3 vs 4 blade
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: General Discussion
Forum Discription: Anything Correct Craft
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=20177
Printed Date: April-28-2025 at 7:45pm
Topic: 3 vs 4 blade
Posted By: mrinboard
Subject: 3 vs 4 blade
Date Posted: December-17-2010 at 9:05am
|
Hey guys need some help Im going to be buying a new prop over the winter and I wanted some feedback on what is the better prop 3 or 4 balde I have a 1994 ski nautique we us it for slalom skiing and footing
Thanks, Mr. Inboard ------------- Dont Hate "ACCELERATE!" |
Replies:
Posted By: 8122pbrainard
Date Posted: December-17-2010 at 9:21am
|
Mark,
Roughly, the # 3 topic here in the forums is proping you boat. Do a search and start reading!! You WOT RPM would be great to know too. If someone is directing you to a 4 blade, they most likely are not informed on the latest 3 blade props. (or, they have a 4 blade they want to sell!!  )------------- /diaries/details.asp?ID=1622" rel="nofollow - 54 Atom /diaries/details.asp?ID=2179" rel="nofollow - 77 Tique 64 X55 Dunphy Keep it original, Pete < |
Posted By: Hollywood
Date Posted: December-17-2010 at 11:56am
|
If 4 blades is better than 3 why not go for 5? ------------- |
Posted By: emccallum
Date Posted: December-17-2010 at 12:29pm
| On my 95 snob with a 1.23:1 tranny and the standard motor I am running the Acme 470 three blade. Smooth as glass. It is a great prop for skiing. It will pull your arms off, and I have pulled up 5-6 folks on slalom with little effort. I do think I have lost a bit of top end, but I rarely run it WOT for very long. As before, lots of info here on props. Start reading, and weighing the pros and cons for each one! A new CNC'd prop will be a lot better than any old one. |
Posted By: Fl Inboards
Date Posted: December-17-2010 at 12:42pm
We actually tested a five blade one time. bottom line is the five blade needs rpm to be utilzed that our inboards canot atain. The out board and stern drive industry utilizes them. I like four blades over three for our application. they do run smoother and their is no turn growell with them. I even run a hand build SS OJ four blade on my old v-drive that out performs anything else I tried. ------------- Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise. 1993 Shamrock "fat" 20. 2008 Nautique 196 5.0 |
Hollywood wrote:Posted By: horkn
Date Posted: December-17-2010 at 9:59pm
|
I've been very impressed with my CNC acme 208 4 blade. I will probably buy a 540 to see how that stacks up to the 208 I have to really compare 3 to 4 blades, in a very much like for like with almost no other variables than the number of blades. ------------- 78 martinique- refloored, reinforced, stringers re glassed, re engineered interior GT40P heads Edelbrock Performer intake acme 4 blade http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v64/horkn/fish/nautique.jpg |
Posted By: adamt
Date Posted: December-18-2010 at 7:26am
Why stop at five
 ------------- -Adam 1973 Skier |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: December-18-2010 at 7:01pm
|
I think you'll be happier with a 4 blade, they seem to lift the stern a little more smoothing the wake.
I have a new cnc 3 blade on my boat and I'm looking forward to try a custom made 4 blade. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: mslitti
Date Posted: December-18-2010 at 7:50pm
|
Nice 5 blade, I have one on both of my Mercury Racing #6 speedmaster outdrives, But a do not think the person wanted to spend $6000 on that prop. Lol
|
Posted By: adamt
Date Posted: December-19-2010 at 7:03am
|
Look again, it's a SIX blade!!!  ------------- -Adam 1973 Skier |
Posted By: storm34
Date Posted: December-19-2010 at 4:13pm
Ernest, do you have a GT-40 in your SNOB? We're looking to get a new prop this spring and are debating between a 3 and 4 blade. I'm with Jody, I hate the growl the boat makes when turning with a 3 blade. Our 88 was smoother than any boat I've driven to date. Hoping to get our 96 to that point. ------------- |
Posted By: emccallum
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 12:34pm
| I do not have the gt-40. I havent really noticed much growling, but, I really havent compared the 470 to a good CNC'd 4 blade. DOnt get me thinking about growling!! Ignorance is bliss. My buddy has a 470 on his snob (with the GT 40 motor) and his boat just isnt as smooth as mine. We have aligned it and check everything we could think of. I think some hulls just run better than others. |
Posted By: mdvalant
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 12:39pm
|
I enjoy my blades of 4, personally. Everyone has their favorites though. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5009 - '90 Ski (sold) http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5479 - '00 Sport Mississippi River - Bellevue, IA |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 12:48pm
The old school cast 3-blades that came on the early 90's Nautiques are the only ones Ive actually heard/felt growl like youre describing, Chris. They do it in a hard turn only- I believe a hard left turn will induce it. Sound about right? Keith's '94 did this with the 3-blade OJ. The new-school 3-blades dont do anything like that. They make a *touch* more noise than the 4-blades, but I wouldnt call it a "growl". More of a very slight "chugging" that you notice at skiing speeds. Most people wouldnt notice the difference unless you ran a 3-blade right after the 4-blade though. The CNC 3's are still light years ahead of any of the cast props (3's and 4's alike) in terms of smoothness, not to mention performance. 4 blades are usually the prop of choice with the HO 351's with the 1.23, but that has more to do with the props available than it does with 3 vs. 4 blades. No one makes a 3-blade CNC prop with more than 15" of pitch, and the more powerful motors that are only meant to turn 4800-5000 need a bit more than that to keep the revs in check. The non-HO boats, on the other hand, will usually see better performance from a 3-blade, as there are a number of props to choose from in the 11-14" pitch range. ------------- |
Posted By: Watarski
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 1:03pm
|
I've got to swap to a LH prop (have an Acme 542 now). I'm probably going with another 3 blade based off everything I've read here. Does anyone know if Delta Propeller is doing a sale like they did last Winter? ------------- 1985 Ski Nautique 2001 |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 1:09pm
|
Go to the "Links" section on CCF- we have a standing 20% discount with Delta. ------------- |
Posted By: Watarski
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 1:27pm
|
Thank you sir! Need to order that 543 pronto... ------------- 1985 Ski Nautique 2001 |
Posted By: east tx skier
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 1:42pm
|
I had an Acme 541 on my old MC that growled like crazy when you bought the boat off plane. Great performance, but a bit noisy. Love the 422 on my 98 Ski. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2383&sort=&pagenum=7&yrstart=1996&yrend=2000 - 1998 Ski Nautique (Red & Silver Cloud); GT-40; Perfect Pass Stargazer; Acme 422. |
Posted By: Fl Inboards
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 2:09pm
Now Craig why would you go and do that when Florida Inboards everyday price is 20% off on any OJ product. I tell ya what Christmas special OJ props 30% off for CCF subscribers/members, sale ends Jan 31 2011. Better products for better prices at Florida Inboards Inc. ------------- Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise. 1993 Shamrock "fat" 20. 2008 Nautique 196 5.0 |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 2:16pm
|
Jody, does OJ make anything for an older (1:1) CC (12x13, 12x14, 13x13, 13x14, etc- RH obviously) in their XMP line? Or is the 13x15.5 4-blade for the 1.23:1 the only one they offer? ------------- |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 2:19pm
30% off Acme, too? ------------- |
Posted By: Fl Inboards
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 2:49pm
|
Tim, Their is a complete line of 13" wheels readily available from OJ in all three lines of propeller XMP, Legend and Force, smaller dia wheels can be supplied upon request but of course their is a bit of an up-charge on special order props. 100% satisfaction guaranteed. The last one I had built was a 11.75X20 4blade SS Very fine quality and performance. Eric will build most anything anyone would want in a propeller.
Riley sorry no! Only OJ products. Merry Christmas to all!! Jody ------------- Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise. 1993 Shamrock "fat" 20. 2008 Nautique 196 5.0 |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 2:56pm
Jody, do you have a product list? The only 1" shaft RH XMP prop listed in their http://www.ojprops.com/resources/applicationguide.pdf - Application Guide is the 13x15.5 428. ------------- |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 3:01pm
|
On their XMP,(CNC line), my understanding is the OJ's have more meat on the blades than an Acme, so if I was considering going from a 13x12 in an Acme to a 13x12.625 in an Acme, a 13x12 OJ would be more similar to the Acme 13x12.625? I've been considering a different prop for our Malibu Sporster. It has the 310 carb engine. Manual states red line is 4800. It turns 5050 with even 3 people in it. It's got way more hole shot than it needs. I'm thinking a little more prop would be just as good or better all around and may increase top end slightly and better fuel economy for cruising. Does that sound right to you? ------------- |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 3:27pm
|
Bruce, when the OJ's are described as "having more meat" on their blades, Im pretty sure thats in reference to the thickness- not the surface area. The Acmes have bigger blades (surface area wise), though not by a huge margin... both CNC styles have significantly more blade area than the old cast props. The only XMP Ive ever tried (430) was slightly bigger in diameter and had more cup than the Acme (422) I ran it back to back against, and thus the OJ ran about 300-400 fewer RPM. Thats the closest Ive been able to compare them apples to apples, but I would bet that if you could find 2 props with equivalent specs, the Acme vs. XMP would turn very similar RPM's. ------------- |
Posted By: east tx skier
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 6:34pm
For comparison's sake on blade area, here's my old Acme 541 next to a comparable OJ XMP 13x12. Acme has a throwing star thing going for it.
 ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2383&sort=&pagenum=7&yrstart=1996&yrend=2000 - 1998 Ski Nautique (Red & Silver Cloud); GT-40; Perfect Pass Stargazer; Acme 422. |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 6:38pm
|
Acme's are sort like clever blades. Did you notice any difference between the two? ------------- |
Posted By: Fl Inboards
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 8:07pm
I see these are left hand unless the picture is inverted would any of the two be for sale provided they were left hand? And not Gold plated!  LOL!!!------------- Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise. 1993 Shamrock "fat" 20. 2008 Nautique 196 5.0 |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 8:19pm
|
Jody, Im pretty sure ETS let his lefty's go with his MC!
Any response to this?
Id really like to try an XMP on the BFN if a proper size exists. ------------- |
Posted By: Fl Inboards
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 8:58pm
|
Tim I would have to say that is an incomplete and overall rather vague application chart and will see if we can make it more complete and informative for future usage. As for your application more information is needed as always What Rpm are you running and is the motor stock? Any Hp upgrades? And also what is the overall desire? Top speed? Holding speed with a load? Out of the hole? And if you have any initial thoughts on what size you would like to try and will work for your application.
Keep in mind my price list comes as blade dia and three or four, Pitch is inconsequential for my purposes for pricing. We have been working on some stuff for the 200 even stepping up as high as a 14" wheel, though the project has been shelved for a few months. Thought I would ask ETS because I have a customer that could use a discounted used prop for an upcoming build. Also I am flush with right hand wheels for emergency customers but have no lefty's. ------------- Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise. 1993 Shamrock "fat" 20. 2008 Nautique 196 5.0 |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: December-20-2010 at 9:17pm
|
Jody, What do you think about my application, 13x12 or 13x12.5?
I've been considering a different prop for our Malibu Sporster. It has the 310 carb engine. Manual states red line is 4800. It turns 5050 with even 3 people in it. It's got way more hole shot than it needs. I'm thinking a little more prop would be just as good or better all around and may increase top end slightly and better fuel economy for cruising. Does that sound right to you? ------------- |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 11:42am
|
Bruce, if I were you, Id be tempted to try the 13x12.5. It should knock down the RPM's closer to 4800, not kill the holeshot and probably increase top end a touch. It will turn a few less revs at all speeds, which is nice. I assume youve got a 13x12 Acme on it now?
Jody, we havent water tested the boat in its latest configuration yet, so I need to baseline it before buying anything... just trying to figure out if OJ offers an XMP in the 13x14 range or not. In 2009, we were spinning the Acme 1598 (3-blade 13x14, .080 cup) 5200 RPM and seeing about 56mph. The Acme 612 (3-blade 12.5x15.25, .105 cup) turned about 4900 RPM and pushed the boat the same 56mph. According to the dyno software Alan ran for me, we'll be going from 370hp @ 4500 RPM to 455hp @ 5500 RPM. Below 3500 RPM, the power curves look very similar- the new motor will just pull quite a bit longer. The boat also lost 500-600 lbs with the new structure. The goal will be to get the most top end out of the boat as possible. The 13x14 Acme had a decent holeshot that should only improve with the weight loss. I would imagine that propping down further would put the RPM's through the roof- but I can always do so temporarily if we need to pull something out of the ordinary. Im not sure how many RPM's we'll pick up with the changes we made, but my best guess is that we'd like to spin right up to the 5500RPM power peak. Im guessing that the 2 props we have should put us in the ballpark... but more options are always good to have. Im not looking for an exact recommendation at this point- just trying to determine what else I should try when the time comes, as Im curious how an OJ would compare. Maybe I should give Eric a call and see what they have available to try. ------------- |
Posted By: Fl Inboards
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 12:34pm
|
Riley what is on the boat now? And what did the boat come with? If you are happy with the current performance but feel the revs are to high you may want to consider adding some cup to your existing wheel.
Tim I am sure OJ has a prop for ya but with the amount of extra HP you might want to consider going to steel racing/high performance under water gear. Going over the 60 mph mark with stock brass componets may be a recipe for disaster. Though keep in mind I did run my flat in the 80plus range with brass under water gear! But!!! No more! As far as propellers go you may need something as high as a 15 pitch but when the time comes just let us know what you feel you want and we will make it happen,at least get you some product to try out and play with. ------------- Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise. 1993 Shamrock "fat" 20. 2008 Nautique 196 5.0 |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 12:44pm
|
Jody, whats the danger with the brass components? We had all the hardware off the boat and Ive been cleaning up the castings a bit as the pieces go back on.
I guess its not clear to me- does OJ make anything in their XMP line right now on the range of 13x14? RH 1" shaft, obviously. I know Eric made something custom for Joe's stroker, but that was a cast prop. The CNC's are so much smoother that Id prefer to stick with one of those- but Im not opposed to trying other options. ------------- |
Posted By: boat dr
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 1:09pm
Jody , I guess Tim has never seen nor had the good luck to "chunk a blade" at speed.Not for the faint of heart, insert enough HP and NiBrAl will fail. There is a lot going on under the water that we never see nor think much about , TILL !!!!!! ------------- boat dr /diaries/details.asp?ID=4631 - 1949 Dart /diaries/details.asp?ID=1533 - 1964 American Skier |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 2:30pm
Nope, I certainly havent. Are we more concerned with speed, RPM (prop) or HP? While we're well beyond the stock numbers in all 3, I didnt think we were really pushing the envelope in terms of what has been proven to be safe and reliable, at least enough to be concerned. The biggest question mark I see is the hull dynamics- though nothing strange was happening at the speeds we were seeing previously (mid-upper 50's). We are certainly taking care to make sure all the running gear is straight and in good condition- the strut is new and the rudder port and a tracking fin have been replaced with good used parts. All castings have been cleaned up and are being carefully aligned during install. If there is an unwritten rule of thumb that we'll be up against, please let me know! Doc, are you running special underwater gear on Karen's boat? ------------- |
Posted By: Fl Inboards
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 4:36pm
Tim I am not sure what the Barefoot 454 motors were rated at maybe 330?? a little more. But if your calculations are in the 470 hp range spinning a prop at 5500 RPM then some reinforcement and re-thinking about your project may be in order. I know I would not run a Nibral wheel with those numbers. I would also at least reinforce my backing substructure that my strut is fastened to.
This one would be rather overkill but I hope you understand. Kinda like putting 500hp in a car that came with 300hp and not doing anything with the stock rear end. At least on land when the drive train goes away the car stops and we walk away. Ever throw a blade on a prop at High RPM? ------------- Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise. 1993 Shamrock "fat" 20. 2008 Nautique 196 5.0 |
Posted By: storm34
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 4:53pm
|
Wow, that's quite the set up there. I guess those guys probably got it figured out when they build those dang things! ------------- |
Posted By: east tx skier
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 5:21pm
They are left hand rotation. The Acme conveyed with the sale of my old MasterCraft and the OJ was on loan from Eric so that I could run a little side by side comparison with them back in 2005. /edit. Just caught the "plated" joke. Well played, sir! ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2383&sort=&pagenum=7&yrstart=1996&yrend=2000 - 1998 Ski Nautique (Red & Silver Cloud); GT-40; Perfect Pass Stargazer; Acme 422. |
Posted By: east tx skier
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 5:23pm
Yes, In short, the Acme was better out of the hole, but had a bit firmer pull. OJ held speed slightly better in the turn, but lost a bit of grunt on the hole shot. In OJ's defense, Eric recommended the 13x11.5 for my application, but I wanted to compare similarly spec'd props. Did a little write up when I did this. http://www.tylerskiclub.com/proptest.pdf - Prop Comparison To add to my post above, at each blade's widest point, the Acme was approximately an inch wider than the OJ. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2383&sort=&pagenum=7&yrstart=1996&yrend=2000 - 1998 Ski Nautique (Red & Silver Cloud); GT-40; Perfect Pass Stargazer; Acme 422. |
Posted By: 65 'cuda
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 6:27pm
I think the builder expects that motor to live at very high rpm's, very nice. Dry sump motor, shaft mounted rockers with their own oiling circuit, what kind of numbers does that thing put up? My brother in law runs a 7 liter hydroplane, 468 in., small carburetor, 13 or 14:1, turns nearly 8000 rpm's. Other boats in his class turn over 8 grand. 8-9 hundred hp. direct drive 12 x 24 ish props, ------------- Gary http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=941" rel="nofollow - 1965 Barracuda SS |
Posted By: C-Bass
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 7:06pm
|
I certainly haven't seen a prop let go so I'm far from experienced on it...but wouldn't it only be a factor of RPM, and not HP/Torque applied to the prop. I would think the new CNC props are designed to handle all the torque you can give them, and they would just start slipping before coming close to breaking.
------------- Craig 67 SN 73 SN http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=6103" rel="nofollow - 99 Sport 85SN |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 7:09pm
Most BFN's came with the 330hp 454, a handful with the 340hp 460, and some with the HO 454 (390-425hp), though Ive never seen one of those with my own eyes. With a 600+ lb overweight, soggy structure, bent fin, misaligned powertrain (riding on the log as it turns out!), severely pitted rudder port and tweaked strut, running up to 56+ mph was a pretty mundane event. We've fixed the issues with the running gear and solidified (and lightened) the structure, as well as added a handful of hp up top. Id love it if our changes gave us a handful of mph and an improved holeshot, but Im not expecting to see 70mph or anything. Ill ask again (because I dont understand!), is it the HP (or perhaps torque), speed or RPM (presumably prop RPM, not engine RPM) that I need to be concerned with? Or is it some sort of combination? I dont believe Im entering into unchartered territory, but perhaps I need an education. There seem to be plenty of ski boats with equal or more hp (Python powered Nautiques and 6.2L Malibus come to mind) that have more cubes and torque with comparable hp to what Im planning to be pushing- and those run nibrals. Billy and Alan have both spun their 330-380hp SBF's 5500+ RPM with nibrals. Those 2, as well as Joe, Reid, Marshall, etc have all flirted with the 60mph mark, all with nibrals. I dont *think* Im flirting with disaster at 455hp @ 5500 RPM, but I could be wrong. Im not opposed to trying other props- got any suggestions on what to look for and where? As far as the strut "underlayment" goes, I assume youre referring to the hull? The bottom of the keel had a pretty beefy layup, but we reinforced it with 3+ layers of biax nonetheless. It is also getting an aluminum backing plate/bracket for the steering clamp. ------------- |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 7:16pm
|
Number of blades can have as significant an effect here as material selection. My experience is that the 3 blades significantly flex and lose efficiency somewhere about 375hp on my sn. If it is flexing enough that it is slipping significantly more then fatigue failure is certainly a concern. The 4 blade props start off less efficient but hold thier shape and therfore work better for the higher hp applications. A three blade steel prop would be a welcome upgrade, particularily on a boat that was "light" enough be able to be able to live with less blade area. A problem has been that the 3 blade steel props are typically giving up too much in terms of all around ski boat performance compared to the cnc props to take seriously for my application. For high speed only considerations on a well powered barefooter I too would be surprised if you couldnt do best with a 3 blade stainless prop of appropriate pitch... ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 7:25pm
|
Torque and rpm both have a say, rpm makes the blade want to fly off.. bigger (size and pitch) blades and the torque to turn them causes the flex that reduces the ability for the blade to hold on when the rpm makes it want to fly off. I dont really worry about my 4 blade nibral prop that I turn with my engine running at 6k rpm.. but my prop is only turning at 4900 rpm.. you are talking about a running 3 blade with 33 percent more loading per blade and running higher prop rpm... starting to push it..
I hate to talk about any of this on this thread because the original poster really would likely be most happy with a an appropriately sized 3 blade cnc nibral prop.. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 7:27pm
Joe, you hit the nail on the head- thats really my main reason for wanting to stick with a CNC nibral ski boat prop, if possible. As much as we want to see every last mph wrung out of this thing, we still plan to ski with it regularly- so Im really hoping to find a prop that does everything well. Of course, Ill try anything- but a prop that doesnt ski well would likely only get put on the boat for reunion speed runs. ------------- |
Posted By: Fl Inboards
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 8:53pm
|
Tim Just trying to help with a little caution, The water gets like concrete over 60 and anytime maijor performance gains are to be had in a boat always second guessing and second or even third re-measuring for saftey sake is necessary. You mentioned Python motors but like Joe pointed out they are spinning 25% less then motor RPM at the prop. 5000 plus RPM I would not try and spin any nibral but to each their own. Glad some beefing up around the strut was done. I am not sure where the thinking that just because a prop is a cnc it will be less likely to self destruct and let go, remember they start life as a casting just like any other nibral prop and can have wrong material % cast in them also. I have seen ACME as well as Federal and OJ loose blades. But a Steel prop is far less likely loose a blade at those kinds of RPM's.
I think if you are building a 470 HP 454 motor it kinda throws skiability out the door, will it not? High idle to compensate for the cam lope, fuel consumption will increase. Dont get wrong I think the build is cool as hell but 470 HP in a direct drive for skiability? Your not going to find a prop that does every thing well but will find a prop that you can live with under most conditions. Any way when the time comes that you want to experiment let us know and we will send you product, if you dont like it send it back! Is the shaft on your barefoot 1" or 1.125? Either way I am sure we can get you into a C&C wheel if that is what you want. Cheers! ------------- Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise. 1993 Shamrock "fat" 20. 2008 Nautique 196 5.0 |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: December-21-2010 at 11:13pm
|
Yall confuse me. I was thinking switching to a 4 but everybody on here said stick with the 3. Go with the 3. Now yall are saying 4. Huh! Have to rethink here then. ------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 12:05pm
Hence my repeated questions above! Sounds like its the prop RPM that I need to be concerned with above all else (hp, tq, speed). Like I mentioned, there are several guys here (Billy, Reid, Alan) that are turning 5000 RPM or more (prop RPM). I guess Ill find out if 5500 causes issues or not when we launch!
I made no such claim- I want a CNC for the skiability and smoothness. I have no idea if Ill have strength issues with it or not. Ive got a 14x16 SS OJ (3-blade) that I really didnt care for on my '90... maybe I should consider getting it cut down for the BFN?
I sure hope not. Comp says I should still idle ok. The powerband below 3000 is really very similar to what it was before the new cam/exhaust/etc (370hp @ 4500 RPM), all the newfound power is above that point- so with the weight loss, holeshot should improve (assuming I dont need to put on a wheel with a bunch more pitch to keep the revs in check). 
Sounds good! We've got a 1" shaft. ------------- |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 12:07pm
You need to re-read this thread. Very few people would recommend a 4-blade for your application. ------------- |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 12:12pm
Skicat, how and what for do you use your boat? ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 12:34pm
http://correctcraftfan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12430 - We already had this discussion 2 years ago. ------------- |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 12:52pm
I grabbed this quote from the above mentioned thread:
I already have the 208 and I'm happy with the all around performance, but I don't know anything else, my boat came with it. I use it primarily for open water slalom and occasional wakeboarding but no ballast. Are you likely to see the same kind of really eye opening difference going from a 4 to a modern three blade that you would see going from an old 3 blade to a modern 3 blade? With equivalent pitch etc. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 12:55pm
No, it is not likely to be eye opening. Of the 1.23 props Ive run, the 3's are measureably better, but the CNC 4's are also very good. ------------- |
Posted By: Hollywood
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 12:57pm
Buy a 4 from Jody immediately! ------------- |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 12:59pm
Beware not becoming another "Mr 69 I own all topics" this is a common question when selecting props TR. stay cool. I have the 3 blade 542 on my 80' SN and it performs very nice, but for finer wakeboard use I dont think it's the right wheel for 2 reasons: 1- Low rpms at boarding speed, throttle is not responsive. (2400-2500rpms) 2- stern too deep into water at boarding speed, dont get a nice wake shape, unless you like steep wakes. Need lots of weight on the bow. This is being very picky about driveability and wake shape, for general use the 540 and 542 would be just great. That said, I'd like to try an uncupped 4 blade 11.5'' pitch or a 11'', but again, that's just me. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:00pm
|
My main question is which one out performs the other. It doesn't matter whether I myself is going
For a cruise, or having a ski day with a couple of buddies or pulling my nieaces on the tube. Which blade out Performs the other. ------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |
Posted By: Hollywood
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:02pm
|
Which color is better, red or blue? ------------- |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:03pm
|
what was there first, the chicken or the egg? ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:05pm
| Tim, thanks for the feedback. I don't want to miss out on any performance improvements that would make sense, but $$ comes into a play a little bit too. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:05pm
Im cool. I was just letting you know that everyone (you and I included) answered his exact question over 2 years ago, and provided a link since you apparently did not remember. ------------- |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:13pm
|
SkiCat, it sounds like what everyone is getting at is that it can come down a little bit to what you like best, for the way you use your boat etc. Or maybe you just like the "feel" of one over the other and that's not the same for everyone.
Although, I'm definitely feeling a nod towards the modern 3 blades for your use. It sounds like the 4 blades give a little bit of stern lift and low end bite, which comes into play for stern heavy V-Drives and any boat running a lot of ballast. I know Reid and others have been known to let people try (test drive) props on their own boats. Your best bet might be to find someone willing to let you try-before-you-buy a couple of the props you're interested in. |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:17pm
|
I think that tim's assessment of not a mind blowing change between the 4 and a new 3 would hold with the 1:1 props as well Brian. Steve Watkins tried and didnt buy a 540 over his 4 blade at Reid's in the fall. There is a difference, I could tell Steve's boat didnt have a 540 on it driving it in an irreverant and generally unsafe manner.. but would the average family boater more interested in watersports than beating up his boat notice $350 worth of difference.. no.
Skicat you dont have an 80 SN and you are not running silly ballast, if you have $350 to spend on your boat you want an acme 540 it is all around the best performing prop for your boat, and a big change over the stock federal or an oj legend. That is the first hand experience of someone who had the same hull and pays very close attention to performance.. take it or leave it. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:21pm
|
If as Jody alluded to earlier that the oj 3 blade xmp line is now more complete in terms of RH offerings then the 540's dominance may in fact be in question once again.. but one wasnt able to get an 13x12x1 RH OJ back when I was trying them out. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:27pm
|
Some of u are not
Listening. I am asking For a opinion. I understand We have discussed this. It doesn't Matter if I am just going for a cruise, Or taking a few buddies skiing, or Pulling my nieaces on the tube. The question is Which one out performs the other? ------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:28pm
I think if you still had a cast prop and were shopping for a new one, that a 540 would probably outperform the 208 if you were looking to eek out the best holeshot and top end that you could. I wouldnt expect to see or feel a huge difference though- so since you already have the 208, the 540 probably isnt worth the expense. That being said, I would pose the question before the next reunion you attend and see if someone can bring a 540 for you to try. ------------- |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:30pm
Lee, it is you who is not listening. Define performance. Are you talking holeshot? Top end? Fuel economy? Smoothness? Wake shape? Wake firmness? We have all been saying the same thing for 2 years now- it might be time to try a prop instead of asking the same question over and over! ------------- |
Posted By: Hollywood
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:32pm
|
red ------------- |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:34pm
It's you who's not listening, performance will depend on HOW AND WHAT you use your boat for. IT DOES matter if your going for a cruise, taking a few buddies or pulling tubes, skiers or boarders. Any of the 3 props already mentioned, 540, 542 and 208 will outperform the stock prop in your boat. Now depending on the conditions you use your boat one would suit better than the other. I have already stated that I think the 540 is the best choice for you as it seems you want a "general use" prop. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:38pm
|
Skiing!! ------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:48pm
|
TR,
I would like more hol shot And keep the smoothness I have now. What are options? ------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |
Posted By: C-Bass
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:52pm
For crying out loud. Buy the 540 and be done with it.
 ------------- Craig 67 SN 73 SN http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=6103" rel="nofollow - 99 Sport 85SN |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 1:57pm
|
For crying out loud
Thank u c bass. ------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |
Posted By: C-Bass
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 2:00pm
|
If you're not happy with it, send it back and try another one (542). I think most places are willing to let you do this. ------------- Craig 67 SN 73 SN http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=6103" rel="nofollow - 99 Sport 85SN |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 2:05pm
|
Last question? The
540 is a 3 right. ------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 2:11pm
Yes sir, it's a 3 blade. The 542 is also a 3 blade. The 208 is a 4. |
Posted By: emccallum
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 2:22pm
|
You are going to go with a 3 blade over a four blade?? Why?
Just kidding! Merry Christmas to all, and to all....I am done reading this thread! |
Posted By: Morfoot
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 2:27pm
|
Skicat..Yes the 540 is a 3 bladed prop... I purchased one after Delta props offered us the deals on Acme props. I was running the original Federal prop on my 88. I swapped it out on Sunday and I noticed a signifgant difference and was very pleased with it. I use mine for both boarding and skiing which is why I went with the 540 instead of the 542.
To add to what Joe said... Swatkinz pulled of his 4 blade OJ and put on a 540 to see if there was an improvement. I went with him as I drove his boat (an 88) the day before and both our opinions were the same. The 540 did not perform as good as the 4 blade and WASN'T worth spending the money to replace it. That being said my honest opinion is that it is well worth the money to upgrade from the original federal 13x13. I am curious how the wake will be this spring when I weigh her down for boarding but am happy with what I saw from a drivers point of view at various speeds. Here is the thread I posted my results. http://correctcraftfan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=20175&PN=2&title=video--holeshot-with-new-542 - Foot's 540 Run results ------------- "Morfoot; He can ski. He can wakeboard.He can cook chicken.He can create his own self-named beverage, & can also apparently fly. A man of many talents."72 Mustang "Kermit",88 SN Miss Scarlett, 99 SN "Sherman" |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 2:32pm
Awsome! Thank u! I'm ordering the 540 when I get off work. My x mas present to myself.. ------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |
Posted By: horkn
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 9:37pm
Luciano, I believe the 208 is probably better than the 542 or the 540 for the reasons you mentioned. ------------- 78 martinique- refloored, reinforced, stringers re glassed, re engineered interior GT40P heads Edelbrock Performer intake acme 4 blade http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v64/horkn/fish/nautique.jpg |
Posted By: Swatkinz
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 10:54pm
Skicat, It seems like the purpose of the thread might be dead since you indicated that you were ordering the 540. I'm sure you'll be happy with the prop, however, I'll add to this thread to tell you my (average CC owner) experience with props. What you need to keep in mind is that JoeinNY, TRBENJ, Hollywood and many others on this site have tested these props ad nauseum on our hull both with stock motors and highly tuned engines. At Reid's last fall, I asked these guys to drive my boat, give it a workout and then provide an honest opinion on it's performance, specifically with reference to the prop. Keep in mind that I'm running a 4 blade OJ prop and not the original Federal. All three commented that they felt that the 540 would improve all around performance. While I don't doubt that hard data might show an improvement over my 4 blade and I do highly respect the above mentioned members' opinions, I tried it and there just wasn't enough of a difference to me to justify the price, but again I'm not as in tune with the feel drive, performance as these guys. Not many people are. However, I could tell immediately when Reid tapped the 2nd keg....had a slightly less bitter bouquet. Seriously, I think there'd be a big difference and that cost would be justified vs. the original Federal prop. That same weekend, I drove Morfoot's 88 with the old, original prop and there was a noticeable differnce b/w his prop and my 4 blade, but then again he's real hard on his equipment (beaches the boat, spills kool aid on the upholstery, runs 87 octane, uses Fram filters etc.)................................Kidding, Kidding! He's meticulous as his boat shows To sum it up, it didn't seem like you were hardcore enough in any one discipline, skiing, barefooting, cruising to really identify a single prop as being "the best". I'll bet you'll enjoy the performance of the 540, but would also be happy with a 4 blade like mine. Just keep in mind that these guys really, really look deep into this stuff. Don't get too bogged down in finding "the one do it all prop." It seems that all of these modern props should give better performance than the original, even for the average non-gear head CC owner. Good Luck! ------------- Steve 2011 Sport/Air 200 Excalibur 343 2017 Boatmate Tandem Axle Trailer Former CC owner (77, 80, 95, 88, all SNs) Former Malibu owner (07, 09) |
Posted By: SNobsessed
Date Posted: December-22-2010 at 11:03pm
|
4 blades have more bling factor - oops, that just counts over at Planet Nautique!
I thouhgt this thread was very entertaining. Thanks much to the writers for their passion. Merry Christmas to all you screw heads! ------------- “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” Ben Franklin |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: December-23-2010 at 12:10am
Ok it's done then,540 on order,any idea what oil I should be using  ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: December-23-2010 at 2:41am
I'd expect the 4 blade to pull a smoother wake but the 208 is 12.5'' pitch, and if I'm getting 2450rpms at 21mph with the 11.5'' I'd expect, as you said yours perform, 2100-2200rpms at 21mph with the 208. That would surely not solve the throttle response. I think 2600-2700 rpms at boarding speeds will work best. What I'm not sure is if I could custom order an uncupped 4 blade 11.5'' or go with a cupped 11''. I will email Acme as my dad will visit the states on april. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: horkn
Date Posted: December-23-2010 at 3:36am
|
I guess I am not seeing what the throttle response issue for you is.
Even at 240 hp, the 208 even in my boat with a heavier floor setup than stock, and a fat sac and people in the boat, I never had issues with any range of power. The boat has always pulled extremely well with the 208, overloaded or not. I ran my boat from 02-08 with stock 240 hp and the 208. These motors are tuned to have a nice wide tq curve. I doubt there is much difference in tq from 2100-2700 rpm. All I can see by running 2600-2700 rpm is great fuel usage for boarding speed. ------------- 78 martinique- refloored, reinforced, stringers re glassed, re engineered interior GT40P heads Edelbrock Performer intake acme 4 blade http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v64/horkn/fish/nautique.jpg |
Posted By: Luchog
Date Posted: December-23-2010 at 10:34am
|
Hokrn, look for Alan's post on torque curves, you'll see that above 2500 and up to 3500 is were these engines make real power (stock form). That's why I always suggest people using their boats for heavy load wakeboarding that they should try to prop their boats so that it falls in the 2700-3000rpm range at pulling speed.
It's easier with reduction gear boats, in fact V-drives come propped this way stock because they are heavy wakeboard specific boats. On 1:1 boats you compromise WOT speed and need to watch not to over-rev the engine. Have you ever seen a crank or bearings from a wakeboard engine pulling at 2000rpms? cylinder heads? valves? These boats were also meant to pull skiers at 3000rpms in their time. Fuel consumption even improves at pulling speed. If you ever get a heavy weight load on your boat, let's say 1400lbs, drive the boat and tell were the engine smoothens and pulls better, it will be at +2600rpms were it makes torque. Again, these are my thoughts and experience, and they are meant only for seriously weighted wakeboarding boats. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2095" rel="nofollow - 1980 Ski Nautique Commander 351W |
Posted By: Hollywood
Date Posted: December-23-2010 at 12:31pm
|
If the MW Federal performance level is a 1, I'll give the OJ Legend a 7 with 8,9,10 going to the various ACME offerings depending on how you use your boat. ------------- |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: December-23-2010 at 12:38pm
|
I orderd the 540 last night. I hope to see a better hole shot and not lose top end to much. Hurry up spring, I can't wait
For the first drop in the water. ;) ------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: December-23-2010 at 1:11pm
|
I also wanted to add a special thanks for all the help. Though I know some of you,have motors that are supped up and have had lots of
Experience with all kinds of props. Special thanks to all replies and comments and even the smart ass ones too. I keep my motor well tuned to And I am looking forward to seeing a performance change. Joein thank u sir, tr, and all for help. I'm glad this part is over, and can enjoy a even better performance 2001. ;) ------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: January-28-2011 at 11:39pm
I must be a freeking jerk. Sometimes after reading things over and over you finally you catch it. Yall have been so helpful in many ways I can not explain. Please excuse me guys for my stupidty and useless remarks. I have read more and more on props and just reading this I was not listneing. Thanks to all who are kind and generous. I have recieved this 540 three weeks ago and hope I do see a difference. I love this site and apperciate everything..  ------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |