Mazen Ardati
New member
Hi. Does any one have the fuel consumption chart for sunseeker 68 pr.
it’s a simple, sensible, question, why not just answer it rather than go all judgemental?I'm always puzzled by these requests.
I mean, if you're interested in a 20+ meters planning boat, of all things, do you think it's the fuel consumption that can make it or break it? Seriously?
Besides, it isn't a matter of models, it's essentially just a matter of size and weight.
At a cruising speed anywhere between 20 and 25 kts, all boats of that size with will burn around 11 liters per nautical mile, give or take.
The difference between the less and the most efficient comparable boats may be plus/minus 10%, if that.
I'd rather pick the one with the cushions colour that my wife likes better...
To be fair, it's hard to answer a question where all the salient information is left out. That boat could have three different engines if a Mark 1 and then there's a Mark 2 and a Mark 3.it’s a simple, sensible, question, why not just answer it rather than go all judgemental?
No, it isn't.it’s a simple, sensible, question
Is that for the Mk 3? I think it was around that time that the Mk 2 was discontinued.I fully agree with the comment that in the real world fuel burn at cruising speed for large planing yachts is usually in the 10-11 l/nm range, provided the bottom and props are reasonably clean.
Sunseeker does publish fuel burn and range charts, they're just not made widely available to the public. Here is the chart for the Predator 68 from the booklet produced in October 2017.
View attachment 186975
My guess is that the values are for boats fresh from the factory at half load tested in UK waters. Fully loaded in the Med, and with fin stabilisers, you will not achieve these values. For example my P57 which is fitted with fins is generally about 10% worse than the published values across the board.
Again though, not enough information given to elicit an accurate reply. There's a minimum of six different engine/boat combinations available. @DAW has provided the data for two of them, but we don't know if that's what the OP is looking for.I think that the general principle that fuel consumption is only a very small part of the on going financial outlay is true. But if the OP wants the figures to see if his boat is performing as it should....or is planning to charter a boat for a holiday....then it’s certainly valuable knowledge to have
I'm pretty sure its for the Mk 3 ... the booklet also contains information for the 68 Sport Yacht which was the same boat with a small flybridge.Is that for the Mk 3? I think it was around that time that the Mk 2 was discontinued.
Happy to stand corrected, though it remains a mistery to me the fact that some builders go to the effort of making booklets with these numbers and then treat them as if they were classified documents!Sunseeker does publish fuel burn and range charts, they're just not made widely available to the public.
I suppose it’s very much like the car industry....if you announce the economy, people who don’t get those numbers will be upsetHappy to stand corrected, though it remains a mistery to me the fact that some builders go to the effort of making booklets with these numbers and then treat them as if they were classified documents!
Did you get that booklet in Mar-A-Lago?
Anyway, it's interesting to see that my guess was right on the money only at the low(ish) P speed of 18 kts, while at 25 kts (which isn't exactly warp speed, particularly for a boat that pretends to be sporty) it goes up to almost 14 l/Nm.
Are you surprised?And the OP hasn't reappeared here since asking their question.
What makes you say that ?Are you surprised?
Because the OP only has 2 posts to his name, one of which is the current post, he’s a newbie as such and the tone some of the replies came across as unnecessarily arrogant in tone instead of friendly.What makes you say that ?
It’s the initiation we all receiveBecause the OP only has 2 posts to his name, one of which is the current post, he’s a newbie as such and the tone some of the replies came across as unnecessarily arrogant in tone instead of friendly.
Except the OP was gone the minute they posted their question, they didn't wait around to read any replies; good, bad or indifferent.Because the OP only has 2 posts to his name, one of which is the current post, he’s a newbie as such and the tone some of the replies came across as unnecessarily arrogant in tone instead of friendly.