Freeloader
Well-Known Member
Earlier this summer I purchased a Regal 2250 Cuddy that is fitted with a Mercruiser 5.7L 350MAG 300hp motor and Bravo III twin-prop sterndrive unit (the highest spec motor and drive combination available for this model).
The boat is 22' long, with a beam of 8'-6" and weighs 4,400lbs (actual weight on a weighbridge). The performance with the standard 26" Mercury 3x3 Bravo III propellers is pretty good all round, with a 0-30mph time of around 7 seconds and a top speed of around 53mph (GPS) at 5,100rpm WOT (WOT range 4,800-5,200rpm).
I started looking around for a spare propeller set simply to keep on board in case of emergency. From my test results, I took it that the current 26" pitch is about right for my boat and thought that I would therefore get a similar 26” 3x3 set. However, I have found that Mercury now do a 4x3 Bravo III propeller set (in matte or high-gloss) and a 4x3 Bravo III XR – i.e. a 4-blade front propeller and a 3-blade rear. I use my boat primarily for water sports and so the 4x3 setup may be beneficial, although I wouldn’t want to take too much out of the top end.
It appears that the XR may be designed more for bigger boats with big-block V8’s, so I take it that the standard Mercury Bravo III 4x3 propeller would be the most suitable for my boat. Does anyone have any experience with going from a 3x3 to a 4x3 prop and have any information on the relative performance differences between the two?
I have also found an independent propeller supplier, Hill Marine, who manufacture Signature 4x4 propellers for the Bravo III drive – i.e. a 4-blade propeller front and rear. Again, I would be interested to hear from anyone who has experience of these propellers. Additionally, I would be interested to know whether they are as robust as the Mercury items? My 3x3 Mercury propellers are constructed of a fairly thick stainless steel and seem to withstand occasionally churning up sediment in shallow water. Some propellers I have owned in the past were made of far thinner stainless and would not take that kind of abuse – how do the Hill Marine propellers compare?
Thank you in advance!
The boat is 22' long, with a beam of 8'-6" and weighs 4,400lbs (actual weight on a weighbridge). The performance with the standard 26" Mercury 3x3 Bravo III propellers is pretty good all round, with a 0-30mph time of around 7 seconds and a top speed of around 53mph (GPS) at 5,100rpm WOT (WOT range 4,800-5,200rpm).
I started looking around for a spare propeller set simply to keep on board in case of emergency. From my test results, I took it that the current 26" pitch is about right for my boat and thought that I would therefore get a similar 26” 3x3 set. However, I have found that Mercury now do a 4x3 Bravo III propeller set (in matte or high-gloss) and a 4x3 Bravo III XR – i.e. a 4-blade front propeller and a 3-blade rear. I use my boat primarily for water sports and so the 4x3 setup may be beneficial, although I wouldn’t want to take too much out of the top end.
It appears that the XR may be designed more for bigger boats with big-block V8’s, so I take it that the standard Mercury Bravo III 4x3 propeller would be the most suitable for my boat. Does anyone have any experience with going from a 3x3 to a 4x3 prop and have any information on the relative performance differences between the two?
I have also found an independent propeller supplier, Hill Marine, who manufacture Signature 4x4 propellers for the Bravo III drive – i.e. a 4-blade propeller front and rear. Again, I would be interested to hear from anyone who has experience of these propellers. Additionally, I would be interested to know whether they are as robust as the Mercury items? My 3x3 Mercury propellers are constructed of a fairly thick stainless steel and seem to withstand occasionally churning up sediment in shallow water. Some propellers I have owned in the past were made of far thinner stainless and would not take that kind of abuse – how do the Hill Marine propellers compare?
Thank you in advance!
