More testing on Sharrow prop...

[flyingscott]

I’d say I’m stating the exact opposite of being narrow minded. I would like a very wide minded test . That’s all. I don’t bash tests that are like for like comparable or that mostly I’ve done in real life. I think some merc props are terrible things. Like the vengeance. I only ever comment or post about props I’ve actually tried out or seen compared like for like. Can’t get fairer than that. Like I say…I respect and have time for everyone’s opinion…and certainly I’m all for anything new in terms of prop or watercraft development. Especially when it comes to efficiency around blades and rotating machinery. It’s in my nature and more crucially, my very occupation depends on it. Hence the reason I’d just love to see a fair test like for like and with a few different applications. This most recent test is a better effort for sure. But still not too comparable and very selective. The first one was ridiculed by many professionals just after and long after I suggested it. Just on the numbers alone. Who tests a prop that’s on the limiter and crazy underpropped, as they did last time. Surely they knew they’d get found out on that one ?

If they ran it to 5500 how is it on the limiter? Most Yamahas I have owned the limiter is at 6100. I just think you would find something to nitpick period. Once again Why are you not criticizing all prop tests? Especially since they are all suspect. I am still sad about the complete lack of vision here.

 

[QBhoy]

If they ran it to 5500 how is it on the limiter? Most Yamahas I have owned the limiter is at 6100. I just think you would find something to nitpick period. Once again Why are you not criticizing all prop tests? Especially since they are all suspect. I am still sad about the complete lack of vision here.

Read back what I said friend. The first test on the outboard boat with the 150 was on the limiter by a long long way with the merc prop they used. Worse than that…the same tester tested that very boat and engine not long before that test…with the same merc prop…but with 2 or even 3” more pitch. Resulting in more top end…better efficiency and the rest. Have an open mind and look a little further into it all, if you have a spare hour or so to do so. I’d urge you to, if you don’t mind. It’s all I can suggest friend. All the best.

 

[flyingscott]

So you are mad they ran the mercury to the rev limiter ? But you are also mad they only ran the Yamaha to 5500 rpm it's recommended RPM? I am out you are gonna bash it no matter what because you didn't do it. I am excited to see where this prop goes.

 

[QBhoy]

So you are mad they ran the mercury to the rev limiter ? But you are also mad they only ran the Yamaha to 5500 rpm it's recommended RPM? I am out you are gonna bash it no matter what because you didn't do it. I am excited to see where this prop goes.

Don’t think you’re getting what I’m saying here. The first test had the merc prop way way under propped so was limited literally. This test has the sharrow prop pitched to see exactly peak power rpms at 5500 and the other way up at 5900 rpm with less pitch than the sharrow. Do you understand these things and what that means ?

 

[flyingscott]

Don’t think you’re getting what I’m saying here. The first test had the merc prop way way under propped so was limited literally. This test has the sharrow prop pitched to see exactly peak power rpms at 5500 and the other way up at 5900 rpm with less pitch than the sharrow. Do you understand these things and what that means ?

Don't give a rats tail anymore. I am out!!! I understand perfectly that you are mad about both tests and want me to agree with you.

 

[QBhoy]

Don't give a rats tail anymore. I am out!!!!

Good idea…

 

[Texasmark]

That's the only one you can buy on their online store right now.
In comparison, the Solas SS for my boat, most expensive on Iboats, is $661.

My latest prop purchase, SS 4 blade Solace 13+x19 was $275 free shipping. Works great with WOT single digit slip, 115 Merc on 2002 Crestliner 1750 Fish Hawk.

 

[flyingscott]

Alright you 2 answer me this. Wide open prop slip should be a non factor because it is not hard to do. What about midrange, like planing at lower speeds. That way you don't have to pull tubes at 25 mph with small children on them, because any lower and your tube rope are caught in the wake. Or teaching a small child how to ski but your wake is 2 ft high because you are plowing. How about lifting the stern so your tube ropes don't get caught in the wake. What is your slip at Tubing speeds? What is your slip pulling young children on skis? So I could care less about slip at top speed because that is easy to lower. What about where a family uses their boat 90% of the time? So if this prop does all it says it does could it actually be a safer prop?

 

[QBhoy]

Alright you 2 answer me this. Wide open prop slip should be a non factor because it is not hard to do. What about midrange, like planing at lower speeds. That way you don't have to pull tubes at 25 mph with small children on them, because any lower and your tube rope are caught in the wake. Or teaching a small child how to ski but your wake is 2 ft high because you are plowing. How about lifting the stern so your tube ropes don't get caught in the wake. What is your slip at Tubing speeds? What is your slip pulling young children on skis? So I could care less about slip at top speed because that is easy to lower. What about where a family uses their boat 90% of the time? So if this prop does all it says it does could it actually be a safer prop?

If you buy one…you could likely report back on all that. I’d be keen to hear. Genuinely

 

[tpenfield]

Nice idea of a prop, but probably needs more test results and comparisons. . . and a lower price.

Does anyone find something wrong with a boat/prop setup that won't plane at 3000 RPM? . . . as alluded to in the testing.

 

[QBhoy]

Nice idea of a prop, but probably needs more test results and comparisons. . . and a lower price.

Does anyone find something wrong with a boat/prop setup that won't plane at 3000 RPM? . . . as alluded to in the testing.

Thought similar too.

 

[seahorse5]

With Yamaha both doing the casting and selling the MX-3 series to their customers and boatbuilders seems to add credibility to Sharrow's claims for better fuel economy and handling characteristics

https://www.sportfishingmag.com/new...artner-up-for-manufacturing-and-distribution/ https://www.sportfishingmag.com/new...artner-up-for-manufacturing-and-distribution/

 

[jbcurt00]

CLOSED