Higher Fuel Consumption on Port Engine

MichaelNJ

Active member
Joined
Aug 8, 2004
RO Number
14778
Messages
1,142
My port engine consistently burns about 5% more per hour. Both my engines used to burn the same and others with the same boat and engines burn the same.

Plugs, Caps and rotors changed
All 16 fuel injectors replaced
Props just tuned
Engines aligned

Any other ideas?
 
Forgot to mention

2006 Mercruiser 6.2 Horizon inboards (Straight Shafts) with 400 hours.
 
was the work done after the problem surfaced?

Was compression checked??

Same fuel in both?
 
Water temp the same on both

Same fuel all the time

Work was done as part of routine maintenance.

Fuel injectors were replaced a few weeks ago because of the paint issue with the Cool Fuel Modules. I was hoping that would solve the problem. One of the port side injectors was definitely clogged with paint.
 
do both engines reach same WOT RPM?

Do you have a propscan report?

It is possible that the props were not identical before work was done and now they are.

Are the air cleaners clean? Any exhaust restriction?
 
They both reach same WOT now, about 5K. I had them done over the winter. The port was a little over propped and the starboard was a little under. They are both within spec now. There doesn't seem to be any exhaust restriction.
 
I just have backfire flame arrestors. They should be clean but I'll check them
 
What Transmission. Most loose something in reversing, perhaps the the props were intentionally different to compensate?
 
I don't think that's it. I used to get the same burn in both engines and others with the same setup do as well.
 
Are you sure the over under propping reports are not reversed?
 
I guess anything is possible but it makes sense that the port prop was overpropped. If that was the case, it would take more throttle (fuel) to turn the same RPMs. But this was corrected and there has been no change in consumption.
 
I believe those trans are straight drives - should be reasonably easy to get a look and/or a camera near the tops of the trans where the 'label' is so you can read and or record both the "A" ratioa the "B" ratios on those tags.
If they are not the same then you have your answer - if that is the case it is much more common than you would think.

Hope this helps
 
Make sure any tank crossover valve is Closed. When crossovers are open, the fuel will tend to follow the path of greater suction and least resistance. My winter storage yard sometimes opens these valves up, I think just to encourage such mysteries as yours.

How are you judging GPH rates, by FloScan or other inline flowmeter which may need re-calibration? or are the flow rate readouts sourced directly from the ECC/ECM to Smartcraft or similar device?
If using inline flow sensors, are the fuel systems return or returnless type?

Have you seen any sheen in the exhaust wake at the dock that might indicate a leaky injector or other combustion issue?

Is the 5% GPH differential confirmed at the pump at each full fill-up? - Port engine always take ~ 5% more gallons than stbd., topped off?

Do you most always use an active synchronizer when not maneuvering in close quarters? Otherwise have you checked tach readings with a portable tach tester or marine scan device? ( ...The latter of which would also show ECC algorithm-derived GPH rate).

Is there any port lean underway?

Just to confirm & clarify , I think you said this is a relatively recent development but it was evident before the prop work was done and has not changed since those props were reinstalled. That seems a bit odd, since the props' pitches were apparently finagled in opposite directions, so one might expect to see ...some... change in same-rpm/same-sea-conditions GPH rate differential. Maybe just not very noticeable.
 
Was the Cool Fuel module with paint problem replaced with one with a paint-issue fix?
Maybe check the rail fuel pressure regulator for paint debris if some had made it to an injector? Mine has a screen inside, easily accessed.
 
I didn't understand that the port fuel did not change after prop work. I agree with your comment about more work. Then what becomes puzzling is why if prop pitch was reduced why the fuel remained the same.

Have you verified tach readings??
 
The cool fuel modules and ALL the injectors were replaced. The Regulators were replaced as well. They did have paint on the screen.

Make sure any tank crossover valve is Closed. When crossovers are open, the fuel will tend to follow the path of greater suction and least resistance. My winter storage yard sometimes opens these valves up, I think just to encourage such mysteries as yours.

Gas Engines, no crossover or transfer between tanks

How are you judging GPH rates, by FloScan or other inline flowmeter which may need re-calibration? or are the flow rate readouts sourced directly from the ECC/ECM to Smartcraft or similar device?
If using inline flow sensors, are the fuel systems return or returnless type?

SmartCraft Only. Just looking at GPH and Total Gallons used based on Smart Craft

Have you seen any sheen in the exhaust wake at the dock that might indicate a leaky injector or other combustion issue?
No but I smell unburned gasoline. My mechanic said it was not unusual

Is the 5% GPH differential confirmed at the pump at each full fill-up? - Port engine always take ~ 5% more gallons than stbd., topped off?
Yes but my generator runs off the port tank as well. I will have to run a tank without using the generator to really compare actual fuel use.

Do you most always use an active synchronizer when not maneuvering in close quarters? Otherwise have you checked tach readings with a portable tach tester or marine scan device? ( ...The latter of which would also show ECC algorithm-derived GPH rate).
I don't have a synchronizer. I sync using the SmartCraft Sync gauge. I am basing my observation on the ECC GPH rate

Is there any port lean underway?
No
 
Would you explain the timeline again. When did you first notice the change. What work was done before the change and after the change?

I don't see any mention of timing being checked.
 
Initially, fuel burn was the same on both engines.

A couple of years ago I noticed about a 5% difference. I talked to my mechanic and he said it wasn't significant enough to be concerned about. He also said that the GPH reported by SmartCraft is not as accurate as a true FlowScan since that number is just based on injector pulses as opposed to actual fuel flow.

I noticed that the shaft going through the port strut felt a little tight in the cutlass bearing. The Starboard shaft turned easily the port did not. Mechanic didn't feel that small amount of resistance would equate to a significant difference in fuel burn. I had the engine aligned and they were able to align the shaft in the strut better. The props were done at the same time. No significant change in fuel burn.

Caps Rotors and Plugs were done two years ago as part of scheduled maintenance

The fuel modules, regulators and injectors were done a few weeks ago. I really thought that would be the answer. The boat does run better. The first few times out, it looked like the fuel burn was closer between the two engines. But this weekend it seems to be back to a 5% difference (about 1 GPH at cruise speed)
 
Back
Top