Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

[1994lundminnow]

What are the benefits and drawbacks to a jet pump vs. a conventional prop drive?

 

[navigator336]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

Pros:<br />- Generally a quicker hole shot.<br />- A very simple drive that will last a long time (unless you suck up the bottom too often - the repair is fairly easy and not too expensive if you do).<br />- Generally safer for those in the water as there is no prop.<br />- You can parallel park a jet drive at the dock by turning the wheel towards the dock then shifting from forward to reverse to forward to.... at idle.<br />- With a Hamilton jet you can run in as little as 3" of water. With a Berkeley, Jacuzzi, Panther, etc. you need 2.5' or you'll suck up the bottom, but you won't damage the prop or drive if you do get too shallow occasionally.<br /><br /><br />Cons:<br />- Generally poorer fuel economy.<br />- Generally lower top end.<br />- Virtually no steering at idle due to the lack of a skeg of any consequence.<br />- If the driver doesn't back off on the thottle as the boat comes on full plane, the skier, or boarder will get a high pressure wash. A tuber is usually fine as the rope is longer.<br />- If you suck up a ski rope, it can be eventful to get it loose from the drive shaft, especially if it's an old Berkeley A style.

 

[DJ]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

Are you asking about an outboard jet or inboard jet?<br /><br />What has already been said is generally true.<br /><br />Outbboard jets lose a lot of horsepower in the conversion. <br /><br />Neither is as efficient as a conventional prop.<br /><br />Slow speed handling can be very intertesting.

 

[ED21]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

I have to agree pretty much with what was said about jets vs props in my limited experience. <br />A friend had an inboard jet an a small boat that we used a lot. We couldn't pull a skier, but it was interesting being able to skim over the flats in about 6" of water & not worry about ripping off the lower unit.

 

[1994lundminnow]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

Thanks for the replies everyone. I am more interested in the inboard jet vs the outboard jet.

 

[Terry H]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

Inboard jet is much more efficient than the outboard jet, but you still needs a big fuel tank...just a thought

 

[Tufan]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

I have a water sports consession in a public beach here, renting Jet Ski(s) and operating Banana boat.. <br /><br />I had a Jet Boat to pull the banana raft, 17 footer with 100 HP each twin engine... $ 50 - $ 70 a gas every day... Than business grew and I bought another used boat, an 18 footer bowrider and put a brand new 90 Hp outboard on it, better performance - $ 20 gas a day max... <br /><br />You can guess what happened to the Jet Boat - out on the yard for sale - I got another bowrider with out board on it!<br /><br />Not to mention the maintenance - easy parts stuff. Jet boat is great to get close to the beach (and when you get too close sucks in sand!!) and thats ALL... Very difficult to navigate when slow also.

 

[ZmOz]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

Unless you NEED a jet (shallow water) it would be best to stay away from it. I wouldn't even think about one unless it had a big V8 attached to it.

 

[bilmon]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

after 35 years of props I bought a 03 Sugar Sand Mirage, I may never go back to props.Mine is a 18 ft. powered by a Merc 240 efi v6, same motor as an outboard. True it is a little harder on gas then a comparable outboard but they are available with optimax power heads, much more efficient. Top speed is less then a like powered prop[55.7 gps best on mine] but aceleration is incredible and they will out handle a prop at ANY speed plus you can stop on a dime, pretty handy with some of the clowns out there. Check out the Sugar Sand ,Sea Doo, and Polarus all Merc powered up to about 23 ft. all availible with walk though wind shields and are hard to tell from any conventional bow rider.

 

[Terry H]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

Oh yea...if you want to gitrid of a passanger on you boat you can go from wide open forward to reverse in one step...

 

[dajohnson53]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

Originally posted by ZmOz:<br /> Unless you NEED a jet (shallow water) it would be best to stay away from it. I wouldn't even think about one unless it had a big V8 attached to it.

I've been in a couple of really nice boats designed around the Merc 175 (and higher) sport jet which are excellent boats and surprisingly decent on fuel. I owned a V8 jet and while they have their advantages, they have what I consider major disadvantages in terms of weight and size of the doghouse (engine enclosure). The weight is often a factor in a jet boat as you end up in situations where you have to move the boat off a sand bar or worse. (after all you bought it to do shallow water running). The doghouse takes up way too much room unless the boat is at least 20 feet long with a foot bottom. Just my opinion of course, but BTDT.

 

[KCook]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

^

 

[cadillacdreams82]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

We have always had prop driven boats,we are currently in the market for a daycruiser type boat,most of them we have looked at have the mercruiser alpha 1 outdrive wich I have experiance with,we are also looking at a 1977 Taylor daycruiser with a panther jet drive hooked to a 460 ford. Does anyone have any thoughts positive/negative or advice about this drive system?

 

[JoLin]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

This thread is 6 years old. please start a new one.

 

[cadillacdreams82]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

This thread is 6 years old. please start a new one.

Ok new to the forum,cant figure out how to start a new thread,any suggestions?
Thank You.

 

[labguy]

Re: Jet Pump vs. Conventional Prop

Click on "Create New Post" at the top of the main page.