Distance per tank on MV/34

Post here if you want to discuss a topic specific to the MV/32, MV/34, and MV/41.
Post Reply
Guest

Distance per tank on MV/34

Post by Guest »

I am sure this been discussed before and I also know there a lot of factors that determine how far one can cruise on their vessle. I am curious to find out if there are any good rough estimates on how far one can travel at a cruising speed with a full 180 gallon tank.

I am sure someone has a good idea on what a conservative estimate is. I know a 180 gallon tank is not very big at all, but with the hull design and the relatively small sized engines that the 34 could make good distance.


Mardagan
Mardagan
deckhand
deckhand
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 7:36 pm

Post by Mardagan »

Has anyone made an effort to determine an approximate figure for this? I am very curious to see some stats.
Sandy Daugherty

Fuel consumption

Post by Sandy Daugherty »

Go to http://www.pdqyachts.com/ver2/yachtsPow ... ameSet.htm

for an extensive discussion of range and performance.

(gentle dig follows:)

Of course, If you were sailing, you could be worried about what to do with the half tank of fuel you DIDN'T use this season....
Sandy Daugherty

correction of range url

Post by Sandy Daugherty »

Oops!, make that

http://www.pdqyachts.com/ver2/yachtsPow ... mance.html

for fuel consumption data.
Stray Cat
1st mate
1st mate
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri May 07, 2004 8:14 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Range and fuel capacity

Post by Stray Cat »

The range you hope to get can easilly be calculated from the 17 knots per hour at 4 gallon per hour presumption. AND, if the water is flat calm and there is no wind, etc. you will get just about what you predict.

If you are not in a particular hurry you could get maybe four times the range, and still be in port before the becalmed sailboat set. You could easilly set your speed to get 1 gallon per hour. Trade off speed for range.

HOWEVER, real world experience indicates that only a fool would bet his boat and likely his life on making those rosey predictions on particularly long passages in marginal or changeable conditions. Adjust your speed and your expectations as you go, keeping a fuel reserve and a couple of alternative plans for the unpredicted.

We have learned that the going is usually as much fun (or more) as the getting somewhere, so we plan easy comfortable runs, where safety, comfortable boat motion, loose schedules, several alternatives in mind if something goes awry and a relaxed attitude let everybody aboard enjoy the trip.

For example, the run down the Columbia from Portland to Astoria, at 17 knots, with a tail wind and the river current at our backs is 100 miles, and on a good run we have topped off on less than 25 gallons. Range: 600 miles or more (under excellent conditions). That presumed a 35 gallon 'reserve.'

Example two, the following run over the Columbia River bar and North up the Washington coast to the entrance to the Straits of Juan de Fuca at Neah Bay is also a hundred miles, but there are few refuges along the way. There is usually a couple of knots current (right on the nose), 15 kt or better wind (on the nose again), seas running 5 to 8 feet (on the nose to on the port beam) and swells rolling in from all across the Pacific building up to the 10 to 20 foot range for at least the last half of the trip. We generally run with the throttles set for something between 12 and 16 kts to get good control and pretty good boat motion, and our time for the overall trip varies between 10 and 12 hours. That means we only got 8 to 10 knots actual speed and we tank up in Neah Bay on 125 to 150 gallons. Range: 100 miles (under pretty adverse conditions), and with the same 35 gallon reserve.

My point is that the calculations are nice but experience with the boats indicates that these MV's are excellent for coastal passages, and you can scoot right along, so long as you tuck in every day or two -- or if you have good conditions and are in no hurry you could amaze everybody. Anybody who wants to take a Passagemaker across an ocean needs to talk the the nice folks at Dockwise.
Candy Chapman and Gary Bell in Stray Cat, MV34 hull 12
Guest

Post by Guest »

thank you so much for the replies! This has helped me more then I imagined.
Rejoice
1st mate
1st mate
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:38 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Mile per tank

Post by Rejoice »

Based on our averages over the last 2,500 miles, running at 18 mph with 100 horse engines, we could go about 360 miles with a 20% reserve.
Anne & Dave Mensel
Rejoice
PDQ MV/34-51
Nashville, TN
ELIXIR
1st mate
1st mate
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 6:56 am
Location: Chesapeake

Post by ELIXIR »

Just heard from Rob Poirier at PDQ that one PC34 left the FL Keys and made it to Belize/Mexico and from there cruised down the Central American Coast and recently returned. They did the crossing of the Gulf by running at 6-7 kts. which only burned 2+ gal hr. and gave them the range they needed though I would think they must have carried jerry cans on deck as that would distance even throttled back would cut it close.
duetto
admiral
admiral
Posts: 984
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 11:18 am
Location: ICW (32043)

Post by duetto »

hi,

we're new to pdq, power, etc. we just completed the trip from stuart, florida to branford, conn. it is approx 1500 SM. we cruised at 3100-3200 rpm which typically was 13-14 knts on gps. water was calm except for albermarle sound, lower delaware bay (against us) and nj shore (with us). we averaged 2.8 g/sm and 4.3 g/h.

john cummings

duetto mv 23
Sno' Dog
skipper
skipper
Posts: 80
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 7:20 pm
Location: Jensen Beach, FL (mv 087)
Contact:

Distance per tank on MV/34

Post by Sno' Dog »

jndcummings wrote: <snipped> ... we averaged 2.8 g/sm and 4.3 g/h.

john cummings, duetto mv 23
John,

I'm assuming you meant to say: "2.8 sm/gal"? Which is certainly very good!

I'm still hoping to hear from more folks with the 100-hp engines, I understand that about half the new boats (2005) have this option now, so there should be some more data accumulating out there on fuel consumption and cruising range? Any takers?

Henry
Last edited by Sno' Dog on Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sno' Dog
skipper
skipper
Posts: 80
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 7:20 pm
Location: Jensen Beach, FL (mv 087)
Contact:

Distance per tank on MV 34

Post by Sno' Dog »

Just spoke to Rob Poirier, he gave me some pretty good answers to my own question. Four boats participated in the "River Rats" Flotilla this spring (see PDQ home page), three of these boats had 100-HP engines while one had 75's. Since all four boats traveled the same distance at approximately the same speed, and all fueled up at the same time, it proved to be an excellent comparison of fuel consumption. The results, which were quite surprising to the participants, are actually pretty much in line with my calculations from a year ago -- I've been waiting all this time for verification! Now it's documented: THE 100-HP BOATS USED LESS FUEL!

According to Rob, the 100-HP boats burned between 3.7 gph and 4.2 gph -- there was a noticeable correlation with loading, the lower numbers were for the more lightly-loaded boats. The 75-HP boat, which was heavily loaded, averaged nearly 6 gph! One reason for this is that they had to push hard to keep up with the faster boats, typically they ran at 3250 rpm while the 100-HP boats loafed along at 2700 rpm.

Sounds as though Rob has changed his tune a bit now on power recommendations -- he's always been a staunch 75-HP advocate.

In any case, this latest news is enough to persuade us to go the 100-HP route on our new "Sno' Dog" -- which we can now reveal to be HULL NUMBER 87 !!!

Henry
bjones

Post by bjones »

It's a "no brianer". I was the guy in the four boat "River Rat" flotilla with the 75 HP engines. I got to compare notes with the other three (all 100's) each time we got fuel and each afternoon when we talked about how low their rpm levels had been to keep from running off and leaving me.

If you study the torque curves(which I wish I had done before buying the boat) it is seems apparent that the 100 is a much better match for the MV 34 - based on the weight that most owners now put on them.

Bottom line is that the 100's could easily cruise 4 or so knots faster and used 30-40 % less fuel! I will be very surprised if PDQ does not start aggressively recommending the 100's.

Remember that the 100 HP upgrade represents less than 2% of the cost of a new PDQ.

Bob Jones - Hull #61 - The Hye Life
bjones

Post by bjones »

"no- brainer"
User avatar
Mishigas
admiral
admiral
Posts: 134
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:17 pm
Location: Selby Bay, Edgewater Maryland

Post by Mishigas »

Interesting topic. I was in the south flotilla and was running the 75 hp engines and yes, the 100's will need to back off a bit to allow the 75's to keep up but...Human nature is human nature. What happens if I run at 17-18 knots because I can with 100's, what does that do to the fuel equation? Sure, backing off and running 100's at a slower RPM will result in a lower fuel burn but I would think that when running solo, in open water they will run faster resulting a higher fuel burn per hour. It would be interesting to see real seasonal fuel burn rates with the 100's, not holding back to allow for slower boats to keep up. Now gee, anyone want to buy a pair of lightly used 75 Yanmars???... :P
Sandy Kramer "MISHIGAS" MV34
Milky Way
deckhand
deckhand
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:27 am
Location: Belleville On Canada

Fuel usage.

Post by Milky Way »

Hi! I have 100 hp yanmars and I am getting very close to 4 m.p.g. I got my boat july 05 with line cutters, 17/16 inch 3bladed michigan props, and aquq drives. Over the winter lay over in cold Ontario I made the following changes. 1. I had my props checked by a reputable shop. Found a difference of 1 inch of pitch, 17/ 15.5, 17/ 16.5. I suspected a problem because I had difficulty in ballancing the rpms at cruise. I had both props repitched to 17/16. 2. I removed line cutters. 3. I built trim tabs 18 inch wide by 12 long. These are fastened to the rear flanged area of the hull and ss piping up to the hand rails. All pipe fittings are securely bolted so that the one inch d. pipe willnot separate. The attachment points to the hand rails are on teathered pins to the fittings which can be adjusted for certain wait and ballance. I run with a dhingy 200 lbs, full fuel and full water, cruise loaded, large bimini. I run my boat slightly more level, still with the nose up at 2600 rpm at 15- 17 mph depending on wind and waves. You can sit on these tabs, get out of the water, the standard poodle can get out by himself, or you can very quickly fold one or both tabs to the transome and use the swim ladder as usual. Also with the props now properly ballanced the engine noise is and feels right and the rear hideaway screen does not bang shut when cruising. Armin Quickert Milky Way M.V.78.
Post Reply