How much fuel carrying capacity do folks bring for exploring the Inside Passage with a 22' Cruiser? I don't mean for shooting straight up to Alaska, but for taking lots of time exploring the winding waterways of coastal B.C. I saw 85 gallons mentioned in one post. I'm wondering because I'm thinking of having custom Al saddle tanks built (to replace the plastic tanks at the stern) and wondering what capacity would be ideal for this kind of adventure?
How much fuel capacity for exploring Inside Passage?
- Thread starter pcg
- Start date
Paul, our main tanks hold about 43 useable gallons. In additional containers on our 8 cruises in SE Alaska, we have carried between 36 & 53 extra gallons. On our first three trips, we cruised mostly on plane, so used a lot of fuel. Since retirement, the last 5 cruises there have been at 85% displacement to extend range. Due to our new twin Honda 60’s using much less fuel, I’m planning on only 81 gallons for this coming years Alaska trip. The furthest we’ve gone between fueling is 405 miles & on that stretch we still had 27 gal in reserve. For us us who like to explore extensively between available fuel points, I prefer to have the capability to go between 400 & 500 miles at displacement speed & not being concerned if the need arises to travel on plane or being able to skip a fueling when the prices are exorbitant.
We have yet to travel the complete Inland Passage in BC, but have been in the lower part & from Prince Rupert north. I think 85 gallons fine for BC, especially if using displacement speed when necessary to extend range.
Jay
We have yet to travel the complete Inland Passage in BC, but have been in the lower part & from Prince Rupert north. I think 85 gallons fine for BC, especially if using displacement speed when necessary to extend range.
Jay
colbysmith
Active member
The 22 I used a few years ago on the Inside Passage also had tanks for 42 gallons. I carried 2 5-gal cans additional, and did fine. (I never had less than 5 gals available.) But I also only ran at hull speeds of 5-6 mph. The only time I ran on plane was getting from Prince Rupert to Ketchikan, and returning, and that was only at times. So most the time I was getting about 5 mpg. Colby
If you always stay at low displacement speeds, AND watch the currents you can probably be comfortable at 60 gallons. With our Cal 46 (range under power of about 3,000 miles), we rarely went over 6 knots. We always waited for slack water at the passes (or with more experience went thru with a flood). The trip would take significantly longer than in a C Dory 22. We didn't do any of the route in a 22, but almost all in a 25 with only the stock 100 gallon tank. We were able to go 2 to 3 x further a day than in the sailboat.
With displacement speeds, we would rarely run more than one pass a day. With the C Dory it was not unusual to run 3 passes. 60 miles in 10 hours or 60 miles in 3 hours?
It boils down to how you are going to run the boat--and many off the course detours you make.
With displacement speeds, we would rarely run more than one pass a day. With the C Dory it was not unusual to run 3 passes. 60 miles in 10 hours or 60 miles in 3 hours?
It boils down to how you are going to run the boat--and many off the course detours you make.
FWIW: Inside Passage – Distance between fuel stops
We've wandered pretty much all over the Inside Passage in BC and SE Alaska, in all sorts of different directions.
Distances are from tested routes in my chartplotters. They're in Nautical Miles. To convert NM to statute miles, multiply by 1.15.
You can get to most places you'd want to go in a small boat if you can COMFORTABLY (with a good reserve to handle weather changes etc) go 160 nautical miles on a tank. If you have 200-300 NM range you have a lot more flexibility in your routes, but I don't think there's anywhere much more than 140 NM from the next fuel stop. Many are a lot closer together than that.
One place which would take significantly longer range to get to is the fancy glaciers up at the end of the Tracy Arm, the entrance of which (assume at Tracy Arm Cove, the anchorage just inside Holkham Bay) is about 56 NM south from downtown Juneau, or 70 NM from Auke Bay. The run up to the glaciers from Tracy Arm Cove is 26 NM each way. So you'd need about 160-190 NM range, depending on where you start and end up.
Some of the other longest runs between fuel stops:
Petersburg-Juneau (downtown): 114 NM
Petersburg to Auke Bay: 124 NM
Petersburg-Sitka: 152 NM, but you could stop for fuel at Angoon (some days) or Tenakee Springs (by going out of your way)
Petersburg to Craig: 120 NM
Auke Bay-Sitka (via Peril Strait): 131 NM
Hoonah-Sitka (via Peril Strait): 126 NM
Petersburg to Craig: 120 NM
Glacier Bay, Bartlett Cove to Margerie Glacier and back: minimum about 120 NM, depending on where you anchor overnight.
Shearwater-Prince Rupert: 175 NM, but you could stop for fuel at Klemtu or Hartley Bay.
These routes could vary a few miles in length, depending on how directly you travel, and where you pull in to anchor overnight.
We've wandered pretty much all over the Inside Passage in BC and SE Alaska, in all sorts of different directions.
Distances are from tested routes in my chartplotters. They're in Nautical Miles. To convert NM to statute miles, multiply by 1.15.
You can get to most places you'd want to go in a small boat if you can COMFORTABLY (with a good reserve to handle weather changes etc) go 160 nautical miles on a tank. If you have 200-300 NM range you have a lot more flexibility in your routes, but I don't think there's anywhere much more than 140 NM from the next fuel stop. Many are a lot closer together than that.
One place which would take significantly longer range to get to is the fancy glaciers up at the end of the Tracy Arm, the entrance of which (assume at Tracy Arm Cove, the anchorage just inside Holkham Bay) is about 56 NM south from downtown Juneau, or 70 NM from Auke Bay. The run up to the glaciers from Tracy Arm Cove is 26 NM each way. So you'd need about 160-190 NM range, depending on where you start and end up.
Some of the other longest runs between fuel stops:
Petersburg-Juneau (downtown): 114 NM
Petersburg to Auke Bay: 124 NM
Petersburg-Sitka: 152 NM, but you could stop for fuel at Angoon (some days) or Tenakee Springs (by going out of your way)
Petersburg to Craig: 120 NM
Auke Bay-Sitka (via Peril Strait): 131 NM
Hoonah-Sitka (via Peril Strait): 126 NM
Petersburg to Craig: 120 NM
Glacier Bay, Bartlett Cove to Margerie Glacier and back: minimum about 120 NM, depending on where you anchor overnight.
Shearwater-Prince Rupert: 175 NM, but you could stop for fuel at Klemtu or Hartley Bay.
These routes could vary a few miles in length, depending on how directly you travel, and where you pull in to anchor overnight.
thataway":55dorfia said:
Bob, as usual is dead on & Richard shows how with very little fuel like Colby carried, one can easily make it from fuel point to fuel point. For those who just want to go basically from fuel point to fuel point on a first time cruise very little extra fuel is needed. That has never been our mode as we do enjoy the fuel stops & towns they are located in, but the main interest in cruising this area is the more remote areas in between for extended periods. This does make extra fuel mandatory & that circles back to just how much, to Bob’s “It boils down to how you are going to run the boat--and many off the course detours you make.”
In the planning for our group cruise this summer, I have recommended, as I stated before a range of 400 to 500 miles at displacement speed. For the most part we will not take on that much fuel or need to make near that many miles, but for the times we might need it, all will have the fuel storage capability to do so.
Jay
Wow lots of really good information! I can't say enough about how great this group is - so many people with a wealth of experience and knowledge, coupled with the willingness to share. Thank you all!
That summarizes my thoughts after reading all of the above. If I decide to go to the trouble and expense to have custom saddle tanks built, it doesn't make sense to not take advantage of the opportunity to build in extra capacity, even if I wasn't planning on using the boat for extended explorations.Hunkydory":3gabkjpr said:
T.R. Bauer
New member
As folks have noted, there's going from point A to point B and then there is exploring. I have found through thousands of hours of goofing around that a heavy CD 22 will get 3-5 mpg while on step travelling at 15-20 mph with old carb technology. Of course this depends on conditions and load. Even at wide open throttle, you should still get 3 mpg. New engines I hear are more efficient, but I don't know how much more efficient. Someday I will find out.
For exploring, in addition to the factory 19 gallon tanks, I bring 2 twelve gallon red fuel tanks and that seems to be enough for 150 miles of fun without stressing about gas and having a good amount in reserve. If you have tons of time on your hands, hull speed basically doubles or even triples your range unless you are fighting wind, tides, or other currents. There are times when doing that is really nice and I like doing it. Often though, I am running full tilt trying to hit a tide for fishing or trying to be anchored before daylight runs out. That's when I get 3 mpg.....
For exploring, in addition to the factory 19 gallon tanks, I bring 2 twelve gallon red fuel tanks and that seems to be enough for 150 miles of fun without stressing about gas and having a good amount in reserve. If you have tons of time on your hands, hull speed basically doubles or even triples your range unless you are fighting wind, tides, or other currents. There are times when doing that is really nice and I like doing it. Often though, I am running full tilt trying to hit a tide for fishing or trying to be anchored before daylight runs out. That's when I get 3 mpg.....
No thread yet. It will be another road trip to Skagway & then 2 to 3 month cruise from there again. Jody CD22 “Voyager”, Bill 23 Ranger Tug “Mystery Girl, & Mike CD22 “Little Joe” & I make up the group. We plan on a slow high lite tour of my favorite places previously explored. This is a closed group as we’re already 2 boats over optimum in the limited anchorages & dock space in several of the remote areas we plan to visit. We have been planning this trip & then stopped due to Covid the last two years. Hopefully it will be a go this year & I will likely start a thread when that is known for sure.
Jay
Jay