Click for Lurssen Click for Ocean Alexander Click for Walker Click for Abeking Click for Seacoast

2001 Sunseeker '50 w/ Cat 3196 fuel consumption?

Discussion in 'Sunseeker Yacht' started by Rolo Tomasi, Dec 9, 2019.

You need to be registered and signed in to view this content.
  1. Rolo Tomasi, Dec 9, 2019
    #1
    Rolo Tomasi

    Rolo Tomasi New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2019
    Messages:
    6
    Location:
    California
    I'm planning an 1100 mile delivery of a 2001 Sunseeker '50 with twin Cat 3196's and haven't been able to find an accurate fuel burn online. I need the optimal speed for best distance.
  2. Capt J, Dec 9, 2019
    #2
    Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    12,301
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    Optimal speed for best distance would be around 800 RPMS. What HP are these engines?
  3. mapism, Dec 9, 2019
    #3
    mapism

    mapism Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    484
    Location:
    Sardinia
    A Sunseeker 50 with the 660hp Cat should be the Camargue, correct?
    Anyhow, you always get the best range at displacement speed, with ANY planing boat.
    But that's very far from being an ideal boat for cruising at 800rpm and 8 or 9 knots for 1100 Nm...!
    The most economical planing speed is around 1800/1900 rpm, making 23/25 kts and burning 16/18 gph/engine.
    Just do the math...
  4. Liam, Dec 9, 2019
    #4
    Liam

    Liam Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    496
    Location:
    Malta
    A Camargue 50 with those engines usually burns just under 7 liter per nautical mile (6.5) at about 25 knots. They top 34/35 knots.

    Possibly the best Sunseeker hull the old Camargue 50, really a nice ride with a nice balance.
  5. Rolo Tomasi, Jan 22, 2020
    #5
    Rolo Tomasi

    Rolo Tomasi New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2019
    Messages:
    6
    Location:
    California
    We ran a sea trial with new flow meters and got the following results:
    Total gph both engines
    7.5 kts – 5.4 gph
    8.o kts – 7.0 gph
    10 kts – 18.4 gph
    15 kts – 33.8 gph
    21 kts – 49 gph
    28 kts – 73 gph
  6. mapism, Jan 22, 2020
    #6
    mapism

    mapism Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    484
    Location:
    Sardinia
    That's almost 9 and 10 litres per Nm respectively.
    Way too much at those speeds, for that boat/engines.
    R U sure that everything is in tune, clean hull, etc.?
    Btw, she should be capable of much more than 28kts, as Liam already mentioned.
    If that's all you could achieve, considering also the fuel burn numbers, it looks like engines are more loaded than they should be.
  7. AMG, Jan 23, 2020
    #7
    AMG

    AMG YF Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    5,243
    Location:
    Sweden
    This is more than our Delta 80 with triple IPS1200 is using and about twice the Delta 54 at the same speeds...
  8. Capt J, Jan 23, 2020
    #8
    Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    12,301
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    Speed numbers are way off for the rpm and fuel burn, are you using the trim tabs to properly trim the boat. In a sunseeker you can easily gain 2-3 knots by properly trimming the tabs down to the right ride angle? Also I've managed/maintained a 2007 62' Predator since 2011, in 2014 we had bottom paint flaking off and the bottom paint was thick, soda blasting it to gelcoat, putting 6 epoxy barrier coats and 2 coats of bottom paint and we picked up 3 knots, instantly. What RPMS are you making WOT? What load at WOT? What speed at 80% load? Are both props showing even load factors? Any vibration? Boats usually slow down as they get old but 6-7 knots is considerable/alarming.
  9. d_meister, Jan 23, 2020
    #9
    d_meister

    d_meister Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    297
    Location:
    San Diego, CA.
    So, where are you going? If I deduce correctly, if you're in California, you're going either to Mexico or to the Pacific Northwest. Chances of traveling at cruising speed for either destination for significant legs of the voyage are not good.