Cruising on Erie Canal

Jay - Bravo on what works for you. I've found "rules of thumb" are like "opinions";
you may have yours, but they're not necessarily "facts" for everyone. I subscribe
to common sense and knowing what is in your owners manual in a 20/80 ratio.
Opting to tip the ratio more for common sense may end up biting you in the
pocket book when it comes to boating/engines unless you have above average
aptitude with same.

I find blogs like this very interesting with many seemingly worried about burning
too much fuel, and the costs* involved, but ignoring other factors which may end
up much more costly in time.

Aye.

* locally now $1.98/Gal unleaded
 
Foggy,
We often travel at hull speed for a number of reasons. No wake zones, manatees zones, canal speed restrictions. I doubt many here are concerned about the financial aspect of fuel conservation. In a cruising situation maybe the hull speed is really a need to conserve fuel to achieve more in the way of range. For our boat 10 mph is just not enough to get on plane or what feels like a happy spot for the engine as it is in between getting on plane and displacement speed. Plus according to the fuel management it happens to be not as efficient as slowing down to five or six mph. Since lots of us have auto pilot these speeds allow for seeing the scenery, wildlife, or objects of interest longer. Lots of us like to take pictures. My point being I don't think people who at times are traveling at displacement speeds are penny pinchers as you seem to be suggesting. I think we just enjoy traveling slow speeds to relax, enjoy and to sort of soak our surroundings. Some might want to stretch their on board fuel because of the distance to the next available fuel for purchase. I for one seriously doubt I will have a motor failure as a result of a day of slow cruising in spite of what your Honda manual states.
Happy Trails
D.D.
 
Will-C":224598hs said:
Foggy,
We often travel at hull speed for a number of reasons. No wake zones, manatees zones, canal speed restrictions. I doubt many here are concerned about the financial aspect of fuel conservation. In a cruising situation maybe the hull speed is really a need to conserve fuel to achieve more in the way of range. For our boat 10 mph is just not enough to get on plane or what feels like a happy spot for the engine as it is in between getting on plane and displacement speed. Plus according to the fuel management it happens to be not as efficient as slowing down to five or six mph. Since lots of us have auto pilot these speeds allow for seeing the scenery, wildlife, or objects of interest longer. Lots of us like to take pictures. My point being I don't think people who at times are traveling at displacement speeds are penny pinchers as you seem to be suggesting. I think we just enjoy traveling slow speeds to relax, enjoy and to sort of soak our surroundings. Some might want to stretch their on board fuel because of the distance to the next available fuel for purchase. I for one seriously doubt I will have a motor failure as a result of a day of slow cruising in spite of what your Honda manual states.
Happy Trails
D.D.
Click to expand...

Try as I might :-), I can not find fault with your words.

Aye.
 
The original discussion was centered on running at hull speed, or lower, to comply with speed restrictions on the Erie canal without damaging the main engine. Fuel conservation was not the issue. On the other hand, finding the "sweet spot" for efficient cruising in un-restricted waters is an interesting subject!
 
Foggy":2jpd1pgo said:
Bob mentioned this earlier. I'll paraphrase in my own words.

For you "putterers" who enjoy long lazy days in protected waters at hull speed
while enjoying the local scenery:

Extended running at low rpms is NG (read not good) for your engine.*

If I enjoyed such, I would opt for having an undersized engine that I could run
at operating speed (well above idle but somewhere below 80% of max rpm).
This could be the "kicker" on single main engine vessels. NG for a twin engine
guy.

On twin engine vessels, it's more of a problem unless you can alternate engines
(one in, one out) with the "in" engine running above 3,000 rpm. This is not a
great solution and may cause other problems since the working engine will be
over propped. It all goes back to the bold face above.

And, there goes all the fuel savings many seem so concerned about.

Aye

__________________________________________________

*2014 Honda Owner's Manual BF90, Pg. 80

"Running the engine below 3,000 rpm for more
than 30% of the time so the engine does not
warm up."
Results in
"Water condenses in the engine and mixes
with the oil, resulting in a milky appearance."
and
"The engine oil deteriorates, becomes less
efficient as a lubricant, and causes engine
deterioration."
Click to expand...

We seem to be slowing down on our cruising lately. When cruising theTenn river in Oct we stayed mostly at about 5 knots.Its a Honda 150 with fuel injection. How long a stretch can we cruise at about 12-1400 rpm without engine damage? We are cruising the St. John's shortly and thought about taking it slow again.
 
I enjoy folks experimenting with their engines, not mine.
Get back to us in a few years, okay?

I used to sail and I've had my fill of 8 knots and under. For this reason, and
the slow engine rpm factor, I don't frequent "Slow No Wake" areas when I can
help it.

Aye.
Grandpa used to say, "Speed changes you."
 
I think the idea of condensation being caused by low speed running might be a have to the duration of the trip and water temps. The Erie canal is relatively warm so I would think engines operating temps would be warm enough to ward off any threat from condensation. I also think Honda is covering themselves for any situation which the motor might be subjected to i.e. very cold water. The engine has thermostats for a reason. If the engine is up to temp by your temp gauge to about 180 degrees I would not worry about the motor dying an early death. Even traveling at displacement speeds your well above idle rpm. It would seem that constant high rpm use would contribute more to engine wear. Case being diesels being governed to much lower rpms than a gas engines for longevity. Neither a gas or a diesel should be left at idle speeds for long periods. Traveling at displacements speeds normally is well above idle. Enjoy the trip.
D.D.
 
Yea, those Honda engineers are just blowing a lot of hot air...
What do you think?

As far as Honda engines at high rpms, a local Honda mechanic
told me most problems he has seen with unseated valve rings come
from not running Honda OBs enough at WOT to seat the rings.

Diesel engines are designed to run at low rpms. Why? They do much more
work at low rpms than a gas engine, have more torque, higher compression,
blah, blah, blah. A diesel can run 80% WOT (2400 - 2800) all day while a
gas engine only about 40% or so. Not apples to apples comparison diesel and gas.


There ya have it. Don't baby 'em. Burn the gas. If you want slow,
get a sailbote.

Aye.
 
Foggy":3q4aicp6 said:
Extended running at low rpms is NG (read not good) for your engine.*


*2014 Honda Owner's Manual BF90, Pg. 80

"Running the engine below 3,000 rpm for more
than 30% of the time so the engine does not
warm up.
Results in
"Water condenses in the engine and mixes
with the oil, resulting in a milky appearance.
and
The engine oil deteriorates, becomes less
efficient as a lubricant, and causes engine
deterioration."
Click to expand...

I'br just looked through the owner's manual for the 150 and 9.9 (both 2005) and find no mention of slow running being detrimental to the engines health. So either that's limited to the new EFI Honda 90 or it's new for 2014.

When the Toyota we drive is going down the road the motors RPM is ~2000. Same for the Dorf truck. So cars with EFI are certainly designed to run at slow speeds, i. e. 2000 RPM, for long periods of time.

I remember a few years ago that Toyota got sued because one of their 4 cyl. engines would get loaded up with sludge and as a result of the suit, they were replacing engines. The Honda slow speed caution may be a result of that episode since their outboards are basically car engines.

And finally, with marina gas running at $5-6 per gallon, I spent the summer running at 2400 RPM with no evidence of contamination in the oil. Never have seen "milkey" ioil, unless I blew the head gasket.

So, I'm still curious as to from where that statement came.

Actually the present Eire Canal starts at Waterford. The leg to Troy is cut off. Waterford is a wonderful upstate New York town, worth a few days to soak in the ambiance.

Boris
 
journey on":31xsue6c said:
Foggy":31xsue6c said:
Extended running at low rpms is NG (read not good) for your engine.*


*2014 Honda Owner's Manual BF90, Pg. 80

"Running the engine below 3,000 rpm for more
than 30% of the time so the engine does not
warm up.
Results in
"Water condenses in the engine and mixes
with the oil, resulting in a milky appearance.
and
The engine oil deteriorates, becomes less
efficient as a lubricant, and causes engine
deterioration."
Click to expand...

I'br just looked through the owner's manual for the 150 and 9.9 (both 2005) and find no mention of slow running being detrimental to the engines health. So either that's limited to the new EFI Honda 90 or it's new for 2014.

When the Toyota we drive is going down the road the motors RPM is ~2000. Same for the Dorf truck. So cars with EFI are certainly designed to run at slow speeds, i. e. 2000 RPM, for long periods of time.

I remember a few years ago that Toyota got sued because one of their 4 cyl. engines would get loaded up with sludge and as a result of the suit, they were replacing engines. The Honda slow speed caution may be a result of that episode since their outboards are basically car engines.

And finally, with marina gas running at $5-6 per gallon, I spent the summer running at 2400 RPM with no evidence of contamination in the oil. Never have seen "milkey" ioil, unless I blew the head gasket.

So, I'm still curious as to from where that statement came.

Actually the present Eire Canal starts at Waterford. The leg to Troy is cut off. Waterford is a wonderful upstate New York town, worth a few days to soak in the ambiance.

Boris
Click to expand...
I probably shouldn't be too concerned about it. Many of my engine's 1640 hrs have been slow cruising, slow trolling and drift fishing with the engine idling and don't burn oil and have never had milky oil or other problems.
 
Well Cracker, it has been about a month and a half and it does not appear you have purchased a boat to do your extended cruising on. Having done it a bit on small and big boats, I will toss out a few questions for YOUR intended use.
You traveling alone or with someone else and/or pets?
You plan on cooking on board?
You like to stay out on the hook or use docks for overnight?
What is your beverage of choice?
You like to entertain others on your boat or go visit on theirs?
How big or small are you?
Any health considerations?
Medications that have to be refrigerated?


Toss the engines out..other than I would stay with a 4-stroke (CD22) for the "Known extended low RPM times" for this trip alone. And I guess I will ad here there use to be several CD22s with a single 50hp. I spend about 80% of my time on the boat now around 6.5-7 knot range. I think the little diesel engines are perfect set up for these slow cruises on any of the R-21+ boats. May find a used one, make the cruise, sell it and buy another boat for your go fast boating.

The "real room available" on a CD22, either a cruiser or an angler is way different than what is available on the R-21's. I love the little tugs, but, for me it would be a day cruiser as I think I am just too big for extended cruising on the R-21. I had asked Jeff Messmer (and I know he is way tired of hearing it) to build me an R-25/27ish tug with the basic layout of the R-21...just up size it without all the flash and flitter.
 
If I was traveling by myself, a R-21 with a camper back might be just the ticket for extended summer cruising. I would consider making a sort of folding platform that goes over and extends the engine cover with a camping mattress for more sleeping room.
 
ssobol":1yryfc8l said:
If I was traveling by myself, a R-21 with a camper back might be just the ticket for extended summer cruising. I would consider making a sort of folding platform that goes over and extends the engine cover with a camping mattress for more sleeping room.
Click to expand...

You can also have an extended swim platform added to the R21. It looks good and should handle a fair amount of weight without upsetting the hulls performance. Coolers, generator, waterproof storage containers, extra fuel, etc. This would keep what space there is in the boat more liveable.

Ranger is also very good at "space utilization" - the R21 is a good example of this.

Regards, Rob
 
Back
Top