Sharrow props

[wrxhoon]

Sharrow Marine - The Propulsion Revolution is Here

The Sharrow Propeller™ offers a faster, quieter, and more fuel efficient ride through state-of-the-art design that is custom machined and fitted to every boat. Two-time award winner and the first major advancement in propeller technology since the 1830s.

www.sharrowmarine.com

Has anyone tried these props?

 

[Hookup1]

Uh NO. Don't be the hero. Call PropGods.com .My 4-blades are game changers. I couldn't be happier.

What problem are you trying to solve.?

 

[Byram]

Negative.. I dont run my boat enough each season to recoup gas savings at their cost.

 

[wrxhoon]

Uh NO. Don't be the hero. Call PropGods.com .My 4-blades are game changers. I couldn't be happier.

What problem are you trying to solve.?

I don't have a problem, I was just wondering if anyone here has tried them. I wouldn't buy one at those prices .

 

[Meanwhile]

I'd try a pair IF they sponsored the test. No way can I afford those props.

I also agree as above, my 4 blade props give me low speed bite and good handling.

 

[ROBERTH]

Maybe someday they will come down to a more affordable option. From the testing I have seen so far, they are game changers for sure!

I do wonder though how many times they will get clogged up from trash or weeds, etc.

 

[Mustang65fbk]

For my particular application... I've got a 2004 Grady White 228 Seafarer with an F225 Yamaha outboard on it but I can't find performance data with an F225 anymore, so I used a 228 Seafarer with an F250 instead. On the Sharrow Marine website they claim that the single blade prop will be "As much as 30% more efficient between 2500-4000 RPM". A brand new, well before they discontinued them, 228 Seafarer with an F250 Yamaha on it and a normal prop will run at 4,000 rpm and burn 11.5 gph as well as 2.91 mpg. With the Sharrow brand prop being "As much as 30% more efficient between 2500-4000 RPM" that would put you at around 8.05 gph burned and 3.783 mpg. At a price tag of $4,900 for the propeller and say $4/gal for gasoline, you're saving roughly 3.45 gph at 4,000 rpm x $4/gal for gasoline, which equals $13.80 worth of fuel that you save. If you divide the $13.80 savings over a one hour period by the hefty price tag of $4,900 you're looking at what... 355 hours of using the Sharrow prop before you'd even break even, if my math is correct?

And that's if the "30%" claim is even all that accurate, which I'm sure if those are the actual results, that they were done with perfect weather and sea conditions to get the best numbers possible. I'm all for saving money on fuel and getting as good of fuel economy as possible, yet I can't drop $5k on a propeller to start to break even after 355 hours of usage. If I started breaking even, or maybe even being ahead after a season... well then it might be a different story. But for the price and amount of time it'll take to make that $5k back, I simply can't justify it and would much rather put that money elsewhere into better things like new electronics, fuel, insurance, tabs and so on. At $4/gal, $5k will get you exactly 1,250 gallons of fuel. That's a good deal of fuel to burn without blowing it on a prop that you likely won't see all of the benefits that they claim you'll see.

 

[Fishtales]

Metal snakeoil if you ask me... Go with something tested and proven on your hull.

 

[Seahorse5]

Yamaha's agreement to cast and sell Sharrow props I believe lends credibility to their claims of better fuel economy and performance,

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220621005301/en/

 

[SeanC]

Yamaha's agreement to cast and sell Sharrow props I believe lends credibility to their claims of better fuel economy and performance,

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220621005301/en/ https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220621005301/en/

Have to agree. Yamaha aren’t going to support a product without doing their own research. Interesting to see if Yamaha’s performance figures are similar to Sharrow Marine’s. Wondering if prices will drop with Yamaha is doing the manufacturing.

 

[Chessie246G]

Here is my, admittedly limited knowledge, take on this. There have been very few sold! Very few to almost no independent testing. The tests I looked at def didn't show a 40% increase, It was closer to 10-12% In theory I can see them being slightly more efficient, but 5k more. Thats more or less a 1/4 the way to a repower with a 4 stroke. and god help ya if you hit something and bend it.

 

[SeanC]

Here is my, admittedly limited knowledge, take on this. There have been very few sold! Very few to almost no independent testing. The tests I looked at def didn't show a 40% increase, It was closer to 10-12% In theory I can see them being slightly more efficient, but 5k more. Thats more or less a 1/4 the way to a repower with a 4 stroke. and god help ya if you hit something and bend it.

Yep, that would be my greatest fear. Dinged a couple of props over the years. Not too expensive to get them repaired. These things though…$$$ if possible at all.

 

[Seahorse5]

I am no expert on Sharrow props but have experience over the years on selecting props for different rigs.

Sharrow does have a prop protection plan that covers the repair or replacement of a damaged prop for one year at no charge and an extended plan for a monthly fee that covers for up to 5 years of repair or replacement. The details are on their website.

When reading advertising claims that state "up to 40% improvement," that does not mean every boat will see that same amount of performance increase. Each rig is different and depending how efficient the hull is determines the improvement percentages.

 

[Mustang65fbk]

I'm by no means an expert on propellers either, that being said for a prop that's $5k+ it's just simply of no interest to me, even if I do keep my boat for oh idk 10-15 years. The reason for that is because if I do have the boat for 10, 15 or even 20 years... how do I know if I'll need to re-power over that time or what manufacturer of outboard I'll decide on going with? Currently I've got a Yamaha F225 and it looks like they have a Yamaha specific prop that you can choose the pitch on, which I also wouldn't want to spend $5k on a prop and get one with the wrong pitch. Either way, if/when I re-power to another outboard, it'll likely be a Suzuki 250 hp motor, or something similar. Which, I'm guessing if the other props are Yamaha specific, that they wouldn't work with a Suzuki? Idk, there's just way too much of a gamble and a roll of the dice here. If the props were in the $1,500 price range or so, then it would be a bit of a different story in that I could probably make the money that I spent back on fuel savings rather quickly. That being said, with a $5k+ price point, it's a bit of a different story. Lastly, I usually like to think of something that I purchase and if "it's actually worth that price" to make and produce. I can't imagine that it costs them anywhere near $5k in materials, labor, workmanship or anything else to make a single propeller. Maybe I'm wrong and it does cost that much to make? I don't know? When I think of $5k that I could spend, there's a ton of other things that I'd rather spend it on than my boat, and if we're talking about boat specific things... I'd say radar and a new fish finder/GPS combo would be a much better buy and I'd still probably not even spend the entire $5k in doing so. Just my opinion of course.

 

[Seahorse5]

My thoughts are that the Sharrow prop is not for an average recreational boater, especially due to the initial cost.

It is ideal for the commercial guides or the offshore fisherman who want more range and time on the water due to the better efficiency of the prop in getting increased fuel mileage.

If you boat several hundred hours a year, then it is easy to calculate your fuel costs and how the gallons used can be reduced depending on the boat and type of running.

Sharrow states that they will exchange a prop if it is not the correct one for your application.

 

[Mustang65fbk]

I was on YouTube tonight browsing and it just so happened to recommend a couple of different videos of testing a two boats with new Sharrow props on them. I'll come right out and say that I honestly just don't think they're worth the cost in smaller boats, or ones that have single outboards. They talk about how they can make a huge difference in tugboats, freighters and even larger boats like the CAT that they test with twin outboards. In the smaller 20' Bayliner that they test though, about the biggest difference between the props is around the 3,000-3,500 rpm range, and that's only because the Sharrow prop has the boat up on a plane, whereas the standard 3 blade prop does not. Looks like there's around a 20 mile difference with regards to your total range but the rest of the numbers seem to be pretty similar between the two props and from 4k rpm on up, they're very similar numbers to one another. It looks like the biggest advantage that you'd have is the 3,000-3,500 range, and maybe up to close to 4k rpm, but from then on it's nearly the same. Looks like there's a fairly decent difference between different props when used on the CAT with the twin Yamaha F300's on it, but that's also $10k or more for two propellers, which will buy you a good deal of fuel. I wonder if the numbers on the smaller 20' Bayliner would be any better if they went with a different sized, pitch prop or even maybe one with 4 blades as opposed to 3? Might help get it on a plane faster and help out with the mid range somewhat?

Sharrow Propeller™

The Sharrow Propeller™ is a remarkable new, patented loop propeller design that CEO and inventor, Greg Sharrow, claims can out-perform conventional propellers in most major parameters of current propeller measurement.

boattest.com

 

[luckydude]

A brand new, well before they discontinued them, 228 Seafarer with an F250 Yamaha on it and a normal prop will run at 4,000 rpm and burn 11.5 gph as well as 2.91 mpg.

I have a fairly new 228 (2020) with the F250 on it. Maybe on a lake, with a tail wind, no water in the water tank, very little gas in the tank, and one light person you could see 2.91. I've *never* seen anything like that. I've got about 2000 miles on the 250, I average 2.2 mpg. I run the boat mostly on plane, don't troll on the main engine. I'm in the sloppy pacific so maybe that's the difference.

 

[Mustang65fbk]

I have a fairly new 228 (2020) with the F250 on it. Maybe on a lake, with a tail wind, no water in the water tank, very little gas in the tank, and one light person you could see 2.91. I've *never* seen anything like that. I've got about 2000 miles on the 250, I average 2.2 mpg. I run the boat mostly on plane, don't troll on the main engine. I'm in the sloppy pacific so maybe that's the difference.

Oh yes... I'm sure those numbers are recorded while being in near perfect conditions with a minimal amount of extra fuel, water, persons and so forth on board.