It will pass anything
but the fuel dock.
|
| 969.5 | 200hp Evinrude VS 260hp Mercruiser | GENRAL::CBROWN | | Tue Apr 28 1992 09:43 | 16 |
|
My brotherinlaw has a 200 Fourwinns with a 200 hp Evinrude on it. I
have a 190 Sea Ray with a 260 hp Mercruiser. Both boats are about the
same waterline and weight real close to the same. Both boats also seem
to perform about the same. He pulls me out of the hole for just a
couple seconds and than I slowly catch up and just creep away. It seems
that I get much better gas mileage than he does. He has a 45 gal tank and
I have a 44 and when he is close to empty I still have over a 1/4 tank
left.
Hope this helps a bit
Craig
|
| 969.6 | MPG | SALEM::GILMAN | | Tue Apr 28 1992 09:59 | 7 |
| I get far better MPG with my 78 Johnson 25 HP than I did with my 35 HP
1968 Mercury. Both engines are on the same SIZE boat... but the
wooden boat with the 25 not only gets better mileage with a smaller
engine but goes 5 knots FASTER too. I suppose the boats weight ABOUT
the same 800 lbs or so.
Jeff
|
| 969.7 | Fuel i/o vs ob | WEFXEM::HOWELL | | Mon May 04 1992 07:52 | 12 |
| To ans. your questions alot of comparison need to be done but assuming
that all is equal in most cases for now you will see more efficient
fuel consumption from a i/o because it is a 4 cycle engine as a
outboard is in most cases a 2 cycle but they do have 4 cycle outboards
and they are quite expensive but so are i/o.The cost of operation
should also consider the maintence as well as fuel.I have had both and
i found after the initial purchase the i/o has been less cost to
operate.The fuel cost for 2 cycle must also consider the constant
buying of 2cycle oil where as the 4 cycle usualy goes the season on 5
quarts and a filter.I hope this is of some help you will find that alot
of this is a big trade off and you need to determine what your needs
are before buying.
|
| 969.8 | New outboards are a lot more efficient than those a few years ago | BAJA::THORSTED | In search of smooth water... | Tue May 05 1992 10:52 | 7 |
| My old Chrysler 140 outboard was a real gas gussler, but my 1985 Mariner 150 did
considerably better on gas (and power/speed) than my friend's I/O, including the
price of the oil. I might mention that it also did a lot better than my current
285 hp Inboard in MPG and speed, but as you would expect, not in the power
catagory.
/wayne
|