Cruise Further, Cruise Safer episode 8 - Displacement cruising | Motor Boat & Yachting

[@marinesurveygroupltd7322]

Liters or gallons per nm is an easier way to work out range. Another factor when going slower to consider is engine hours at re sale time & service intervals. My volvos required service every 100hrs which @8 knots comes up a lot quicker than 100hrs @20 knots. I.e 100hrs at 20 knots is many many nm & trips vs distance travelled in 100hrs at 8 knots

[@antoniavie]

Run displacement ~8 kts on one engine. YW

[@thameswater2561]

what does Jane like then?

[@richardpearce4521]

Clearly not boating!

[@foxdmulder]

Jane looks pissed and bored.

[@one4theroad15]

.....not a bloody lot!

[@giveitsome1565]

Jayne likes C......

[@N330AA]

Shania Jane

[@petermathewvanaardt74]

question, Im about to buy my first 35 mt so my question is, will stabilizers help for the rocking motion during sailing?

[@MotorBoatYachting]

+Mathew Peter Yep, that's exactly what you want - we've written a feature on all the different options on the market > www.mby.com/gear/could-boat-stabilisers-spell-the-end-of-rock-n-roll-45319

[@allenklingsporn6993]

This certainly isn't the full story. Your fuel consumption at displacement speeds in planing or semi-planing hulls needs to be compared to the time required to get to where you're going. If one graphs hourly fuel consumption against distance traveled for several different speeds (ideally several displacement and several planing speeds), you'll probably find that you'll actually use less fuel at higher speeds. Displacement hulls are purpose built for displacement efficiency. Most other hulls are not.

[@jeffmelcher2908]

Allen Klingsporn , I have not found that to be true, gal/mile is much less at displacement speeds in every boat I’ve owned. It gets progressively less fuel efficient as speed rises.

[@TheCitrusss]

very questionable observation. Planning: first, he was going 22 kts and burning 200 l/h. That gives 200 litres per 22 nm or 9.1 l/nm second, 16 kts and 110 l/h, that is 6.8 l/nm Displacement: 8 kts and 13 l/h = 1.6 l/nm Therefore displacement speed is 6 times more efficient

[@rykehuss3435]

Allen Klingsporn You have never owned a boat have you. Otherwise you too wouldve realized that the slower you go, the less fuel you use and the longer your range. No matter what boat youre driving and how fast or slow.

[@tomjeffries1824]

What a ridiculous analogy, if you go slower whether in a boat, car or bike, you will less fuel per mile, thus increasing range, granted the slower the speed the longer it will take to travel a set distance but at slower speeds you will arrive later but with more fuel, in turn costing you in time but saving you money!

[@rikstone7059]

Jeff Melcher and that is proven by the range calculation of the boat. An 86 yacht has a range of 1500 miles at 10 knots, but only around 400 at high speed.

[@diyoregonnowtexas9202]

If you have the play money to buy a new 61 foot boat, who gives a darn about fuel cost?

[@jamescoldingham7641]

hi speed diesels don't like prolonged use at low revs it will result in glazed cylinder liners ect. still as a professional yacht engineer I would rather the cash came my way for rebuilds rather than went to the fuel pump. if you cant afford to run the boat you have you should have got a different boat!!

[@darthkek1953]

It does depend on the engine, there are plenty of diesel engines designed to push a vessel along at displacement speeds. But I do agree, if you want to do displacement cruising you should get the right hull and the right engine for the job... fast engines at low speeds, not a great long-term idea.

[@kinglouis6974]

I’d rather get there a bit quicker That’s already 12 litres per hour but it take you 80 more hours to get there ..... hmmmmm

[@darthkek1953]

Yes thats why he should include liters-per-mile too, even it's an exponential drop to lower speeds meaning you really do get more milage for your money. A LOT more.

[@abdullahhsugwsadat5608]

👉❤️🇦🇫🤝🇧🇲❤️👈