Tarquin Trader

[Wiggo]

Re: don\'t be silly

The Royal Navy limits its ships to 12 knots in peace time, not to save fuel, nor even to allow the Jolly Jack Tars to enjoy the trip, but for health and safety reasons. Above 12 knots, you can't go below and make a cup of tea without risking a serious scalding accident. A claim like that could bankrupt the Navy, these days.

<hr width=100% size=1>Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

 

[Aardee]

Re: Fleming 55 Fuel Consumption Figures

In a "Mystic Meg" moment...

After 389 posts with many forumites putting more effort into your boat purchase than they did their own, we'll all finally have a full grasp of the Traders' fuel consumption in MPG & GPH (at all speeds/ RPM/ Trim...) to 18 decimal places.

You'll then try it in a decent chop, it'll handle like a sack of excrement, and all this hot air will be for nowt.

Did you not have girls at your school?? /forums/images/icons/smile.gif



<hr width=100% size=1>"I am a bear of very little brain and long words bother me" - A A Milne.

 

[Gludy]

Re: yes yes, i agree

Its actually amazing what you can;t learn tcm!

You are simply refusing to accept that the very figures you commented on claiming they supported your no free knots prove the opposite - but even with thise figures now explained to you, do you accpet? No ... facts simply do not matter to you.

" Those daft buggers going down to the med at 10 knots to save fuel must be just stupid, after all. perhaps their fuel guages were all wrong. And likewise the royal navy limiting its ships to 12knots on exercise to conserve fuel - that's stupid as well. It's amazing what you can learn here innit? "

If you are going to be cynical, at least make sure your facts are right. Thos boats are not planing boats = they are mainly displacement boats and again if you care to look at what I have written all the way through this thread it is that as you increase speed in a displacment/semi displacment boat you will use more fuel BUT this is not the case with the planing boat that can actually burn more fuel just before it planes.

Your very points you are making against me actually support the findation of my points.

I suggest that if you cannot properly debate the facts and stop jumping at figures without analysing them, that you stick to your non-boaty iriony threads which I have to say are very good indeed.






<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[Gludy]

Re: I\'m comnfused now

Yes it is supposed to be good because your are swapping speed for comfort BUT that is a value judgement, there is no wrong and no right, everyone can decide on the facts.

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[Wiggo]

Re: yes yes, i agree

<blockquote><font size=1>Quote from previous post:</font><hr>

Your very points you are making against me actually support the findation of my points

<hr></blockquote>


Findation. Presume that's a cross between a finding and a foundation, or something that you build circular arguments on, Paul? ;-)

<hr width=100% size=1>Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

 

[Gludy]

Re: We\'ve had several on cruises in company...

Kim
It seems that I am incapable of a starting a thread that just stays simple and does not rattle feathers .... this one is what has become a typical Gludy thread with lots of people with their back up ..

"I get the impression that most owners of these models sooner or later settle down to quite modest cruising speeds, no higher than mid-teens -- and often they rumble along like a veritable cruise liner at 10 knots or so "

I agree - I take what you say as fact. In my case the 575 model is more economic up to 18 knots and less economic above 18 knots.
I get about 0.6mpg out of mt Squadron. that whats the Trader give me at 25 knots cruising. So the Trader type boat offers me a choice. I can choose to go 20 knots plus a pay for it, I can choose to go high teens and pay the same or I can choose to go slower and be more economic ... the key is that I have the choice.
Add to that the space, the drying out and the increased level of comfort and you have the main reasons for considering a shift.

"I know I keep pecking away at this one on your threads but I genuinely don't think you buy a semi-displacement hull for fuel efficiency -- but I do agree you buy it because it generally works okay at whatever throttle settings you make from displacement to high teens. 20-knots plus and some are definitely better than others. "

One day after red has gone the fuel efficiency factor may well become much more of an issue. However, fuel efficiency give range and people who want long distance crusing need range. So in that sense they do buy on fuel efficiency.

"In terms of build, I've personally never heard of one sinking and they generally seem fairly robust. Stainless steel work on the early ones particularly was not great -- a trait shared with many Taiwanese builds of the period. But whichever way you look at it you get a hell of a lot of boat for the money and the entertaining space is, as highlighted elsewhere on this forum, virtually unmatched length for length anywhere else. From memory you can also get all around the engines even on a 61-series equipped 41+2, which I personally like. Biggest bonus probably, compared to most boats of Taiwanese origin, is that these have been going long enough that they have a recognised market value. "

The space ia very important factor - the same length boat giving almost twice the space!

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[Gludy]

Re: Fleming 55 Fuel Consumption Figures

I just gave the 4.88 stuff becauee I read it of the calculator .... calm down ... this forum is about sharing info and enjoyment not getting stressed.

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[Gludy]

Re: Questions on your analysis gludy

So which is it?

I am amzed that you cannot accept the figures.

Just before the hump you have worse fuel consumprion travelling at 12 knots than you do at 20 knots .... that is the point I made. It was being compared to a semi-displacment boat that does not have this reversed fuel situation.

"No they dont. They show that in the area of where most planing boats are used 20-28knots, fuel consumption doubles. You only pick the bits that make your argument. I'd guess the difference in the trtaders consumption between 18 and 24.6 knots was flatter than before it?"

You have on those figures a flat consumption up to a certain point and then in passes its efficient cruising speed and can double. Yes... that is what I am saying.
I also said this depends on your boat. My boat consumes about the same from 14 knots up to 25 knots, after that, to get 6 extra knots I can really burn up fuel.... I have explained this.


"Yes the figures prove that but what's your point? Isn't that the same if not MUCH worse with a semi displacement?"

No semi displacement justs keeps increasing fuel consumption the faster you go - there is no hump and no reverse of efficiency.
The trader 575 at 12 knots gives 1.1 mpg, at 18 knots 0.6mpg and at 25 knots about 0.4mpg.

"Oh, and points two and three contradict themselves."

No - the figures provided, which are not in dispute by me proof what i am saying is correct. The figures show that on that boat an efficient fuel consumption would mean crusing at about 22 knots. Other boats are different but the same logic applies.



<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[Gludy]

Re: yes yes, i agree

"Findation. Presume that's a cross between a finding and a foundation, or something that you build circular arguments on, Paul? ;-) "

The penalty for sending so many posts with two finger typing ...

Or could it be that on this thread I was trying to establish a foundation for my next purchase decision ... sort oif finding out the facts and so 'Findation' as a new english word is not a bad way of describing the process.

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[mjf]

Changing my life

This thread is changing my life.....I cannot get any work done!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gludy]

Re: Changing my life

Well do not let SWMBO read the thread or that P38 may go and be replaced by a Trader 41 with twice as much room, comfortable passage making, extended range and ability to get treble the fuel consumption out of it at displacment speed......

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[mjf]

Re: Changing my life

Yep, thats exactly the issue - or a small Elegance thingy with proper walk round decks with proper bulwarks, anchors in proper hawspipes with anchor cable washers - no bow roller to get 'biffed' everytime someone attempts to berth alondside.

Cups of tea and loo visits when 'at sea'


Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[KevB]

Re: Questions on your analysis gludy

Please just accept you keep contradicting yourself and picking small factual points and twisting them to suit.
As for this statement...My boat consumes about the same from 14 knots up to 25 knots

What complete rubbish.
How can you class 3 times as much as "about the same"?

just shows you like making things up to justify your argument.

Here are the figures for a Phantom 50 which is the nearest to your boat I can easily find.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://static.photobox.co.uk/public/images/45/99/10714599.s.jpg?ch=97&rr=16:00:39>Nirvana</A>

 

[KevB]

Re: Questions on your analysis gludy

I lied. Here's the figures for a Squaddie 58. Even worse....

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://static.photobox.co.uk/public/images/45/99/10714599.s.jpg?ch=97&rr=16:00:39>Nirvana</A>

 

[Gludy]

Re: Questions on your analysis gludy

You keep shooting yourself in the foot ... its not me that is taking small points and twisting them, it you.

My boat has a pair of TAMP 122 600hp engines in it so your example are not correct BUT lets now yet again examine your fugures:-

The Squadron 58 is a replacment for my boat and so taking that as the nearest.

Fuel consumption at 12.9 knots 0.59 mpg
at 17.7 knots 0.54 mpg
at 23.7 knots 0.56 mpg - an increase of 6 knots and a lowering of fuel consumption .... so whilst the place at which the hump occurs varies by the boat, the planing boat once again is inefficient at a lower speed and consumes less fuel going faster by some 6 knots.

On this boat after that point it is almost flat all the way to top speed - there being no sudden increase near top speed that many boats do exhibit but this clearly does not.

So what are we left with, you yet again provide the figures to prove my general point that a planing hull is less efficient at lower speeds and have actually produced an example that has almost the same fuel consumption at almost any speed ..... whereas a semi-d hull would always increase fuel consumption as you increase speed ..... again my very point.

The only difference with this set of figures is that others did not fire off wihrhout reading them first, so maybe there is hope yet.

Please, before you have no feet left, explain to me exactly what you are trying to prove me wrong on?

You have succeeeded in proving that planing boat are least efficient before they get over the hump and very flat in fuel consumption throughout most ,if not all their range - this is the exactly opposite of what you were saying before when you tried to prove that planing boats always increased fuel consumption with speed and others that there is no such thing a s a free knot. This example has at least 6 free knots in it, in fact it got more than that because it would be about 25 knots before the fuel consumption was again 0.54 mpg and so its 7.3 knots all free without any extra fuel consumption.




<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[DERF]

A debate???

Gludy,

you keep posting that you want to debate topics....

I've read many of your posts and seem to get the impression that your debating style constitutes bludgeoning people about the head when they disagree with you.
... is it any wonder why your posts ruffle feathers?

You were determined to buy a Marlow because you believe it is the best boat without exception..... remember that is a subjective view. Now your rattling on about Trader..

Unless I'm mistaken your initial reason for moving away from a fast planing boat was because of the potential loss of derogation on diesel...no? I refer to one of my earlier posts.. if you are so hung up about fuel consumption etc why don't you take up sailing?

Buy a large sail boat.. they're on the whole cheaper to buy and cheaper to run, you'll have unlimited range and can cook and drink tea to your hearts content whilst underway... albeit at 5-6 knts!





<hr width=100% size=1><font color=red>If it doesn't kill ... it fattens</font color=red>

 

[Gludy]

Re: A debate???

"I've read many of your posts and seem to get the impression that your debating style constitutes bludgeoning people about the head when they disagree with you.
... is it any wonder why your posts ruffle feathers?"

I have to agree that I ruffle feathers - thats a fact.

However I disagree abouit "bludgeoning people about the head when they disagree with you"

If you look I simply deal with the facts. Sure when people get a bit perosnal and even start off other taking the mickey threads, I respond but I have actually enyoyed those threads .. they are very amusing.

Currently folks are making claims about the nature of boat types that are simply not true. They produce figures to support their case which turn out to disprove their case - I simply deal with the facts .... however it seems that in some cases other factors come into it and I cannot be held responsible for other folks hang ups.

"You were determined to buy a Marlow because you believe it is the best boat without exception..... remember that is a subjective view. Now your rattling on about Trader.."

I consider the Marlow the best boat in the world for my purposes period. Its also the best designed and built boat around. Its just that I currently cannot afford one. I have never stated I was getting one, simply that I was looking at them.

"Unless I'm mistaken your initial reason for moving away from a fast planing boat was because of the potential loss of derogation on diesel...no? I refer to one of my earlier posts.. if you are so hung up about fuel consumption etc why don't you take up sailing? "

You are mistaken. Its a balance of a whole range of factors that I have already outlined in this thread.
Over the next few years my boating will consist more of long distance cruisong which is not effected by UK diesel prices. It is however making the range of a boat another factor in the equation. Also if red is done away with I think displacement and semi-d hulls will get a lot more attention but that is only one of many factors. The red issue would not bu itself force me to change boat , I would move it to the Med.

Now what in the above has ruffled feathers?


<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[BrendanS]

Re: Am i going worng somewhere?

Read my posts, I already said a P60 with stabilisers won't plane - to stop you arguing that point with me, but you argue it anyway, and start asking other posters if it;'s sensible - stop stwisting arguements to suit your case.. I'm not trying to say that a P60 with stabilisers is a good idea, I'm arguing the case that you are not comparing like with like. You cannot compare two boats hull forms, then arbitrarily give one of them stabilisers, then say of course it's more comfortable. Of course it is, it's got stabilisers! Anyway, I gave you the option of taking stabilisers off the Nordhaven for the purposes of comparision too, and you conveniently ignored that aspect. We were discussing hull form, speed and comfort, not stabilisers

at 9knts, both with, or both without stabilisers, which is going to be most comfortable in a F8? I don't know the answer - never been on either in a F8

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

 

[Wiggo]

Re: Opinions!

<blockquote><font size=1>Quote from previous post:</font><hr>

I don't know the answer - never been on either in a F8

<hr></blockquote>


Well just sod off and stop cluttering up the forum with opinions, then, Brendan. We just want facts, here, so we can have a mature, reasoned slanging match about who's facts are better than who's.

Gludy, just buy the damned trawler and have done with. Then tell us about it, while you work out what to buy next.

<hr width=100% size=1>Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

 

[KevB]

Re: Questions on your analysis gludy

I have just been out to lunch and had a bit of a reality check.

I can only dream to one day be in the position of being able spend on a boat the kind of money that buys a trader 575.

Whatever you need to do to convince yourself that it's the boat for you (when secretly you want a Marlow) is up to you. But whatever you buy please invite us all to the launch party.

Kevin.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://static.photobox.co.uk/public/images/45/99/10714599.s.jpg?ch=97&rr=16:00:39>Nirvana</A>