FLOW SCAN Meters

Captains Cat

New member
Am looking at adding a flowscan meter to my "new" [to me] TC255. I've got twin Suzi 115 EFI engines though and the flowscan website says:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Important note for the following outboard engine owners:
- Evinrude E-Tec 2-cycle
- Mercury Verado 4-cycle
- Suzuki 4-cycle
- Yamaha 4-cycle

The engines listed above have two fuel pumps. Because the engine's lift, or low pressure pump cycles on and off while filling the vapor separation module, the FloScan instrument GPH/LPH readings will constantly fluctuate between 0 GPH/LPH and approximately 25-50 GPH or 95-190 LPH depending on lift pump and engine size. Though the GPH/LPH readings are unusable, the FloScan instrument will accurately record total fuel consumption as displayed in the totalizer window.
-------------------------------------------------------------------


Looks like it won't work well with my engines, anyone else have this system on Suzis? I'd like to see how much I'm using, not have it "fluctuate"!

Charlie
 
Charlie,

I never noticed that on my ETEC 90 but it might not work quite the same. I do notice it on the Honda 90 VTEC but it never goes to zero. I have worked around it with the Navman by adjusting the damping from a value of 10 to 20. At 10 I could see a swing of almost 2 gph when I estimated the average flow at 6 gph. Now it's down to less than a GPH and seems to approximate the truth on overall total flow.

Tom
 
Thanks. Looks like the standard horizon or navman that Thataway has will work as it goes in the line before the engine and is not "electronic".

Dr Bob, can you coment?
 
Both the Navman (Northstar 210 currently after sales of companies) and the Lowerance EP 10 with the LMF 200 or LMF 400 will work. I have both and they are about the same type of transducers. The newer Suzuki's will plug directly into the NMEA 2000 bus--and read directly off the engine. But I believe that this is 2006 on.

At this point I tend to favor the Lowrance, since they are slightly less expensive, and the Lowrance guages will read so many other items--temps, voltage, speed, Pressures, etc....
 
Anyone know the approximate total cost for fuel flow metering for twin engines? What skill set(s)/tools are needed to do the installation? Thanks, Mike.
 
Looks like the $400 neighborhood. Some electrical skills, the ability and willingness to cut a hole in your dashboard and to cut two fuel hoses between the engine and the fuel filter. Doesn't look like a big job to me, I will probably do it in the near future.

Charlie
 
Hi Charlie

I use a log to keep track of fuel used. I log all my trips. I keep track of date, fish caught, where I caught fish, who was on board, any other special notes and engine hours. I fuel at a gas station the hours are noted and the gallons to refuel.

This is not exact for anything except for how much fuel I have used over time. I do run dual 50's and a lot of time I run with one engine when trolling. I get a good average for consumption.

My pickup has a guage which keeps track of mileage. It is sure nice to see, but when I refuel I usually get a different mpg.

My average boat fuel used is one gallon per hour.

I am happy with the log method and since my truck fuel flow is not to accurate I am not so sure the scan flow type guages would give me better results.

Hope this helps. Jeff

1tuberider
 
Hi Jeff, thanks for the response. I could keep a log too but I need to know how much fuel is in the tanks since my gauges are apparently not accurate. It would be good to see how much fuel I'm using (GPH) at the different speeds. I probably won't fill up the tanks all the way each time either since each one holds 75 gallons!! :shock: which is 2 1/2 times what the total capacity of my CD 22 is!

Charlie
 
Jeff,
You have way too much time on your hands son. :D :!:

If I spent that much time logging all those numbers, then how would the boat get washed, the fish get cleaned, the guest get entertained?

You didn't mention it, but do you have a better half that is taking care of all those details while you are making sure you have enough gas for the next trip? :wink

Mike
Papillon
Navman (Northstar) Flow Scan 2100 (Works Great)
 
Gallons per hour divorced from speed is not a real useful measure for most of us. I think most folks want to know how far they can go on a gallon of gas (economy), and hence their range on the fuel they have with whatever factor of safety they use. We have a Navman, and I guess we are lucky we bought it when we did, as I have heard this model is no longer available since the company was acquired. We use the ecomony setting to show instantaneous miles per gallon - this is never even close to the actual computed miles per gallon but allows us to see what rpm / trim is giving us the best relative ecomony. The Navman shows gallons used / gallons remaining, and this is very accurate - always within a gallon or so even on big fill ups. So I know that calculating about 2.5 nautical miles per gallon (that is average over a lot of varying cruising speeds and conditions) against fuel remaining gives me a pretty accurate range estimate, and for planning purposes I calculate figuring just 2 nautical miles per gallon as a worst case. I assume I have 100 gallons (I know this may be a little suspect, but our specs actually say 107 gallons), and apply a 25% reserve factor, I have 75 gallons and at 2 NMPG I assume I can always go 150 NM between fuel stops. In reality I can go farther, and knowing how much fuel I actually have remaining at any time is very comforting, as I can slow down and get dramatically better economy if need be.

1TUBERIDER":105iyz7n said:
My average boat fuel used is one gallon per hour.

1tuberider
 
Hi all

I forgot to mention I can also measure mpg as well. I use my chart plotter to see how far I have gone. When I went tuna fishing I traveled 30 miles out trolled at 7 knots for 5 hours and traveled 30 miles back. My total distance was 95 miles. For this trip I used around 30 gallons. So I guess that trip averaged 3.17 miles per gallon which included the 600 pounds of tune we hauled back. That trip did exceed my gallon per hour average use, but the boat was used at higher speeds for the trip. Most the time I am either salmon trolling or bottom fishin for that gallon per hour use.

Plus my time on the water is all boat time and I count it for my smile factor.

But I guess the point of a flow meter is info. You would get fuel use at different rpms and remaining miles left in the tank and more. I had one on the safe boat I operated, but I never would leave port short on fuel for a mission. I always relied on the fuel guages and my experience with the fuel tanks not the flo guages.

So back to the point of my truck guage. Yes it gives me mpg, miles left in the fuel and so forth then I hit my first hill ,everything changes. Isn't that true also for the flow scan where wind, sea state or current will all effect the fuel flow.

Anyway since I am not a distance cruiser I never felt the need for that information. I still have enough information from my logs and fuel sight guages to return to port safely and better yet to return to my recorded favorite fishin holes. Plus I can count fish caught, friends that fished, time for boat maintenance and reflect on why I bought the boat.

I wish my better half Debbie would clean the fish and wash the boat and flush the engines and and and but and therefore a day fishin is not done till fish are cleaned and the boat maintenance is done, but I am still smilin cause I got a day on the water.

How much do these guages cost? They must be technical to hook up since somehow they need to know how much fuel is in the tank, mileage calculations, and fuel use.

Anyway I think my log is an alternative to the flow guages and it works for me. Thanks

Jeff
1tuberider
 
The Lowrance fuel flow sensor and the 2" meter (which reads all sorts of data) is $118, and the 4" meter with the fuel flow sensor is about $160. As noted before these can read any material on the bus, and goodly amount of engine data. If you have a Lowrance GPS, it will read miles per gallon. Even my 5 year old Lowrance works with the GPS bus.

The Northstar (used to be Navman) is about $130, but I am not sure if their instrument which is directly connected to the GPS is still available.

The reason for the fuel flow sensor, is not just the amount used--but also what is the most effecient trim. If you are making short trips, and mostly trolling--it is probably not worth while. But if you are making significant voyages where the amount of fuel might be called into question--it is very worth while. You may get 10 to 20% better "economy" with the boat properly trimmed.

Although our fuel level guages seem to be reasonably accurate. The fuel flow meter totalizer is within a percent or two. (But we are mostly running at planing speed).
 
"Simplify, simplify, simplify"

Miles traveled are on the GPS chartplotter. Gallons consumed are on the fuel pump when I refill tanks. Fuel consumption is simple: Divide the miles by the gallons.

If you partially fill tanks, keep a record of fuel fills, and miles traveled. In a very short time, with a minimum of record keeping, you will have an accurate miles/gallon.

We have traveled a total of 23,894 nautical miles and used 5,950 gallons of fuel. So, we get 4.02 nautical miles/gallon, under all conditions. And that is accurate to .9999999% and cost $0.00 (and a little time keeping a log, that we keep anyway). We know our tanks hold 40 gallons. Therefore we can expect an average cruising range of 150 miles, with a little to spare.

We travel at the speed that's comfortable for the conditions. Slowly, if there's lots to see and enjoy. Faster, if a storm is brewing. We then adjust our trim tabs to get max mph for our comfortable speed. That should give us the best economy for that speed. Would we change speed to get better economy? No. We are cruising the boat for the joy of cruising -- for the process -- for the conditions at the moment -- not whether we might save a gallon or two.

Saving the cost of adding a fuel flow sensor (one more gizmo to require repairs and adjusting) will pay for a few more nice meals ashore (we all have our priorities, right?) :lol:
 
"Simplify, simplify, simplify" -- Henry David Thoreau

"Today's Luddites continue to raise moral and ethical arguments against the excesses of modern technology to the extent that our inventions and our technical systems have evolved to control us rather than to serve us." -- Martin Ryder University of Colorado at Denver
 
Got it! Luddite and proud of it!


El and Bill":35y4q1he said:
"Today's Luddites continue to raise moral and ethical arguments against the excesses of modern technology to the extent that our inventions and our technical systems have evolved to control us rather than to serve us." -- Martin Ryder University of Colorado at Denver
 
No, not a Luddite -- not opposed to technological advances. Quite the opposite, if fact. Change has been a by-word in my life. And most tech advances have made my life simpler (whew -- think how much easier and simpler GPS is compared with shooting bearings).

I added the neo-luddism to illustrate that luddites are still around -- and some might have an (arguably) valid discussion point -- perhaps some tech. advances are morally wrong (stem cell research is one that many might bring up) and others perhaps are changing our culture in ways that might not be beneficial (gizmos that kids play with indoors to the exclusion of outdoor play or social interaction with peers, could be another). And some, like a flow meter, might have little application for a small boat.

Sorry you got the wrong impression. I am merely a critic of technology that has little or no apparent use (for me, and perhaps many other small boat users) when there is a simpler and less costly technology in existence.
 
Bill - just being my normal facetious self! Anybody using a computer and connecting to the internet via an Aircard, or using a GPS directed by satellites, or a boat powered by anything but oars for that matter, pretty much by definition cannot be a Luddite!

El and Bill":2yc29g9a said:
Sorry you got the wrong impression.
 
Back
Top