Economical Cruising on C-Dory's

Casey · Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:15 pm Post subject: Economical Cruising on C-Dory's

On another C-Brat thread the issue of cruise range vs speed is being explored. This is a topic of interest to me, and I would like to explore a slightly different facet of the economical cruising idea (but not hijack the original thread).

Without venturing into the whole economic/social/downturn/inflation/Peak Oil rant, I believe recreation boating and cruising will become extraordinarily expensive in the not too distant future as fuel becomes even more expensive than it is today. Look at other places in the World, and you will see that recreational powerboating is largely limited to the upper financial sector of the population. In Europe, my sense is that while powerboating exists, most folks aim for the boating experience, but are largely willing to forego speed. I suppose $7-$8/gallon gasoline might make one willing go slower.

With C-Dory’s we have vessels that may be the best of both worlds – they are seaworthy and proven cruisers, and operate with relatively low power. Moreover, they can be easily trailered to distant cruising grounds which extends their economical cruising range even more.

I would be interested to hear how other folks squeeze the most Adventure from their boating budget.

(example) We have found that by reducing our speed to “hull speed,” we can virtually double our miles per gallon – thus, significantly greater economy (but slower).

(example) Moving a vessel at hull speed takes relatively little power. Europeans often power their recreational cruisers with surprisingly small inboard or outboard motors (often only 20hp or so) which is very economical. Has anyone experimented operating a C-Dory at hull speed with a single small outboard? If so, what are your experiences?

I suspect the future of recreational powerboating may be slower cruising, but for extended trips.

Anyone interested in kicking around other ideas?

Casey
C-Dory Naknek
Lake Montezuma, AZ

thataway · Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:29 pm Post subject:

See my post in the other thread--it indirectly afffects this issue. But on the other hand, it is far more effecient to trailer your boat to a destination than take it on its own bottom--even if you are only getting 10 miles a gallon in the truck.

My father's sailboat was 26 feet on deck, and about 21 feet on the water line. We used a 1930's 5 hp outboard and would use a couple of gallons of gas to go to Catalina Island. I have owned a number of small sailboats with small outboards--and again--mileage from 10 to 15 miles a gallon at low speeds.

We spent several years cruising Europe--and at that time there were very few "trawlers" in the Med, but many very slow and effecient motor vessels in the Scandanavian countries. There are also many small very effecient fishing boats all over the world--many powered with 5 to 10 hp diesels--which are very effecient. There are fishing boats in the US which are also very effecient--for example the Monterey trolling fishing boats: Basically an Itallian design which origionally was a sailing hull. Typically these 28 to 32 foot boats used an 8 hp slow turning gasoline engine.

On the other hand, in our life times we will continue to see the fast and expensive to run motor vessels--and I don't see a resurgance of sail, which is much more energy effecient...

mikeporterinmd · Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 11:50 pm Post subject:

One of the main reasons I ended up with a C-Dory is that I was faced with
repowering a twin small-block boat and dumping a bunch of money into
it. It just didn't seem to make economic sense. Friends selling boats
of this sort are having a devil of a time getting rid of them.

Hard to say if we will see a spike in gas prices into the $4-$6 range. We
should. Overall, US cars get worse fuel economy now than in the 80s,
when you factor in SUVs. Wouldn't hurt to cover SUVs under CAFE, but
I don't when or if that will happen. Any further discussion would have to get
very political, so I'll stop here.

But, in any case, I suspect I will be able to run the CD-22 for many years.
It gets very consistant mpg from 13-20mph...pretty much 3.8-4.2, depending
on the water conditions. I wonder how C-Dory got that 5.2mpg they
quote? Maybe lack of bottom paint and less weight?

It's hard to tell what it gets at hull speed because the draw is so little
that the fuel sensor does not always operate! Its need to pass more than
.5 gph before it operates reliably. So, I think hull speed smpg is somewhere
around 10, maybe 8, maybe more.

Europeans get much more vacation than the average American; perhaps
this is also why they don't mind a slow boat Smile

Mike

Sea Wolf · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 12:59 am Post subject:

I'm perfectly happy to travel at displacement speeds, for the most part, unless we're heading to some fishing spot while the bite is still on.

Except for the above, rushing around just wastes fuel and then makes you have to figure out what to do once you get there quickly! Hurry up now so you can slow down more when you get there???

Why not slow down and enjoy the trip and reallly see the scenery on the way? You can observe a lot more at 6 mph than 16 or 26!

Plus you can go a lot further on the fuel you have. Slow cruising makes sense!

Now I do have to say that on an inland lake like Shasta, I can only go 15-25 miles in each of four basic arms of the lake, and don't have to transit any big distances, but we pretty much practice the above, no matter where we go.

I'm already paying $4.85 a gallon for gas on the lake, so that's already been a factor in my thinking.

Joe.

Adeline · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:30 am Post subject:

ffheap · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 7:45 am Post subject:

Hi Folks,
This is a very interesting thread, but it may lead where I am taking it, where C-dory owners do not want to go.

Before I purchased my C-dory, I was looking at buying a trailable, liveaboard out boat cruiser THAT ALSO SAILS. I fell in love with the Nimble Boats with their trailable cruising trawler liveaboard boats. Why I purchased the C-dory was more do to with wanting a boat that could be used for cruising, fishing, and as a USCGAux OPFAC because I was involved with starting a USCGAux Flotilla on Nantucket Island. With the lack of time I have and the amount of use I get out of the boat, it was a good choice. (I also thought that I would be out of the Inn Business by now but the downturn of the realestate market changed that.)

If I sell the Inn and really retire, and with the cost of fuel rising, and having more of unlimited time on my hands, and the money to change, I would get a Nimble sailing trailable boat.

Why?

1. Cost of fuel.
2. Back to sailing.
3. Trailable.
4. Liveaboard.
5. Economical to run.
6. Good looking.

It is a thought that is with me all the time.

Just thinking.

Fred

captd · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:11 am Post subject:

Hi Casey.
Point of interest; I called a Dealer in Oregon after I had bought the 22 C-Dory. I asked some question about fuel economy. He stated with twin 40 or 50 Hondas, that he (personally) was getting 17 miles per gal while trolling. I would assume he would be running only one engine at a time. Being that I already owned one, he didn't need a sales pitch. He said the gas gets stale before burning it all. We were discussing the need for extra tanks. It kind of proves the good sense to buying a Cd. Even if his statement was 50% bull it ain't all that bad.
Your old BW is still running good. I really like it. It would be even better if I ever get it down in the Keys. It knows all the fishing holes down there doesn't it? Laughing

Darrel

Pat Anderson · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:23 am Post subject:

This is a topic that I enjoy - but we are not about to trade in the CD25 on a Nimble Nomad any time soon! Daydream has a BF150 and a BF15 kicker. We seldom have time at this stage in our lives to go slow all the time! For us, it is mostly weekend cruises where we want to transit from our launch on Friday afternoon quickly, so it is likely to be at 15+ knots, still decent economy now that we have our prop issues resolved (I hope!), so we can get to our cruising grounds before darkness sets in. But the BF150 turns in fantastic mileage at 6 knots. In calm conditions the BF15 pushes the CD25 at 6 knots as well, and as noted, the fuel burn on the little outboard is so low it does not even register on the Navman Fuel Computer...so we already have a boat that is capable of great economy. And 6 knots only seems slow after you have been running fast. So I would say we really have the best of both worlds right now.

El and Bill · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:41 am Post subject:

Yes, economy is important. But to us, the key to great boating is in one word - Relax!

http://www.geocities.com/bill_fiero/relax.htm

El and Bill · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:55 am Post subject:

Yes, economy is important. But to us, the key to great boating is in one word - Relax!

http://www.geocities.com/bill_fiero/relax.htm

JamesTXSD · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 10:07 am Post subject:

Hi Fred,

It was a Nimble that led us to the C-Dory. A neighbor of ours has a Nomad, and I had an interest in the Kodiak... the layout isn't that different from a C-Dory. The problem is in the set-up of the motor-sailor, especially compared to the C-Dory; a handsome boat, but I understand it can take close to an hour to rig.

While not a speed demon myself, I certainly like the ability to go 15-20 knots when I want... across open water, when weather moves in, or just if there isn't much to see.

And in the cabin, the CD-25 has more room than the pilot-house portion of the Kodiak; another consideration when spending extended time aboard.

I do have to admit that each time I fill up that 100 gallon fuel tank, the idea of a motorsailor has some appeal. Hmmm... now where can I mount a mast on this CD? Wink

Best wishes,
Jim B.

ffheap · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 10:58 am Post subject:

Great conversation. Please keep it up. This is what this C-Dory site is good for.

Fred

RJD Wannabe · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 1:44 pm Post subject:

Sounds like a very hidden advantage of a kicker for cruising. Looking forward to some observed fuel economy figures, even if just estimates. Makes the twin vs single with kicker discussion an easy one. Many thanks, great site!!

Dora~Jean · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:16 pm Post subject:

This isn't exactly relevant to this good discussion, but rather kind of a curious data point. We just got back from a 10 day cruise aboard an 882 ft long, 120 ft wide cruise ship (within feet of the Titanic BTW), 14 decks, 2000 passengers, 1000 crew. I asked one of the officers during an open Q&A session what kind of mileage this ship gets (twin engines). He said about 30 meters per gallon at 21 knots cruise speed.

Hmmm, so I mulled this over, that's approx 98 ft/gallon, or 1 mile/54 gallons or 0.018 miles/gallon. Not too great. But as someone else pointed out, if you multiply this by the 2000 passengers (not incl crew), it's getting a 'collective' 37 mpg/person (or about 9 mpg/4 persons)! I for one was surprised at the numbers.

Casey · Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:50 pm Post subject:

Great responses from a variety of folks....

Darrell(CaptD) "Manana" doesn't know many fishing holes in the Keys, but she'll definitely take you to a variety of lobster spots if you're so inclined!

Although I have a single Suzuki 90 on Naknek, like most folks I endlessly debated the twin versus single issue before purchase. I leaned in the direction of ONE motor considering all the attendant issues (oil changes, maintainance, etc). Well, with a Suzuki 6 (kicker), I STILL have two motors. Dang - outsmarted myself (again).

I'm beginning to think that with twin 40's (or whatever) one could run at hull speed Very economically - but when you want to GET somewhere you lower the other engine and Zoom ('ala Halcyon and others). With the CD's beam both twins are pretty close together so asymmetrical thrust on one engine shouldn't be too torquey (just invented that word...).

Will be interested to hear from C-Brat's with twins to see if anyone actually does any significant displacement cruising on one engine. They may not do it now, but when fuel gets more expen$ive they might be the only CD's on the water!

Pat/Patty: you gotta get retired! Then you'll have more time than money, and going slow can be very pleasureable!

Casey
C-Dory Naknek