jointventureII
Well-Known Member
Dear forum,
I have a Mercruiser Bravo II, 1:2.2 ratio, 21p x 17.75 diameter prop. This produces 26.5 knots flat out on a 25ft, 3000kg planing hull.
The engine, a VM diesel 4.2, 320hp, should rev to 3900 but goes to 4000 where it's on the limiter and there's some throttle still to go. If it were allowed to go as far as it wanted I suspect it'd get to about 4200 but this is pure guesswork.
It'll get to the limiter easily even when dirty underneath and loaded. Therefore I want to change the prop.
For the Bravo II, the next step up would be 23p x 17.5 diameter (2 inches p more, 0.25 inches diameter less) however I'm thinking this might not even be enough and going for the 25p x 17.25
This would be a full 4 inches of pitch more (by my calculations that's 600 rpm lost....) but then 0.5 inch diameter less (which I think is around 300 rpm gained?)
Net result using my very ropey method would be 300 rpm less which I think would put me on the 3900 rpm max that the engine is supposed to reach.
Thoughts?
I have a Mercruiser Bravo II, 1:2.2 ratio, 21p x 17.75 diameter prop. This produces 26.5 knots flat out on a 25ft, 3000kg planing hull.
The engine, a VM diesel 4.2, 320hp, should rev to 3900 but goes to 4000 where it's on the limiter and there's some throttle still to go. If it were allowed to go as far as it wanted I suspect it'd get to about 4200 but this is pure guesswork.
It'll get to the limiter easily even when dirty underneath and loaded. Therefore I want to change the prop.
For the Bravo II, the next step up would be 23p x 17.5 diameter (2 inches p more, 0.25 inches diameter less) however I'm thinking this might not even be enough and going for the 25p x 17.25
This would be a full 4 inches of pitch more (by my calculations that's 600 rpm lost....) but then 0.5 inch diameter less (which I think is around 300 rpm gained?)
Net result using my very ropey method would be 300 rpm less which I think would put me on the 3900 rpm max that the engine is supposed to reach.
Thoughts?