Go Back  Offshoreonly.com > Technical > General Q & A
Acceleration and efficiency >

Acceleration and efficiency

Notices

Acceleration and efficiency

Old 09-09-2016 | 09:05 PM
  #11  
Registered
10 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 2,888
Likes: 148
From: SF Bay Area
Default

Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
Hand calculated. 13.2 MPG from Kentucky to Chicago 65mph. Towing 38 Fountain to loto last weekend from Chicago, first tank, 8.1MPG, second tank, 7.8MPG. 454 Vortec with a custom tune, 4.10 rear.
I'm jealous. My 2013 Z71 doesn't do any better even with its puny 5.3 because that hamster is spinning its heart out.
Baja Rooster is offline  
Reply
Old 09-09-2016 | 09:26 PM
  #12  
Registered
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,439
Likes: 93
From: yorkville,il
Default

Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
Hand calculated. 13.2 MPG from Kentucky to Chicago 65mph. Towing 38 Fountain to loto last weekend from Chicago, first tank, 8.1MPG, second tank, 7.8MPG. 454 Vortec with a custom tune, 4.10 rear.
that is decent mileage considering the weight and the hills in missouri.i pulled a 43 ft enclosed trailor with the drag boat&support equipment to arazona with a totally stock 97 1 ton chevy dually[454] and averaged 5.9 mpg round trip.reg gas was around 2.25 per gallon that year.
mike tkach is offline  
Reply
Old 09-09-2016 | 09:46 PM
  #13  
SB
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 14,097
Likes: 3,687
From: On A Dirt Floor
Default

Flat fronted steel trailer ? Been there !
SB is offline  
Reply
Old 09-09-2016 | 09:57 PM
  #14  
Registered
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,439
Likes: 93
From: yorkville,il
Default

Originally Posted by SB
Flat fronted steel trailer ? Been there !
aluminum,even the floor and yes flat nose with a box covering the generator that was mounted up high in the front.

Last edited by mike tkach; 09-09-2016 at 10:00 PM.
mike tkach is offline  
Reply
Old 09-09-2016 | 10:20 PM
  #15  
Registered
10 Year Member
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 265
Likes: 16
From: Omaha, NE
Default

When looking for a purpose tow vehicle for our 38' Powerquest, I was torn between a late 90's 454 Chevy ot late 90's 7.3 Powerstroke. Very happy with the 7.3 as we get 10-12 mpg towing to and from LOTO and Omaha.
Cory H is offline  
Reply
Old 09-10-2016 | 08:14 AM
  #16  
Thread Starter
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,332
Likes: 73
From: chicago
Default

Originally Posted by Baja Rooster
I'm jealous. My 2013 Z71 doesn't do any better even with its puny 5.3 because that hamster is spinning its heart out.
Yep, I made the mistake of buying a brand new F350 Lariat with a 5.4 Gas engine. Felt fine around town. Hooked the boat to it, towed to loto, omg, what a dog. Dam thing spent most of the trip revving its azz off and got horrid mpg. Quickly traded that in for the 6.0L diesel. Power was way better, and mpg was better, then the engine problems began shortly after.
MILD THUNDER is offline  
Reply
Old 09-10-2016 | 11:09 AM
  #17  
Smitty's Avatar
VIP Member
20 Year Member
Super Moderators
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,213
Likes: 0
From: Chicago il
Default

So my first question is....what is the prop slip on both props ?? Without knowing what the slip numbers may be, you can do all of the calculations you want. My switch from 4 blades to 5 blades made a huge acceleration change, but cost me 2 mph up top. Obviously slip went down.

With what you have provided us, my pick would be the higher torque motor, but it will have less top end.
__________________
Want your ECU tuned right?? Call Mark at Precision www.pmefi.com
Smitty is offline  
Reply
Old 09-10-2016 | 01:33 PM
  #18  
Registered
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 2
From: San Diego
Default

More pitch, better fuel economy. Boat runs 50 At 3000. 60 at 3500.00 with the cruising locking props. With the go fast props the speed at the same RPMs considerably less and burns more fuel to get to the same speed as the locking props.

More Rpm more fuel.

Also a heavy load consumes more fuel. Boats are on heavy load only planing and WOT imo


My truck 3/4 to 6.0 gets 13-15 until I put the boat on then its. 4 and sometimes 8 .

AS far as the RPM argument on a diesel . My 22,000 pound motor home gets about 7 in the mountains and hills on the way to havasu. When you add about 10,000 pounds of boat behind it it gets just about 7.. RPMs equal fuel consumption

Last edited by mcprodesign; 09-10-2016 at 01:35 PM.
mcprodesign is offline  
Reply
Old 09-11-2016 | 09:04 AM
  #19  
Registered
 
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 487
Likes: 23
From: Salisbury N.C.
Default

High Torque , Low Rpm Combo any Day for a Boat. Now on the other hand if you had the ability to shift , Low Torque, High Rpm would accelerate you faster if you can keep the revs up.
dunnitagain is offline  
Reply
Old 09-11-2016 | 09:00 PM
  #20  
bck's Avatar
bck
Charter Member#568
25 Year Member
Charter Member
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,171
Likes: 17
From: Western N.Y.
Default

If I ever get around to putting my engines in I should be able to test this pretty well and see what difference it makes. My old torque peak was at 4600 so when accelerating from a 4600 rpm cruise to wide open torque was decreasing. My new torque peak is 5200 so torque will still be increasing as I accelerate from 4600 to as far as 5200. When torque does start falling off the increase in hp on these engines is kicking in. That's how it works in my head anyway. I'm hoping to get them installed in the next week or so.
__________________
Straight bottoms and flat decks

Last edited by bck; 09-11-2016 at 09:26 PM.
bck is offline  
Reply

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.