• Welcome to the Checkmate Community Forums forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access to our other FREE features.
    By joining our free community you will be able to:

    » Interact with over 10,000 Checkmate Fanatics from around the world!
    » Post topics and messages
    » Post and view photos
    » Communicate privately with other members
    » Access our extensive gallery of old Checkmate brochures located in our Media Gallery
    » Browse the various pictures in our Checkmate photo gallery

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact support by clicking here or by using the"contact us" link at the bottom of the page.

Pulsare 2100 fuel mileage

E

engineermike

Member
Guys, I tested my exact fuel mileage last weekend and was wondering what others are getting.

I went exactly 36 miles (gmaps-pedometer measured) and used right at 10 gallons, for 3.6 mpg from a Yamaha 300 HPDI and 29P T1 prop. I was usually runnin 40 mph, but hit 70 a time or 2. I also went through about 8 idle zones. Not that idling hurts mileage, but using all 300 hp to plane off sure does.

For comparison, my Sea-Doo RXP got 5.5 - 6 mpg on the same loop.

I also found this test on the Pulsare 2100, but with a Honda 4-stroke:

http://marine.honda.com/pdf/props/Checkmate%20Pulsare%202100%20-%20BF225.pdf

They report 5.3 mpg at the same speed I was getting 3.6. For whatever reason, my PWC was getting roughly half of magazine-reported numbers also.

Anybody else test this?

Mike
 
For what it's worth...

I have not personally tested fuel mileage, but on a Direct Injection motor mid 3's seems a bit low.

I have heard #'s as high as 6mpg on a 250/300 XS but I can not confirm that with personal stats.

HD
 
I think when the mags test a boat, they mostly do a continuous run. Kinda like highway milage. :D

Then they inflate the numbers according to how high the stack of cash handed to them is.
 
You are comparing a true average Mpg with a maximum mpg at a single instance. Idleing gives very poor mpg compared to planing speeds.

My 2400 get better than 5 mpg at a slow cruise per the smartcraft gauge, but will drop back in the high 2s/low 3 running fast. Never calculated the average mpg, but if asked will say my boat gets 5 mpg.

I would guess a 2100 with a big prop would get 6 mpg at a slow cruise with the engine barely working.
 
Engineermike-I don't think you are far off if your average is 3.6. When you see these advertisements say up to 5-6 mpg that is at perfect condition and speed. Real numbers will be Little lower. Also When you get up into the 70 mph on a couple of runs it will start to eat fuel fast. I have seen many sheets on fuel numbers on the 300. At idle it is at 2.5 gpm at 4000 rpm it is 3.75 gpm and at 5950 rpm it is at 2.71 gpm on a 21ft bass boat weight of boat as tested was around 2950 lbs. This test was done at idle to wot not cruising speed. You can see these test on Yamaha web site.
 
I tested my 21 longdeck with a 300x with a 26 trophy at 45 mph for 85 miles and got exactly 3 mpg. This was tested by filling up before and after, not a Smartcraft guage. I then tried a 300xs with the same boat, gearcase, prop, and at the same speed and same distance and got 6.1 mpg. Your Yamama-Dog must love gas!
 
I did a 100 mile run at 35-40 MPH and got right around the same, 3.6 mph. That was with a 200 Merc EFI.
 
engineermike said:
That seems awfully high, especially when the Honda 4-stroke only got 4.9 at the same speed.
Click to expand...

I can tell you that out of all of my boating friends (I/O's, Large O/B's on smaller boats, ski boats (the worst)) no one comes close to the gas mileage of my 2100/300XS.

With my 280ROS a day of skiing would cost me a full tank of gas. My 300XS will go an entire weekend of skiiing and still not be on "E".

I am not claiming it is the best motor on the planet, I am just saying that I have never experienced efficiency on the water quite like it.

When Randy first made his mileage claims, I wanted to call "BS" as well. Then I bought one....He won!

One day I sat down and figured my monthly savings on fuel during the summer months with the 300XS vs. 280ROS. The 300XS nearly pays for itself for the entire year (I put $$$ down as well so my payments aren't that steep). If you factor in the rebuilds every 2 seasons on my 280 I am probably making money on the deal. LOL

HD
 
I don't know much about that particular hull. But, I can tell you that they had dual batteries, a trolling motor, and nearly double the fuel that a 2100 can hold (they stated 90% capacity during test).

That adds up to hundreds of pounds of additional weight which we all know on an O/B makes a huge difference in speed and efficiency.

I don't know what you are really looking for here. If you want us to say that the HPDI is as efficient as the Opti. Sure, I wouldn't be surprised if it is. Yamahas are no joke and the Japs know how to build an efficient motor.

Here is what I don't get...You asked what people have seen, Randy told you, and now you are trying to prove otherwise.

HD:cheers:
 
A customer of mine who is a Mercury and a Yamaha mechanic got 6.8 mpg with a 300xs on an 18ft Quartershot tunnel with a 32" Lightning ET prop at 50-55 mph.
 
hotdaddy27 said:
Here is what I don't get...You asked what people have seen, Randy told you, and now you are trying to prove otherwise.
Click to expand...

I figured I would catch heat for that.

I asked others for results and what I got was several people reporting 3-4 mpg, which is right in line with my measurements. I also got a lead on tests on the Yamaha website, which shows numbers right on par with my own. My test was validated, which was the purpose of the original post. So, thanks for that info!

Then, there was an abnormally high number, surpassing even the Honda 4-stroke, so I did more research to see if it could be verified otherwise. In the one comparable test, it still beat out the Yamaha HPDi by a fair margin (25%), but did not surpass the Honda 4, which seems reasonable.

Another interesting find was that the 300XS was getting 40-50% higher mpg's than the 300X.

Mike
 
engineermike said:
I figured I would catch heat for that.

I asked others for results and what I got was several people reporting 3-4 mpg, which is right in line with my measurements. I also got a lead on tests on the Yamaha website, which shows numbers right on par with my own. My test was validated, which was the purpose of the original post. So, thanks for that info!

Then, there was an abnormally high number, surpassing even the Honda 4-stroke, so I did more research to see if it could be verified otherwise. In the one comparable test, it still beat out the Yamaha HPDi by a fair margin (25%), but did not surpass the Honda 4, which seems reasonable.

Another interesting find was that the 300XS was getting 40-50% higher mpg's than the 300X.

Mike
Click to expand...

A direct injection motor gets better fuel milegae, especially in the midrange because it uses a stratified charge rather than a homogenized charge.

It with get 30-50% better in the midrange and about 15% better on top end. A direct injected two stroke will get better fuel mileage than a comparable fourstroke for the same reason.

You also can't compare different hulls by weight.
 
On my 2100 br W/250 xs I can cruise at 50mph on the gps and my gph are 8.3. So Im getting 6.0 mpg in that situtation, I haven't tested a whole tank yet to see what the all around fuel mileage is. My previous aluminum boats wouldn't even come close to this number.

These are all around numbers

1985 19ft crestliner 150 johnson 2.9 mpg

2003 18ft crestliner 175 Evenrude Ficht 4.8 mpg

2005 20FT Lund 225 optimax 4.0 mpg
 
Wow...that Bullet also get 6.6 mpg/4.5 gph at 2000 rpm. That's pretty amazing that engine will plane a boat a 2000 rpm. Basically idling.

I think I can plane down to around 2600 rpm, but with a much smaller prop and gear ratio.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top