Fuel economy query....282 Sailfish...

[Legend]

That's pretty interesting numbers considering two things.
1-grady white tested this boat with the Yamahas and the 15-1/4x19 why would they do that if they could get better numbers with a lower pitch?
2- I thought it would have lower pitch you would lose fuel economy? I bet that's one of the reasons why I never thought to drop down and pitch because I thought I would lose both top and speed and I would get worse fuel economy?

Agsiain I'm just throwing thoughts out there but that's very surprising and at the same time encouraging that you're getting such excellent numbers with lower pitch props!

An interesting discussion - here is comparison of the 2 different pitches and size props.
When I got the 4.2L F250 the stainless steel props were on back order for 2 months. I had to use props from F225s and they were 15/1/4 x 19. The performance was not good. I was only able to get top RPM of about 5400 and speed of 42 MPH. Not sure why GW would test with that size prop.

 

[seasick]

I am not sure if the LU gear rations are the same for those two motors. If not, that could explain the performance differences. I can't seem to find a good site for Yami gear ration specs by model and or year.

 

[Capnjim7]

Ok...I finally got to the motors on the lift and saw that the left prop is a Yam...15 1/2 x17 TC SWater series prop...the right is a SS prop but appears to be an aftermarket and just says 17m on it. Am I hearing you guys right that the F225s on most 282s came with 15 1/2 x19 s?? (or 15 1/4 x 19) 'm thinking that herein lies the problem....

 

[seasick]

Yamaha stamped props with 17M on the outside. The actual pitch and diam may be stamper inside the rear of the hub. You have to remove the prop and possibly clean the inside area to see the number

 

[seasick]

Also make sure that you are comparing props from motors with the same gear ratio. Gee, am I repeating myself. Uh oh...Old age.

 

[mleads310]

After reading all this I realized I didn't provide what engines I'm running. 2005/6 f250's Incase it comes into comparison with other posters and other gear ratios. Good call seasick!

 

[amf282]

I also had 2006 250’s

 

[Fishtales]

I'm surprised how many people are worrying about fuel use. For me happy to pay (it is proof positive that I use the boat which means my fixed costs are spread a bit better)…. I do understand when you are testing props and tuning things up, but in general use I don't give a rats behind.

 

[bbal08]

FWIW: We have an '05 282 which we purchased with original low hour F225s with the standard SWS II 17P stainless props. Use the boat mainly in Pac NW out of Westport for salmon, halibut, tuna.

Yammies hit 45 mph tops in sheltered waters in light load (Puget Sound) testing. Got 1.4 down to 1.2 at best in real conditions. Always have full fuel, lots of water, ice and gear so never run light. We switched to 17P four blade props from Ken at PropGods and low speed planning and economy did improve some.

In 2018 we repowered to Suzuki DF300s and after adjusting mounting position (second from bottom) and props (Merc Eco Inertia 3 x 16 x 19P we are getting 50-52 mph tops (again lighter load in sheltered water) but here are the real important numbers: Typical halibut trip outbound running into the pacific swell, 3-4 people, loaded with lots of gear and ice at ~ 20-24 mph, the digital gages show around 1.60 mpg. The return trip usually hits in the 1.8 range. We've seen it hit both sides of 2.0 coming back in smooth water with a slight swell. Numbers slightly lower for tuna as ice and full live bait tank add a bunch more weight, so maybe in the 1.4 range heading out depending on water conditions and speed. Having to run slower into the swell really hurts economy.

In early testing on Puget Sound, we were easily able to plane and hit 32 mph on a single engine. Have not attempted that during typical use but there was no way the old F225s could do that falling off a cliff. Also, the lower fuel burn rate extends range (we'll sometimes go out ~75 miles) and/or enables a second day fishing without refueling which can help work around the fuel dock schedule.

Our gages use GPS to measure speed over the bottom, so relative to speed in water can be baised either way.
(We never shut the engines down, so they run/idle/troll all day). But we have consistently found that the predicted fuel use (the electronic fuel flow system embedded within the Suzuki controls) is extremely accurate. If the gages say we used ~103 gallons (long tuna trip) we likely take about 101. They gages are always close and always slightly overstate the actual use, so just the way we like it.

In any case, we're at least 20% better across the board with the new motors.

 

[amf282]

Great report bbal. I hope we see the same thing with our new 300's. Early runs up and down the waterway shows that we are hitting 1.8 cruising at 35 whereas the old Yammie 250's we were around 1.6 at 32-33. Its too early to tell yet as we are still in the break in period. Looking forward to a gulf stream run to get some numbers.

 

[Capnjim7]

Thanks for the feedback all... I was trying to remember back to 2004 when I had the 2003 300 Marlin with 225s. I dont seem to remember actually getting much different fuel burn on a 120 mile offshore day with 4 guys...about 1.2 -1.3. I think I was more concerned that my props were the wrong size or the repairs had altered the cupping significantly. Seems like I might be right in the ballpark however which frankly I can live with...since as the old saying goes...Compared to a boat everything else in life is reasonable...eh "Fishtales'?? LOL