F225 Performance

M

metla100

Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2014
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Points
1
I have an Adventure 208 with a 2006 F225 with about 675 hours. Just bought second-hand with about 650 hours. My performance is much less than any data sheet that I can find online. The speed is right on, but the fuel consumption is about 2 - 2.5 GPH more than what is published. For example, at 4000 RMP performance sheet says 29.1 MPH (mine is 29.5), GPH is 6.99 (mine is 9.4) and MPH is 4.2 (mine is 3.1).

Does anyone have any insight about the difference? Do the engines get worse performance with age/hours? Anyone else care to share their actual performance with this rig and setup?

Appreciate any insight!
 
Weight makes a big difference. Hardtop, gear, water tanks full.
Did you have a compression test and leak down test done?
Yamaha calls for a valve lash check/adjustment at 500 hours.
 
I found the same thing with my F225s until I checked the actual fuel used compared to the totalizer on the fuel mgmt gauge (multiple times). The gauge is off by 11% or more. It can be adjusted by about 3% if I recall correctly. Reset the fuel totalizer to zero, fill the tank and see how much it takes to refill the tank after it's down 3/4 or more. Compare to what the gauge says- I'll bet the gauge shows more fuel consumed than the tank actually takes.
 
I have the same setup with a hardtop . Same age ( 2006 )with over 1000 hours . My gauge shows 2.7 - 3.0 with 3 on board and equipment , ice , etc. at 4000 rpm running on smooth seas . Your gauge may need resetting as suggested . Plane , trim tabs , seas and wind bring those numbers down for me .
Great boat that we have used and enjoyed since 2006 . Have fun on the Adventure !
 
metla100 said:
I have an Adventure 208 with a 2006 F225 with about 675 hours. Just bought second-hand with about 650 hours. My performance is much less than any data sheet that I can find online. The speed is right on, but the fuel consumption is about 2 - 2.5 GPH more than what is published. For example, at 4000 RMP performance sheet says 29.1 MPH (mine is 29.5), GPH is 6.99 (mine is 9.4) and MPH is 4.2 (mine is 3.1).

Does anyone have any insight about the difference? Do the engines get worse performance with age/hours? Anyone else care to share their actual performance with this rig and setup?

Appreciate any insight!
Click to expand...
First of all, there are so many variables that direct comparisons are meaningless. For example, the sweet spot for fuel consumption in the test data may be different than your sweet spot. Most performance tests are done with no bottom paint and for the 208, no hardtop or bimini down. The goal of the manufacturers tests is to get the max economy, speed,time to plane etc. depending on the market targeted.

Of course, your prop selection(and condition) can make a big difference as will trim etc.
The measurements are not intended nor should they be used as absolute numbers. They should be used as guidelines for comparison over time to see if performance changes which might indicate an issue that needs attention.

If you want to experiment, make a list of the numbers at several rpm levels under similar trim and water/weather and boat conditions to see where your sweet spot is for economy (if that is your concern). Then make a few runs changing trim but at the same revs. The data should be interesting.
One other comment. I didn't see what model year your hull was but the F225 is a lot heavier than the older SXs were. Later model hulls have weight added to the bow to help compensate for the extra weight off of the transom. In addition without the weight, optimal trim may not be possible. On the down side, later hulls weight more and that used more fuel.
Have fun and enjoy.
 
What holes are your motors mounted in on the 208s? I am debating on going up 1 or 2. Sounds like it can make quite a difference on performance. Thanks, Mike.
 
Mine is mounted in the second hole. I would hope GW tested this out and recommended the optimum one to put it in.

I have a running total of fuel consumption on the gages and will compare that to when I next fill up the tank. It makes sense that the gages may be off, thus impacting the performance/consumption calculations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.