I see your point with the mpg comparison. What is the gas tank difference between twins on the same boat vs single. I would imagine the tanks are larger, right?

180 single tank on my 33 OL and 2 X 125 gal tanks on the TG, I think my 272 was 80 gal single tank, and fuel consumption is all in how you drive the boat

Thanks 33 outlawsst, - I am interested in a 271, 272, 291, 292 and even 303. So I would like to know what size fuel tanks are in these boats to get an idea as to which one I should begin to consider.

I currently have a formula 252 which has a 88 gal tank, and thinking this maybe a little small if I wanted to make runs over to Bimini. Also, I am thinking of upgrading to twins or a bigger boat but on the fence with selling and upgrading.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

My 303 had a 180 gal tank, and I could do just over 2 mpg at a slow cruise with 425hp 454's.

-Artie

Both my single 242's are just barely over 100 gal fuel tanks. My 357 is 200 gal tank. I don't like to see less than 100 gal per engine for a BBC and I like this balance with Formula.. While GPH burn is relative to the position of the sticks the larger the tank the longer the range. Formula does pretty well with giving a large enough tank size for the engine and range.

For those who say twins burn more fuel I don't really see how, scientifically speaking. A 10K lbs boat at 50 MPH will require "X" amount of energy and if one engine works hard to do it or two just easily lumber along to do it the fuel consumption is a fixed demand that is determined by the "X" amount of energy required. Sure I understand that with two drives there is more drag and weight but comparatively I think the twin fuel burn is not drastically different from a single, all things considered.

I currently work at the engine development group at Volvo Penta in Gothenburg, Sweden. And the drag from an extra drive IS significant. Anything dragging in the water will be noticed. Obviously all situations are different, but as a standard we usually say that the difference of single vs. twin installtion (outdrive) are a factor 1.4 when it comes to fuel consumption. It's interesting to see how well this value actually stacks up when doing both proper calculations and real life testing.

My 2006 292 with twin 6.2's has a 113 gallon tank. Fuel mpg is 1.8-2.2 depending on how you drive, so about a 180 mile range figuring 20% reserve.

Well maybe I can help, 242-271-and now a 303, all are great, the 242/271 were a breeze to maintain, especially the 271, of the above mentioned boats the 272 is the b##tch# a very hard boat to work on but can be done, the 303 gives u some extra room in the front of engines, so a small guy or agile guy can do what he needs to, I am not, 6'5 250 I'll do all regular stuff, but I have a buddy do my plugs n wires, I'm not very good at mechanics and am really bad at working blind, I do not have that "touch" or "feel" that real mechanics have,

as far as fuel my 271 was a carbed 502, the 303 has 502 EFI's and in all honesty I'd say the fuel on average is 1.5 times, I have gone from 100/150 a weekend to 150/200, I'd say on average an extra 50 a week, maybe 75, well worth it IMO if the male testosterone is flowing this all goes out the window anyway, my cruise speed is up and rpm's down,

All the boats mentioned are great but due your homework on the "particular" boat your looking at and make sure it checks, 271 is a great boat, but it does lack with a full tank and 4/5 adults on getting on plane, but rides and handles very well,if u choose a twin engine boat I'm partial to the 303, 454's gets ya 70/72 454's in a 272 gets ya 62, but for the money for a 272 its hard to argue anyway..

I'm gonna throw a stone at Artie 303 holds 130 galls, I believe the 271 was 115

BTW Hindsight is 20/20 I should have jumped form the 242 to the 303, not complaing about the 271, but just looking back, then again the 303 was alot more money when I bought the 271

Bad memory and fat fingers don't help! You are correct. :lolhit: