|
Post by scotty on Dec 2, 2007 17:18:11 GMT
i was just wandering what would be better, fuel and speed wise. one big engine or two engines of half the horsepower?
|
|
|
Post by monkeynuts on Dec 2, 2007 17:55:03 GMT
at lower revs 2 engines will be more thrusty, but flat out id think a pair of 30hp engines wont be much different in fuel comsumpton to a single 60hp as far as time running gos, but not distace due to been slower with twin engines you will lose 10-15% in power out the back though the props. this is becouse to the disturbance in the water that 2 engines/props cause and will interfear with the propulsion/ thrust
so a single engine will be quicker, and give you more range to fuel twin engines are safer , more manouevrble, but bit slower and less distance to fuel
hope that makes sence and helps
|
|
|
Post by scotty on Dec 2, 2007 18:00:56 GMT
makes perfect sense mate. thanks john
|
|
|
Post by squidlips on Dec 2, 2007 18:01:51 GMT
one engine for fuel and speed wise,but 2 engines for safety also 2 engines cause quite a lot of drag therefore use more fuel. 2 engines also make the boat more manuverable.
|
|
Salar
crew member
Live to Fish
Posts: 98
|
Post by Salar on Dec 2, 2007 18:08:27 GMT
I traded a50hp Evinrude and a small backup outboard for two 30HP Mariners on my old Alask 500 and never regretted it. It cost more to run, but with two of everything I never had a worrying moment.
|
|
|
Post by scotty on Dec 2, 2007 21:24:51 GMT
you cant put a price on safety
|
|