25 cruiser fuel consumption?

T

toothy

New member
Hello All

I've got the bug! I was wondering about fuel consumption on the 25. It isn't listed on the factory web site, but the weight is, and it seems to have packed on quite a few more pounds than the 22. I would appreciate some of your wisdom on this matter. Just round # will do, specifics would be even better.

I want to go to naked island in July and the 14' Whaler center console just won't cut it.

Thanks
Wade & Carol
 
Check out the thread, "Forced upgrade from Honda 135 to 150" in this section. It's by Anna Leigh. I think it is the ninth post in that thread. It has a copy of a recent test with a Honda 150 on a 25 CD, with RPM, Speed GPH and MPG.

Amazingly economical.
 
Thanks for the link. I had read that one, but I'm a bit of a sceptic about stuff from the manufacturer :wink I wanted info from real people who load them up with ALL the junk we all carry.

Help me out here I'm no mathmatician. To get MPG you take speed and divide by GPH right or wrong?

In the linked thread
"The Honda 150 on the 25 bettered the lower cruising speeds by delivering 23 MPH and 3.7 GPH at 4500 rpm. Very usable for inland waters, although perhaps a bit much for all but the calmest days offshore."

By my calculations that comes out to 6.2+ MPG
In another thread the figures by my calculations exceded 8 MPG
Those #'s don't compute, with my limited knoledge of boats and fuel bills.

Thanks again
Wade
 
Wade - your numbers don't compute because GPH (gallons per hour) is not part of the calculation for MPG (miles per gallon). To get MPG, divide miles travelled by gallons used. Say you went 25 miles and used 5 gallons of gas. 25 / 5 = 5 miles per gallon.


toothy":1ui195te said:
Help me out here I'm no mathmatician. To get MPG you take speed and divide by GPH right or wrong?
Click to expand...
 
Wade-

Divide the distance traveled by the number of gallons consumed, example-

40 miles divied by 8 gallons = 5 miles per gallon.

Joe.
 
toothy":y9yq2g4w said:
Thanks for the link. I had read that one, but I'm a bit of a sceptic about stuff from the manufacturer :wink I wanted info from real people who load them up with ALL the junk we all carry.

Help me out here I'm no mathmatician. To get MPG you take speed and divide by GPH right or wrong?

In the linked thread
"The Honda 150 on the 25 bettered the lower cruising speeds by delivering 23 MPH and 3.7 GPH at 4500 rpm. Very usable for inland waters, although perhaps a bit much for all but the calmest days offshore."

By my calculations that comes out to 6.2+ MPG
In another thread the figures by my calculations exceded 8 MPG
Those #'s don't compute, with my limited knoledge of boats and fuel bills.

Thanks again
Wade
Click to expand...

Wade,

You ARE INDEED correct -(Miles/hour)/(Gallons/hour) = Miles/gallon. For the other posters, think of running the boat for 1 hour @ 23 MPH and 3.7GPH --- in that 1 hour you would go 23 miles and burn 3.7 gallons. 23/3.7 = 6.2 MPG. I also agree that the #'s don't compute - e.g. that the gas milage is too high to be real. My guess is that you'll see something closer to 3 or 4 MPG on the CD25.

Roger on the SeaDNA (not a mathematician either but know enough...)
 
Yeah, I had second thoughts exactly along those lines...but when tried to delete the post, found out pHp says "Cannot delete a post that has been replied to" or something like that...but for sure the numbers in that post do NOT compute...


rogerbum":2q2fg0p6 said:
Wade,

You ARE INDEED correct -(Miles/hour)/(Gallons/hour) = Miles/gallon. For the other posters, think of running the boat for 1 hour @ 23 MPH and 3.7GPH --- in that 1 hour you would go 23 miles and burn 3.7 gallons. 23/3.7 = 6.2 MPG. I also agree that the #'s don't compute - e.g. that the gas milage is too high to be real. My guess is that you'll see something closer to 3 or 4 MPG on the CD25.

Roger on the SeaDNA (not a mathematician either but know enough...)
Click to expand...
 
Wade,

"Real world milage" for us has been between 3 and 4 MPG, depending on sea, wind and current conditions. Thats with about 70 gal. of fuel, two adults, two cats and a fair amount of gear (three week cruise). Our prop is a propulse set at 16 pitch (variable) which delivers about 5900 RPM (max) at sea level with a 135 Honda (04 model). Top usable speed for us given ideal ocean conditions is rarely over 20 knots (very flat sea or San Juans on an average day). Can't comment on the 6.2 MPG figure because we've never come close to that figure (wish we could). Maybe the 150 not only produces more power above 4500 RPM but also uses 1/2 as much fuel (sound like snake oil sales, doesn't it).

Hope this helps.
 
Hi Wade, et all;
I have the CD25 with twin 90 HONDAs, w/15" pitch, 4 blade props. Saturday was the first time I ran it with the NAVMAN 3100 fuel flow installation setup. Calibration of actual FF is recommended after abt 100gal are run through the transmitters.I did not write down the numbers, but what I did notice and hope I remember correctly was:

With the below loading....
Full fuel...100gal
4 adults & 2 coolers
NO water & empty holding tank
2 Anchor sets, 30' chain, 600+' line
Refrig. & Air Cond.
Other 'stuff'

1650rpm.... 1.1g/h total... 7.6kts(GPS)
5450rpm.... 17.4g/h total... 29.7kts(GPS) [WOT]

I noticed my range go from 460nm to 230nms (These don't seem to match the above figures, but what I can best recall.). I did not do any of this for a calibration. I did not track with tide and wind considerations. The winds were abt 15kts with tidal currents abt 2.6kts in the area I checked the NAVMAN for operation and set the 'full' fuel setting to 100gal. I hope I can give you better info after my next run. I want to set a flow chart up as I do a speed/rpm chart for future use.

I still have a lot to learn abt all the toys on board, but tracking fuel is rather important when trying to stretch your range. I did find a difference in FF between the engines at the same noted rpm and will have to double check the calibration of the FF sender. The gauge set is the HONDA Electronic Digital Gauge package. I did not have enough console room for the info I wanted; i.e., the water pressure for each engine.... Do not like to find out abt plastic bags around the water intake till it is too late..

Interestingly enough is I noticed different FF and water pressures with various motor tilt and tab trim for the same apparent rpm. This is where I will be focusing my attention to assure a reasonable calibration for any further info. I should have tracked the GPS to see how efficient the CD was running. At this time the gauge sets are at their factory preset, as applied to the configuration of the CD25.

I hope I did not confuse anyone with all this. I do accept comments and I will accept fault for everything on Thursdays, 'my fault day'.... Though, remember .. the rest of the week is ALL mine.
 
Hi,

I just noticed that the numbers from the table are actually 4500 23.0 6.3 3.7
That would be 4500 rpm 23.0 mph 6.3 gph 3.7 mpg. So the earlier post of 3.7 gph was a typo/misread of the table.

This is still really good milage for a 25. :smile
 
Assuming the 3-4 mpg figure is accurate there is basically no fuel cost saving in running a 22 over a 25, give or take the small stuff. I understand all hull shapes have their own eccentricities and that long and narrow slides along better, but I thought the added weight would incur some penalty.
The wife would sure like the added amenities of the 25 for the same fuel outlay. The purchase price is another matter!

Leaving the bay and heading East into Prince William Sound it would be nice to have the kind of range that 3-4MPG and 100 gallons gives you. We could goof off for a really long time, or should I say a really long ways.

I'm assuming the ride quality of the 25 is somewhat superior to the 22 due to the longer water line and added weight?

Wade
 
Wade-

I just don't see how a boat that is over 50% larger in weight, with a motor that is 50% or larger in displacement, can burn about the same amount of fuel as the first boat.

What we would need to test the difference is to run a 22 and a 25 with similar technology engines, over a parallel course, perhaps on a cruise where they could run side by side for several hours under a variety of conditions, and then measure comparative fuel consumption. There are too many variables otherwise to get comparative data.

Might be an interesting project for a future cruise. Might even be able to extend the study to several different power choices for each hull and get not only the hull differences, but variations between motors as well. ???

Sound interesting? Joe.
 
The TyBoo22 (Honda 75) averaged 5 smpg on the Columbia and the big lake it drains into. Period. All the time. Sometimes she did better, sometimes not so good. But come time to fill the tanks, the math was always right at 5.

The TyBoo25 (Honda 130), although not yet closely checked, is best guess 2 to 3 smpg. I am betting that my 25 is a bit heavier than most. Lots more wood inside, plus all the junk Kay makes us haul around. It also has 50+ gallons freshwater in three tanks and a 10+ gallon holding tank under the head that seems to be full everytime I see it (three girls on board). Shoot, throw the TV, DVD and microwave on a scale, and I have enough fishing weights to bring it up to a hundred pounds. Heavy. Probably 3 tons in the water. And I know I have never got over 3 mpg for any distance. But I am pleased with what it gets. And it rides real nice.
 
Sure BTDT! Tyboo Mike is spot on for the 22 w/ Honda 75 or 90. I safely use 4.0 NMPG for planning -- and think El and Bill, who have more nautical miles on a 22 than all of us combined, use the same planning figure. I've gotten as high as 4.5, but that's under ideal conditions. The 75 Yami on my 22 was the same -- no difference either on the Floscan or at the pump. I'm sure the engineers can show better fuel consumption because of fuel injection, but I found no practical difference.

The 25 is a big boat vs the 22, and with the same power plant (not likely) IMO would get 50-60 percent of the 22's mileage. At least 20 percent - according to Honda - of the increased mileage reported on the 25 is because of the 136/150 lean-burn technology.

I've had the 130 Honda (love this motor) on 3 different boats, and have gathered considerable data on fuel consumption (RPM vs GPH) -- both at the pump and on the Floscan. With the numbers I have, the 130 Honda should get about 2.5-2.8 NMPG at optimum cruise. Weight makes a huge difference in the 22, and the increased basic weight of the 25 plus added personal gear will certainly impact the 25 NMPG figure.

Guess my numbers would be considered "ideal" because they are obtained with the autopilot - boat properly trimmed for best performance - and no wandering around to cause excessive drag from steering corrections. And these are NO CURRENT, NO WIND figures. All of my data is taken on LONG legs - usually at least 15 NM.

I don't expect the E-TEC figures to be significantly different than the 90 Honda numbers, but hope to have some answers this week. (I have over 1,000 hours of NMPG vs rpm numbers for the Honda 90/75).

I'd rather be fishing,

Dusty
 
Right, Dusty -- our fuel consumption is 4.17 nautical miles per gallon, over 17,000 nautical miles of cruising. This is an average for the lifetime of Halcyon, all conditions from ideal to terrible, from going up a river to downriver, with a wind and against. In gallons/hour, our long-term average is 2.14. So, with 40 gallons fuel, we conservatively figure 19 hours of cruising and 160 miles (we rarely cruise more than 100 miles without refueling (if possible), since we like to 'burn off the top of the tank.'
Halcyon is heavier, perhaps, than most other CD 22s because of the nature of our long-distance cruising and liveaboard lifestyle.

We have twin Honda 40's but find our fuel consumption almost identical with a single Yamaha 90.
 
Well, I certainly need some help here! I'm reading figures of 3.5 MPG for the Honda 150, and Dusty's experience with the 130 says its range under optimum conditions is 2.9-3.2 MPG. With 3600 miles of cruising under the Cosmic C's belt, I'm averaging only 2.6 MPG with my Honda 130. I don't have my prop size with me just now (boat is stored for winter on the St. Lawrence, I'm in PA), but my WOT is about 5600 RPM. I thought 2.6 MPG was a bit low, and mentioned this to Cutter Marine when they did my first 200 hour service, but, if anything, MPG was slightly LOWER after they did their thing.

With gas prices now so high this low MPG has started to concern me, especially since we are thinking of cruising the Great Loop in 2006/7.

Any ideas out there as to why my C seems to be such a gas hog? When we cruise we usually have a full water tank, rarely have much in the toilet holding tank, and carry two of us with reasonable gear. I usually trim to max RPM or MPH at a given throttle setting.

I'd appreciate any help.

Patrick
 
Sea Angel said:
Hi Wade, et all;
I have the CD25 with twin 90 HONDAs, w/15" pitch, 4 blade props. Saturday was the first time I ran it with the NAVMAN 3100 fuel flow installation setup.
Click to expand...

I hope that your engines are EFI, which I think is great. The Navman is supposed to work with EFI, but how does the Navman 3100 measure the fuel that goes through the pressure relief valve back to the tank? Or does it just measure the flow to the engine?
Click to expand...
 
Based on what others here reported, the 2.0 - 2.5 mpg range is more the rule than the exception for the Honda 130, 135 and 150. I was right at 2.5 mpg on Daydream with the factory-supplied 3 blade 14.5" x 15 pitch stainless propon our 150. I changed to a ProPulse 4 blade, also 14.5" and adjusted to 15 pitch, and the first trip out with the new prop recorded 3.7 mpg over 100+ miles. I am having second thoughts if this was accurate, although I do not know why it wouldn't be, since on the Desolation Sound trip, 200+ miles, the computed average was back down to 2.7 mpg. In both cases, we had held rpms mainly around 3,500. The ProPulse gives speeds at the various rpms almost exactly in line with the table in the "Forced Upgrade" thread, and was hoping for mpgs in line with the table as well - but that remains to be seen. I am definitely going to get a Navman 3100 as my next addition, I would at least like to know what mpgs I am getting at various rpms, how much gas I have left and what my remaining range is, rather than guess at it...
Cosmic C":1kpqjucw said:
Well, I certainly need some help here! I'm reading figures of 3.5 MPG for the Honda 150, and Dusty's experience with the 130 says its range under optimum conditions is 2.9-3.2 MPG. With 3600 miles of cruising under the Cosmic C's belt, I'm averaging only 2.6 MPG with my Honda 130. Patrick
Click to expand...
 
...but how does the Navman 3100 measure the fuel that goes through the pressure relief valve back to the tank?
Click to expand...

My Honda 130 EFI does not have a return line to the tank. Once the fuel goes through the check valve in the squeeze bulb, it stays past it. There is some intricate plumbing under the cowl, so maybe the excess flow is diverted back to the suction side of the pump, but once it passes the spot where I plan to put the Navman sensor, it's paid for.

That is an interesting point, for sure, and one I hadn't thought of before now. Thanks a lot! Now you got me trying to remember what I did with the return line on the old Camaro when I jerked the TPI system and the computer off and put on a good old reliable 4V carb.

Any ideas out there as to why my C seems to be such a gas hog?
Click to expand...

It could be the same reason my 130 is such a gas hog. My boat is very heavy with all the junk we have on board, and the 130 is not enough for it. I really think a bigger motor that doesn't have to work so hard would be more economical. It all has to do with how far down you gotta push the gas pedal to get up the hill.
 
Back
Top