Fuel consumption....

[Tom400CFI]

What do you get for fuel economy, in your cats? I'm interested in hearing Gal/hr, and/or Gal/acre if you have it, for what ever models you have.

[admin]

When I'm running the BR-350 sans-winch, I usually burn 4.5-5.5 gal/hr depending on snow conditions. With the winch on (but not winching...), I can easily suck 6-7 gal/hr.

In the old PB 300, I'll burn usually about 4-5 gal/hr.


Tiller speed seems to make a pretty substantial difference. When I can run with a lower tiller speed, I'm usually on the lower end of above metrics.

[cj@royal]

Between 5 and 6 gal/hour in a 300 polar depending on snow conditions and how bad i want to get home.

[troutriver]

I am generally .75-.85 gallons per acre with a Bison this season. Thats how we track it. Operators reset the "trip" each shift start, write down all totals in the cat log sheet and calculate the gallons/acre. This is using the fuel consumption data from the cat, not the fuel pump.

[admin]

I am generally .75-.85 gallons per acre with a Bison this season. Thats how we track it. Operators reset the "trip" each shift start, write down all totals in the cat log sheet and calculate the gallons/acre. This is using the fuel consumption data from the cat, not the fuel pump.

Is your metric based on machine acres, or actual acreage covered? How do you account for the fact that the trip log reading for acreage is total tilled acreage, including pass overlaps and double passes?

[troutriver]

Patrick,

All data is taken only from the machine computer. Same on 350 or Bison. The acreage is what it is. All the machine looks at is distance traveled and tiller time. There is no way to differentiate whether acreage is "productive" or not. GPS integration would be the only way to be a bit more accurate on that. You could groom a catwalk ten times over the shift, but it still counts as acreage. If you haven't played with this before, use the RH/LH arrow keys on your computer screen to look at/reset information. In order to calculate gallons per acre, you will have to manually divide the acres/gallons. If you are looking for improvement, use the minimum engine RPM, tiller speed, cut depth, down pressure and flag position (if applicable) to get the job done for the conditions.

The tiller pump itself will draw something like 70-90 HP, so thats an easy place to start. You will see immediate improvement just by trying some of these. Example, you don't need 100% tiller speed at all times. 80% will cover it alot of times (maybe not in VT ice though!!). It was a habit, but I really try to be aware of that now and it has made a 4-6 gallon improvement over a shift in the same patterns/conditions. No, I don't get a bonus check for saving fuel if you wondered!!! Its interesting to try things and see what works and what doesn't.

[admin]

troutriver - thanks, I actually am familiar with it. Use it frequently. Just was curious as to whether you had a way of determining productive acreage.

A lot of our guys just like to crank the tiller speed and engine RPMs and go, which is just not particularly efficient. I kind of enjoy the challenge of trying to make the best product I can while using the least fuel. It's somewhat of a game for me. I'm always running with a lower tiller speed, as long as my pattern still looks good.

And for the record... I'm in northern VT. We usually get 300" of snow a year. It's not that icy here. But when it is... well, that's when you really learn how to groom!

[Tom400CFI]

This is good info, so far, with a good explaination of how your are arriving at your data.

We do Gallons per hour, as well as gallons per acre, and we do it by actual acres covered. IOW, we know the acreage of all of our runs. Our ops write down the runs they completed on a log, then we add up the acres groomed (from a spread sheet that has all trails>acres on it) and that is how we come to our production figures. We like that b/c it is actual groomed. For US, grooming over the same thing twice and calling 5 acres, 10....is not what we're after data wise. If we open in the AM wil 300 GROOMED acres, that is what we groomed. To me, saying that we groomed 600 acres (if we double passed every thing, for example) but we're only offering 300 acres to our guests...that isn't how I want to do it.

I love talking about this stuff. I love that you guys are willing to share how you do it. Thanks and keep it coming!

[snowwizard]

This is good info, so far, with a good explaination of how your are arriving at your data.

We do Gallons per hour, as well as gallons per acre, and we do it by actual acres covered. IOW, we know the acreage of all of our runs. Our ops write down the runs they completed on a log, then we add up the acres groomed (from a spread sheet that has all trails>acres on it) and that is how we come to our production figures. We like that b/c it is actual groomed. For US, grooming over the same thing twice and calling 5 acres, 10....is not what we're after data wise. If we open in the AM wil 300 GROOMED acres, that is what we groomed. To me, saying that we groomed 600 acres (if we double passed every thing, for example) but we're only offering 300 acres to our guests...that isn't how I want to do it.

I love talking about this stuff. I love that you guys are willing to share how you do it. Thanks and keep it coming!

Where did you come up with this idea to track grooming? Sounds like the same program i used at a ASC resort i worked at. As a grooming manager their i was just a glorified data entry person. Putting numbers together to satisfy bean counters. Do you have a average acreage p/hr that a tractor grooms?
If your into data tracking it's cool, but i was into the final product that was produced nightly , enjoying the prodcut myself and riding the lift with customers and listening to their comments personally.

[Tom400CFI]

Are you speaking of the good old "Dashboard"?

That thing was useless for (at least) two reasons:
1. No one ever looked at it, cared about it, said anything about it
2. It measured meaningless stuff.

I crunch data b/c I like to. The data I pursue is the only objective aspect of grooming I know, that CAN be measured. The rest; the quality of the finished product, and the enjoyment gotten from skiing it...that's hard to measure objectively. But that doesn't make it any less important. Likewise, this data. W/o it, how can you possibly know the efficiency of your operation?

I originally came up the the "idea to track grooming" (not a new idea, I don't think), to get objective data that clearly shows how one make/model cat performs against another. To see where the greatest efficiency lies. It has grown into much more than that, now though. It's a PITA entering all of it, but the results are pretty cool, and they tell a clear story.