For some reason this thread reminds me of the old joke "Death, nature's way of telling you to slow down". I've only been to Lake Powell once, years ago, when the kids were small. But I do remember it as an overwhelmingly beautiful, almost spiritual place, where, perhaps, one is encouraged to slow down.
Solving the Lake Powell BF130 /150 Problem
- Thread starter Pat Anderson
- Start date
Wandering Sagebrush
Free Range Human
dotnmarty":1h94gavw said:
Marty, often Diana and I did slow down to around 5-6 mph. We were turning around 1600-1800 rpm if you can believe a Honda tach... MPG went up significantly ( we did around 75 miles on 11ish gallons if my memory is correct). Yes we saw a lot of very interesting things that perhaps we may not have observed going faster. We also were waked by every jerk in a Bayloser or Maxxum sized Clorox bottle. Perhaps I include the 12 gauge next trip....
Seriously now, I did enjoy putting along, but there were times when we wanted to get to a canyon without spending 5 or 6 hours getting there. Bottom line is that I would like to have the option to go more quickly, as well as putt along at trawler speeds.
Steve
oops. I guess I did reverse the numbers. My stock Honda 90 prop would be 13.5 diameter and 15 pitch, wouldn't it? I had written it down wrong in my notes.
I remember the Wefings man said (I think) a stainless 13.375 x 14 three blade was the ideal setup. Maybe I'll get one of those and see which I like best and keep the other for a spare.
I'm also thinking about a Permatrim. I run with a lot of trim tab down (more than half) and I think the engine plate might be a more efficient way to get that lift.
Jeff
I remember the Wefings man said (I think) a stainless 13.375 x 14 three blade was the ideal setup. Maybe I'll get one of those and see which I like best and keep the other for a spare.
I'm also thinking about a Permatrim. I run with a lot of trim tab down (more than half) and I think the engine plate might be a more efficient way to get that lift.
Jeff
jkidd
Active member
Boris
I just used the bare hull weight from the factory, they say 3602 lbs for the 25 and 1925 lbs for the 22. I know all the other goodies will have an effect also. I figure that the bare hull weight would let me see how just the motor hp and hull weight were equal to each other. Were the CD22 with a 115 HP ends up you would have to put a 200 HP on the CD25 to get the power to weight ratio close. Then when you start adding all the goodies you would be out of wack again. With my boat I can run the same prop at sea level that I do at Lake Powell. I do see a small change but not much. When I go above 6000 feet is when I see a big change. There I could drop down a pitch size. However the boat still planes and gas consumption is still ok.
I just used the bare hull weight from the factory, they say 3602 lbs for the 25 and 1925 lbs for the 22. I know all the other goodies will have an effect also. I figure that the bare hull weight would let me see how just the motor hp and hull weight were equal to each other. Were the CD22 with a 115 HP ends up you would have to put a 200 HP on the CD25 to get the power to weight ratio close. Then when you start adding all the goodies you would be out of wack again. With my boat I can run the same prop at sea level that I do at Lake Powell. I do see a small change but not much. When I go above 6000 feet is when I see a big change. There I could drop down a pitch size. However the boat still planes and gas consumption is still ok.
There is a service bulletin on Honda 150's with serial numbers between 1000001 thru 1101713 that says performance is effected at higher elevations. My serial number falls in this range and my Honda tech here in Chinook is ordering the new electronic command module that hopefully is covered under warranty. I have yet to take out our boat at sea level since our return from Lake Powell but it ran fine before we left. Our performance at Powell was 3200 rpms and 9.5 mph with poor economy, we kept it at 2500 rpm and 7.8 mph and got about 2 mpg.
I will post after we go out for crab in the next few days and after we get the new ECM.
I will post after we go out for crab in the next few days and after we get the new ECM.
Pat Anderson
New member
We ran with Russ and Toni a lot, same speed, and our computed fuel economy for the whole time we were there was 3.2 miles per gallon...going S...L....O...W, but no complaints, it was great! I will check our serial number against those below and ask West Coast Marine. We also will find ourselves a 14 x 13 prop for the next Powell trip!
sportner":1iyqvgw3 said:
My C Dory 22 was about 4000 lbs ready to go, the 25 was close to 6,000 lbs ready to go. To back up Boris's comments on the Honda engines:
The 130 and 115 share the same block--at 137 cu inches, 505 lbs Long Shaft, 2.00:1 ratio.
The 135/150 share the same block at 144 cu inches, 485 lbs 2.14:1 gear ratio.
To get the really fuel effecient speed on the 25 you would have to drop down to 6.1 knots, and for the 22: 5.6 knots. If you are running at 9 to 10 knots this is probably one of the most ineffecient speeds you can go at.
The Permatrim will help by putting the bow down in chop. It will also give a slightly lower planing speed, and up on a plane faster.
Our experience on Powell, on the first trip, we had a seal level SS Prop, and no Permatrim. We could barely get on a plane, and were not getting WOT RPM. The second trip. we had a lower pitch aluminum prop, the Permatrim and perhaps slightly lighter, and were on a plane all of the time.
The 130 and 115 share the same block--at 137 cu inches, 505 lbs Long Shaft, 2.00:1 ratio.
The 135/150 share the same block at 144 cu inches, 485 lbs 2.14:1 gear ratio.
To get the really fuel effecient speed on the 25 you would have to drop down to 6.1 knots, and for the 22: 5.6 knots. If you are running at 9 to 10 knots this is probably one of the most ineffecient speeds you can go at.
The Permatrim will help by putting the bow down in chop. It will also give a slightly lower planing speed, and up on a plane faster.
Our experience on Powell, on the first trip, we had a seal level SS Prop, and no Permatrim. We could barely get on a plane, and were not getting WOT RPM. The second trip. we had a lower pitch aluminum prop, the Permatrim and perhaps slightly lighter, and were on a plane all of the time.
Bob,
At 10 knots in my 22 I can be on step however to get there I have to get up on step at a higher speed and then back off the throttle while adjusting trim tabs and motor. I normally end up with about 1/3 tabs with motor up about 1/3 on Honda trim guage. On step with the new EFI 90 Honda at 10 knots is actually pretty efficient, over 4 mpg on fuel flow and actual consumption using the Quicksilver 14 pitch 3 blade prop. I found this cruise mode first with a Permatrim and then removed it and could still get comparable efficiency with just a little more trim tab and moving a heavy cooler foward to between the helm and passenger seat.
At 10 knots in my 22 I can be on step however to get there I have to get up on step at a higher speed and then back off the throttle while adjusting trim tabs and motor. I normally end up with about 1/3 tabs with motor up about 1/3 on Honda trim guage. On step with the new EFI 90 Honda at 10 knots is actually pretty efficient, over 4 mpg on fuel flow and actual consumption using the Quicksilver 14 pitch 3 blade prop. I found this cruise mode first with a Permatrim and then removed it and could still get comparable efficiency with just a little more trim tab and moving a heavy cooler foward to between the helm and passenger seat.
journey on
New member
According to a San Diego Honda dealer, Boat Depot, Inc, the serial numbers are up to 1100713. This would include anyone who bought their boats/motor in 2005.
Journey On's motor qualifies, and I think Pat A. and Anna Leigh bought their boats about the same thyme.
Boris
Journey On's motor qualifies, and I think Pat A. and Anna Leigh bought their boats about the same thyme.
Boris