Jim curious as to your best guess on this one...As you know Pat did my wheels over the winter. I did not have the fuel management gauge in previous seasons so I don't know what my burn was but now I am about 1.8nmpg or just over 2mpg.

My overall average GPH is down about 1GPH from 4.8 to 3.7. But again this is overall average including no wake zones, trolling, idling while taking short drifts, etc.

Some general info to help with a guess as to weather this is good or not...22', 8' 6" beam, mod-v (20 degrees at transom), 6,300 pounds with full gear and 3/4 fuel, 2003 (sold as 2005) 5.0L MPI Volvo with DPS drive with 1.95:1 gear ratio.

I am now seeing a 22 kt cruise at about 3,600 RPM (12 GPH). 4,000 RPM (14 GPH) is about 25 kts and 4,200 about 26-28 kts (16.5 GPH). From what I can tell just using hours and amount of fuel to fill up my overall burn is down but definitely running at much higher RPM's than last year to go the same speed. Not that I am complaining, just want to make sure she is running where she should be.

Pat had said that he could tweak the props more to keep the RPM and give me more speed, will probably do that this winter. I want to make a couple of longer trips out the Mud Hole first and compare those to last year first.

hey joe...

props...you were running way too much pitch before,boat didn't give full rpm,and was tough to plane,yes
now,you're rig is easier to plane,and it reaches full rpm,yes

larger pitch will give you a few knots more,problem is,it overloads the engine.the reason you're seeing a different rpm is simple,pitch,the distance the prop will travel in one revolution,you've reduced pitch-speed drops slightly...
give pat a call,see what he says,i would bet he can squeak a few more knots for ya...

Yes, needed tabs down to plane quickly and be able to see over the bow the whole time. And yes now I get full RPM. Now I can plan without tabs and much quicker. Plus the ride is 100 times better, the boat is getting up out of the water instead of plowing through it. We were actually very surprised and pleased that we didn't pound the whole way back last weekend and look forward to fishing in conditions that we usually shied away from.

I understand the pitch problems and the need to get it where it is supposed to be. Just curious if the burn rates sound about right. This past weekend we did a trip that used to burn about 20 gallons but now it takes 30. I understand the wheels have to go more revolutions to get the same distance but I thought it would have used less fuel since it isn't working as hard.

little confused here big joe,so help me out...are you using more fuel or less

Using more fuel, a typical fluke trip that we used to burn about 20 gallons now burns 30. For roughly same amount of miles round trip.

ok...may have to do with the whole spped thing...give pat a call...explain to him what's going on,he'll make a suggestion to get it right...