[PUP] Fuel consumption Was: The right boat

[Arild Jensen]

> -----Original Message-----
> From:Peter Jacops
 What surprise me is that people do not put fuel consumption high on their
wish list.
> Would it be because fuel is cheaper in the States? If so how long will
that be?



REPLY
Not only fuel consumption, but tankage capacity should be a consideration.
Passagemaking is more than just crossing oceans along the longest possible
track.

Many long distance passagemakers do so while never venturing more than 50
miles away from shore.
They cruise along the coastlines. Longest jump between fuel stops is often
only a few hundred miles.

In recent times comparing prices has become very popular. But does it make
sense to save $100 on a fill-up and suffer the penalty of much less mileage
because you are dragging another few tons of fuel around with completely
full tanks.
The loss in mileage could well exceed the money saved compared to buying
less fuel more frequently in much smaller portions.
I'm aware that some list members do cruise in locales with very long jumps
between fuel stops. But there are probably many more cruisers who boat in
locales with much shorter distances. Would a 1000 - 1200 mile range not be
sufficient?
Do we need  3000 - 5000 mile range?  If so, when and why?

Does it make sense to have such huge fuel tanks that you take on a year's
supply at once.  Now you have to deal with fuel that destabilizes a couple
of months after leaving the refinery. Apart from cleaning out water and
particle contaminants, many fuel polishing systems are used primarily to
rejuvenate destabilized fuel stored in tanks for a long time.

Perhaps part of the design process is to ask when and where does it makes
sense to have more than a two months or 1000 mile supply stored in the
on-board fuel tanks.  Could the available interior volume be better used for
other storage? would the weight reduction with smaller tankage be a benefit
in other ways.  How about reduced draft?


best regards to all

Arild