Florida Boat Guy Episode 6: Sharrow Propeller Independent Review Single Outboard - Surprised!!

[@TripSmith]

Good review Chris. Glad you felt the difference in handling and planing speed! I've operated a few boats with Sharrows during some of their "paid reviews" for BoatTest. The ones I was a part of, Sharrow paid for the time/costs to create the review, not the results of the review. I would hope everyone would assume that, but I can see where some folks might be skeptical. Luckily, I've never been asked to falsely represent any brand. If I did, boy that would be awkward! Having had the opportunity to talk in great length to the guys at Sharrow as well as operate boats with them, I've learned a few things about the props and their performance. For one, they will tell you that their props will not improve the fuel economy on all boats. Some boats however will see a great difference is fuel economy, most often at a particular RPM range and not throughout the entire RPM range. Good to see an independent review with some numbers ;)

[@jacktyler7599]

Trip, if the Sharrow folks are not typically expecting fuel efficiency improvements, what is their rationale for switching to their ($$$) prop as they see it?

[@GoldenCroc]

@@jacktyler7599 I would think its as follows: They got a product to sell, and they would like people to buy it.

[@TripSmith]

@@jacktyler7599 I should have worded that differently maybe.... Not all boats will see improved economy, but most will when they have a sharrow vs traditional. There are some boats that they have tried the props on and they didn't improve the economy. So now if an owner of those boats let.the customer knows 👍🏼

[@davidhill6953]

Thanks very much for the thorough video. These props-or at least their marketing claims-are very intriguing. I have NO BUSINESS spending $5k on a prop, but could afford it. I’m on a lake, so not concerned with range / fuel consumption, and based on the modest uplift you saw, doesn’t seem worth it for me. Thanks again, this was super helpful.

[@nunyal8275]

I did prop repair for 30 years as my dad did 40 before me , & people bitched about or repair or new. % grand no way, I bet they cant be repaired either... Someone will have to come up with a bizarre looking pitch block, the days of damaging a prop will be gone...

[@jackspeer2127]

this is the first independent evaluation I have seen. Been waiting a long time. All the vids I have seen with this prop are done on smallish pleasure craft yet the ceo says they can make one for ANY size boat. If the rich can afford anything why have I not seen any Sharrow on Yachts?

[@floridaboatguy]

Sharrow is launching a version for inboard applications I believe. We will see on larger yachts soon. Very curious as well if the benefits will play out. One thing I am wondering, usually the larger boats will have a brass propeller versus a stainless steel so perhaps that could be the hold up on larger applications.

[@johnmortison5763]

I hope you have a secure place to store your boat. The price on that prop will make it a target for thieves. Good luck.

[@floridaboatguy]

Good point but these props are very boat specific unlike a standard prop. Also, my pitbull is a pretty good theft deterrent so I’m not too worried about anyone getting near the boat. 🤣

[@adamfrbs9259]

​@floridaboatguy you should look into a Presa Canario next. They beat everything and local ordinance morons don't know what they are, so they're usually not banned in the cities.

[@JC-td4gg]

Just out the Sharrow MX-A for more motors starting at $1995. Finally.

[@aaronlbuchanan9861]

Great review, i've been watching for a non-sponsored vid. Thanks for sharing.

[@marshmellow3110]

So it’s slower at top end and less efficient across the board pretty much. I’ll stick with my Mirages

[@Slewsberrystoover]

What size prop were you running prior? Also removing the trim tab anode on a boat without digital steering did you notice a difference?

[@1957cajun]

Well this was very interesting! Thank you for taking one for the team! I’ve been wondering about all of this since this prop came out and if it did live up to the hype I would probably buy one for the same reasons you did. Getting out of the hole 1000 RPMs sooner is what, 1 second, 2 seconds quicker? I’ve thought all a long that $5000 for a prop was ridiculous and now I know it is. The little difference you experienced is just not worth the money for this thing. I’m very disappointed.

[@floridaboatguy]

Thank you for watching! Yes, maybe a few seconds quicker. Glad I was able to share with others. I had high hopes for much better efficiency but just not seeing it. Still a great prop, but hard to justify when a similar 4 blade might have yielded the same results. Still, great handling and much quieter but that is about it as far as advantages

[@GoldenCroc]

@@floridaboatguy Yes, I cant but wonder if perhaps more blade area, as provided by duoprop, or a 4 or even 5 blader would be just as good or better? Perhaps it even is the sharrows more potential blade area that makes the difference to start, rather than the interconnected blades?

[@garyradtke3252]

If breaking loose 50-60 Ft Lbs is going to damage the drive line in any way, it will destroy it's self the first time you put your engine in gear!

[@tomvancil8213]

I like your Suzuki 😁 in white

[@kohersh]

Nice review! I know they are expensive and that is due to their relative newness. The ignorant heat they take in comments, based on price alone so dumb and ridiculous. You said it made your boat far more useful….Nuff said.

[@floridaboatguy]

Thank you! Yes, I was trying to simply evaluate the prop to see if it lived up to the hype. I understand everyone has different needs and budgets, so wanted to strictly share performance information

[@GoldenCroc]

I wont criticize based on price, not at all even if they were 100k. That being said, I got a comment regarding your post: As far as I know, its not the "newness" but rather the production cost that is stated as a large part of the price. I dont think that makes up all or even most of it, but it is more expensive to produce than a normally bladed prop using tradional production, no doubt.

[@mosquitofleetfishing6599]

So it gets on plane at a lower rpm but loses in every other category? Definitely wouldn’t change props for that

[@floridaboatguy]

Pretty much! 😩

[@benhardy5829]

Heck I’ll subscribe I mean that’s a 5k prop for a 10 min video

[@floridaboatguy]

Haha yes $5k well spent then! 🤣

[@yelyab1]

Did you 1. compare your propeller vs other similar propellers to see if there are noticeable differences. 2. Weigh the stock propeller vs new. Rotating mass can effect operating especially on a 2 cycle. I don’t think plastic prop wrenches can develope torque required to hold firm during load. 2. Low speed power makes sense with the increased surface area. If you get useable rpm’s that’s great if not, you get bragging rights. 3. My theory is you will have high speed losses and efficiency is about the same for a given engine rpm. Your better planeing performance maybe achievable with one more blade same design. Good job. I love data. I’m an old “go fast” boater. All subsequent boats had as much go fast stuff as I could justify. I talked to many propeller experts at boat shows for over 20 years. This is not where they thought prop design was going for speed or efficiency. It came down to tailoring props for each boat hull if you have the time and money.

[@DaveySLO]

Nice and real world review - not "sponsored" in favor to Sharrow props. Definately not worth the price and results are expected. This video also shows partial benefits of some prop designs: kzbin.info/www/bejne/b2S9in9mfL6qbKc

[@michaelpowell9164]

I appreciate your effort but you didn't index that torque ring at all. I couldn't focus on the video after that! lolol

[@floridaboatguy]

Let me know what should be done differently. Never had any issues installing new propellers but always up for advice. Thanks for watching and comment!

[@michaelpowell9164]

@@floridaboatguy lol, for you nothing. For a OCD jackwagon like me the vent holes needed to be lined up. I'm betting the cover plate has holes to drain the housing when the outboard is trimmed up.

[@floridaboatguy]

I’m ocd as well! I actually took cover plate off after making this video and lined it up better. Not sure if makes a difference but did notice same thing before I put it on the water. Good eye!

[@dwightbernheimer331]

Spending Thousands of Dollars to save a Few Dollars... Had a conversation a while back with two different people at that company... Bottom Line... PT Barnum should be representing them😂😂😂...

[@butzbach1]

What? Six grand

[@floridaboatguy]

They are currently selling for $5k not 6, but still too much 🤣

[@goaski474]

You need to run both motors at a constant, (same RPM's) then compare. Your results are not scientifically accurate

[@GoldenCroc]

Seems like he did? Perhaps you meant something other than what your wrote, like having the speed / rpm column inverted or something? But this is readable and give the same info all the same if you take your time.

[@EricBergeron-e3t]

Wow, that’s $5000 you’ll never get back

[@lorneserpa5888]

I cruise 90% based on max mpg, not mph. Never in a hurry. 22 mph at 3.1 mpg vs 24.2 mph at 3.12mpg is a win win for stock prop. Thanks for your video. Enjoyed it.

[@Misc665]

I've seen several of these Sharrow reviews that show similar results. Better economy at a higher speed with the original propeller. I feel like people that have shelled out big money for these props have to convince themselves that the "improved handling" is worth the money. Nothing against this creator, but even he stated at the beginning that he was looking for better range- he now has the same or worse range at a lower speed, and lower top speed to boot.

[@johnboy5167]

Definitely a waste of money l will stick with my Yamaha salt water series 2 it's performance is excellent on my 250 sho

[@nunyal8275]

How much higher in price are they ?to a regular prop ? can they be repaired .? How much speed do you lose top end.??

[@DrewKrew7]

​@@nunyal8275 They're $5k, so ~10x the price

[@EricBergeron-e3t]

Wow, that’s $5000 you’ll never get back

[@chiphill4856]

Big question: how will those blades stand up to an impact with oysters, sand, crab pots, etc?

[@floridaboatguy]

Probably not well! Would not recommend this for shallow waters

[@davidhall1779]

if you pay 6k for a prop you start out prejudiced, fricken ridiculous price for a prop.

[@andronclock1]

Been waiting so long for a proper review! Just a tip, the lower unit gears will be fine, they get 200+hp sent through them for hours at crazy amounts of torque, our hand strength unbolting the prop cannot damage them😀 Great vid thanks for the info!

[@floridaboatguy]

Well when you put it that way I can’t argue with your logic! Haha Glad you enjoyed the review 👍🏻

[@timlong1462]

And they take a huge shock load when going from neutral to gear. Prop nut generally shouldn't be that tight to even consider this as a problem

[@hobbs2ronald]

You have confirmed, what I have suspected after parsing many details of the marketing claims and promotional-reviews (which are stated per RPM)... IN REALITY there is NOT an "overall efficiency increase" where max cruising MPG would increase from say 3.1 to +X.x, and so Therefore there is not any actual increase in overall range, Nor would there be any overall $$ of fuel savings from increased MPG to justify or recoup the extremely high price... Is sharrow really just a quieter design, but otherwise functionally similar a traditional four-blade prop with more surface area and different pitch or diamater, in terms of performance? (Apples to apples) Seems to me that's likely the truth of it... Logically, both the drag from wind and the drag from water on hull and lower units are the 3 main forces that affect overall efficiency of the boat, SO in reality, there's likely not that much difference from the loop design versus a similarly pitched and surfaced area 4 blade conventional prop (apples to apples). If it was quieter for the same price, then that would be worth something, but is quietness a financial justification for the 500% price premium?

[@floridaboatguy]

I do agree! I think it is very similar results that one would expect going to a 4 blade, however with less cavitation and therefore less noise. Still a good prop, but did not quite live up to all the hype.

[@oceanrider68]

What do you mean by “max cruising MPG”?

[@adamfrbs9259]

Just paddled past one on the dock yesterday. Of course the guy quotes 30% less fuel. That would be impossible to determine "in the wild" by him with constant variations in conditions. So he was just blindly quoting the sales pitch. Only in America, everyone has a damn scam.

[@GoldenCroc]

Exactly my suspicion as well, regarding blade area increase.

[@adamfrbs9259]

@GoldenCroc If you look very close in their underwater videos...(which they've turned comments off) you can see it does stop cavitation off the blade tips, but look at directly behind the center of the prop, it has the cavitation wrapping around the blade and exiting at center. So it is actually doing something. Too hard to verify.

[@bwalker4194]

My take on this prop is that it is MUCH more efficient within a narrow RPM window. However, that window needs to be optimized for the hull, the expected power need, the preferred requested window’s placement in that power band and maybe six other variables. In other words each Sharrow prop needs to be custom designed. Not financially viable but extremely rewarding if it conforms to your needs. There’s definitely a market here, just not at bulk-manufacturing scale.

[@floridaboatguy]

For sure, I do agree. I am doing some more tests next week dialing in that mid-range RPM (which is what I asked them to optimize) and going to play with engine trim and the tabs to see if it can do better

[@bwalker4194]

@@floridaboatguy looking forward to your results. Nice job.

[@GoldenCroc]

I am not convinced "it is MUCH more efficient within a narrow RPM window" if one put the horse before the cart rather than the other way around... To me it seems like it planes sooner, and thats what makes the difference when one measures those specific speeds. As you are well aware, planing transitioning efficiency is horrible. If you really need to be driving in that speed regimen where this matters to you for some reason, perhaps more blade area, as provided by duoprop, a 4 or 5 blader would be just as good or better? Perhaps it even is the sharrows more potential blade area that makes the difference to start, rather than the interconnected blades?

[@DoRC]

As long as the specified torque of the prop nut is less than or even close to the torque rating of your motor you can use the motor to hold the prop still. If the system couldn't handle the torque then the motor would destroy it.

[@WildcatWarrior15]

Ultimately there are too many variables affecting the results to compare one application to another. When it is a fantastic improvement in one area, it may be a wash in another. It may be game changing for tugs, increasing thrust controllability throughout the RPM range, when it may be useless to high speed planing hull applications. At the end of the day, it is a revolutionary design and you have to use what is supposed to be between your ears to know if it's worth it to you. Great test!

[@floridaboatguy]

Well said!

[@Rico11b]

I think if the pitch of the prop had a touch more pitch it would have given better performance. Just a 3 -5 degree change in pitch could make all the difference in the world. Maybe let Sharrow know and ask for a different prop with slightly more pitch and see how that performs.

[@hyperplastic]

wouldn’t it be the other way around? the excel sheet shows it using more fuel at the same speed over the water, which means the engine is working harder, which means it may want less pitch?

[@yota4004]

a 5K prop. I'd have to bring that thing in the house every time I came in from a trip or I couldn't sleep.

[@floridaboatguy]

That’s true! But lot of people easily have more money in electronics, or audio systems or FLIR cameras in their boat. The propeller is a very specific item that would only work on a certain boat with a certain engine horsepower, I don’t know that it would be extremely valuable because of its limited applications due to the customization of each prop.

[@DonziGT230]

Something to consider is if the boat lives in the water there will be an increase in anode load, and possibly require more or larger anodes.

[@andrewusugan]

That nut on the prop doesn’t need to be very tight since I’ve used it just hand tight n that clip will hold it in

[@Jassman3536]

I was hoping for better results from Sharrow in the MPG department and was really wishing a higher top end. Curious if they might do better on my trip Yamaha 450 on the 375 Grady Freedom. .95 at best cruise and 57mph top end. Good fair review. Subscribed.

[@tonyg1958]

Great to see an unbiased review. I've watched a lot of videos and wondered just what the Sharrow could do for my boat (2016 Key West 239 FS with a Yamaha 250 SHO), but the cost really makes you pause. Looking forward to seeing more videos with your thoughts and findings as you put some hours on the new prop.

[@TripSmith]

Give them a call Tony. Sometime they have ran a Sharrow on your particular boat or one very similar and they can tell you what difference it made ;)

[@ignasanchezl]

Throw an Enertia Eco in there and lets compare, I bet ya it can beat it at high speed fuel efficiency.

[@albertpenello]

Interesting video - I'm glad to see more independent reviews. I'm considering these for my 43ft outboard - every little bit helps. Two suggestions for next time - can you label the Sharrow and Standard props on the RPM chart? Also - if you can, normalize the charts by Speed and not RPM. I've seen others do it, and normalizing by RPM doesn't tell you what speed you're going and we know the Sharrow will get you slightly lower RPM at a given speed. What I also think matters is at 25mph, what's your RPM and MPG between the two props. There is no direct comparison there so it's hard to see what the MPG differences are. Thanks for doing this!

[@floridaboatguy]

Absolutely! Thank you so much for watching and commenting. I am going to run another test and also chart trim position as well. The Sharrow engineers seem to think this is a big part of the equation as well. I will try and chart speed as the axis so we can look at those RPM’s.

[@Cojiii1959]

Maybe your outboard needs to burn a new fuel map?

[@motbollie]

Plot against Speed, not RPM

[@charlieodom9107]

These props are not worth it, period.

[@brettknutsen6476]

100%.

[@BassKat169]

Not for $5000 , no way it’s worth it.

[@mbur5099]

It depends how much $$$ you have and where your priorities are.

[@chrisditrani8338]

RPM is not important, it’s speed. If you are going 2 mph faster at the same rpm and gph, that’s the difference.

[@andronclock1]

He is using miles per gallon, speed is factored in this calculation. He isn't using gph

[@chrisditrani8338]

@@andronclock1 My mistake. Read that as gph and not mpg.

[@billiamklein7088]

In ideal conditions I agree. In a head wind I'd appreciate better fuel economy at a slower speed which it seems to do well at most of the lower RPMs. Not worth 5k though haha

[@jamesoosterbaan556]

There is another KZbin video of a person who made props with a 3d printer to test and one design he made is like the sparrow. His results are quite similar and he concluded a 4 blade prop may actually out perform the sparrow at most RPMs. Even in your video the results say not to get it. Price versus performance is isn’t there. Great video

[@floridaboatguy]

Thank you! Yes I have to agree based on early results, a similar 4 blade would most likely be the better choice. I am going to run a 2nd test to try and dial in trim and see if perhaps I can get some better results.

[@adrianrubi5012]

Subbed.

[@fishydubsfishing6516]

Next time tilt you're out drive up you won't have to work on the ground

[@floridaboatguy]

🤣 I actually couldn’t find a place to put the GoPro so ended up doing it on the ground but good point otherwise. Thanks so much for watching

[@johnlehew8192]

If they claim 30% better efficiency and your boat doesn’t get any efficiency improvements… that’s called false advertising and is illegal. You should get your money back

[@floridaboatguy]

They do have a 30 day money back guarantee. While I am not seeing huge efficiency gains, I still love the characteristics of the prop! I am going to do a follow-up video soon and see if I cannot obtain some better results working the trim.

[@johnlehew8192]

@@floridaboatguysure, your choice. The characteristics could be why someone would buy it but that is only part of the benefits. They charge a premium suggesting customers will recoup some of those costs from fuel savings. If fuel savings are not real then they should reduce their costs and market what their product really does. If it was installed incorrectly or built improperly then they should have the opportunity to resolve the issue. Usually reducing noise improves efficiently. It is a very interesting innovative product that started a 3D printing fan war on YT for past few years. Thanks for the video!

[@DonziGT230]

Their claim is "up to 30% cruising efficiency" so you'd only have a case if you got more than a 30% gain.

[@GoldenCroc]

They dont claim anything that hasnt got a big asterisk next to it in the fine print, rest assured...

[@mycatmycat3786]

5 grand it would take me 10 years to spend that in fuel

[@primate2744]

Price is really the biggest downside of these props, otherwise I'd buy one. I'm considering the duo pro Suzuki for when I repower. It would be nice if they made them in the lower horse power models.

[@floridaboatguy]

You aren’t kidding! I keep thinking the other brands will make an alternative but Sharrow holds the patent, so curious if we will see others be able to develop something similar at a mass market price.

[@TripSmith]

I think one of the reasons they aren't making them for smaller HP is the financial savings on fuel are considerably less. If you have quad 600's, you are spending a lot on fuel and could recoup the price of the prop rather quickly. On a 90hp, it will take a long time for it to pay for itself. (if the Sharrow is beneficial for your particular boat as well)

[@gorillahd9247]

Excellent video.

[@floridaboatguy]

Thank you very much!

[@raaah]

Going by what you said you seem over a thousand RPM difference meaning your boat runs a thousand RPMs lower at the same speed and you don't think that you're saving gas? Something's flawed with your data. If you're saving a thousand RPMs over an 8-hour day and 80 gallons that's a big savings

[@DoRC]

It's awesome that they are superior but there's no way that the vast vast majority of people could even come close to justifying their $5,000 price tag. I get that the prop is fancy but you could literally hire a job shop to CNC cut that same shape out of a solid billet of steel and it wouldn't cost $5,000. I think they need to bring their prices down to something that is at least within the realm of reason.

[@floridaboatguy]

Don’t disagree. More wanted to do a video to see if this thing lives up to the hype. A lot of positive aspects, worth the price going to be up to each application and personal choice

[@DoRC]

@@floridaboatguy Yeah I can't wait till an offshore company copies the design and makes it affordable :-)

[@Sail218]

And you lost top speed with the Sharrow. I suspect this prop will be a flash in the pan.

[@floridaboatguy]

Very similar results anytime you increase prop surface area (3 to 4 blades for example), you lose top end so I was expecting that. Definitely more grip and acceleration though. There are definitely some benefits to the design

[@Roger-gm9tl]

So much about RPM, MPG, NOISE, GETTING ON PLANE, etc. but never seen anyone talk about if you ding, damage prop, how to repair, can, I understand depends on damage, send back to Co. don't think many prop reconditioners will be able, or want to, can service prop ? would appreciate some feedback ?

[@floridaboatguy]

Sharrow is able to service all prop issues, it would have to go back to them in the event of damage. They do offer an insurance/protection plan as well

[@Roger-gm9tl]

Probably costs as much as the prop ? doesn't look as strong, looks more fragile, like it can be more easily damaged, harder to repair ?

[@jimbojet8728]

Free? Set of gloves. Don’t be ridiculous!

[@marcusbutzin8368]

You paid for those gloves in the price of the prop!

[@ds3552]

I have a Sharrow on a single Yamaha 300, 27 foot boat. It is quieter, the mid-range rpm’s, performance is night and day difference, better. Idle to 2800 not much difference and over 4000, again not much difference. You do need a socket and short extension to get at prop nut. If you travel above 4000 most of the time, then no reason to spend the money. Top speed on mine about the same. A trip the other day I ran 3100, 16 mph , and 2 mpg, fwiw.

[@floridaboatguy]

Thank you so much for the info! Based on first few runs I have to agree with your comments. That 2500-4000 RPM is where it shines, outside of that range not a lot of benefit. For me, I typically run 4000-4800 so that is right outside that window. I do really, however, appreciate more “usable” RPM in that mid range and keeping on plane at much lower speeds…huge benefit when fighting larger seas.

[@huntfishfire]

Thanks for the review!

[@CaptainReidl]

Thanks! I would buy one, but I'm too afraid of thieves

[@floridaboatguy]

A real concern! Thought about getting a cover for it

[@joesharp5602]

This was a great and eye opening review that caused me to think about the cost benefits of owning a Sharrow prop. Without real money savings using the Sharrow prop, I could never justify its cost. Invariably, and usually through no direct fault or intent, a prop gets damaged, it happens to most of us. I can replace a few hundred dollar prop quickly and take my licks however, a six thousand dollar plus prop is a different story. If your water conditions and boat usage put your prop in harms way, you have to consider the replacement cost and frequency into your purchase decision. For me, its a no go for a Sharrow.... Joe

[@floridaboatguy]

Joe, they do offer a great protection plan and can repair the prop if there is damage

[@thomaslindroos1667]

How will that fin or anode corrode if its painted?

[@floridaboatguy]

That is the trim fin that comes painted from the factory, not an anode. Good question though

[@richarddavis7548]

Great video - thanks! I am in the process of adding these to a 28 Axopar Cabin with twin 200 Mercs in hopes of extending the range. Boat only holds 74 gall, so range somewhat limited. I’ve done all the testing on my current wheels - let’s see what the Sharrows bring to the party. Considering the boat jumps on plane early with hardly any bow rise, wonder if I’m making a mistake?

[@floridaboatguy]

You bet! 28 Axopar such an awesome boat but very surprised doesn’t hold more fuel. Crazy my little Grady holds 82. I think Sharrows would be great on that boat for adding range. I am still dialing in the new prop and hope to post update video soon

[@jacktyler7599]

Very interesting, Chris....and thanks for being the one to hop into the deep end of the pool. I'm like most others, curious about the claims, love the 'look' but haven't found much in the way of irrefutable data. I'm curious if you had heard from others who switched to the Sharrow before the purchase and, if so, what you might have heard.

[@floridaboatguy]

Hi Jack, there is almost no independent data on these props. I was able to find one other video on KZbin of someone doing a similar test with twins. That boat did see 20% fuel efficiency increases, so very interesting I did not see those results. Still a great prop and I love the increase in handling and quieter ride, however it will be hard to justify for most without higher fuel mileage savings!

[@jacktyler7599]

@@floridaboatguy Thanks for that, Chris. Still....I'm kinda envious!

[@jacktyler7599]

@@floridaboatguy Hi, Chris. I'm on the Cutwater/Ranger Tug forum and ran across this post today, which I thought you might find interesting. Several positive Sharrow results but also a speed drop to get them. I'm sure you'll continue to tinker with throttle/trim/leg settings in search of the sweet spot. Thought this might be encouraging. [Forum post for a Cutwater 32 follows} "In our experience, we consistently got between 0.7 and 1.0 mpg, depending on the fuel/water load and sea state.... We usually ran around 40 mph at 4500 rpm; anything less tends to drop off plane. This is also with the upgrade to the Lenco Auto Glide controls for the trim tabs. Late last summer, we upgraded to the Sharrows. Although we haven't put a ton of hours on the boat since, we've been seeing a range of 0.9 to 1.1 mpg, roughly a 25% increase in fuel economy. Our running speed is now 35 mph at 4000 rpm, and it stays on plane easily."

[@floridaboatguy]

Thanks Jack, an engineer from Sharrow actually called today and had some suggestions regarding use of the tabs and trim position. Due to increased lift they suggest raising the trim of the outboard quite a bit higher and less use of the tabs. I will try again next week and see if perhaps those swill yield better results!

[@jacktyler7599]

@@floridaboatguy Hey, it's great that you are being offered some direction on how to find that sweet spot with the new (and $$$) prop. Obviously, less trim tab and you'll have less drag, altho' not to the credit of the prop. Hope you have some success - or at least some useful learnings - and can pass them along to the rest of us. One aspect of your initial testing that I later wondered about was how the Sharrow might have performed better under some conditions than others. E.g. I wondered what your experience might have been on your latest run out to the Dry Tortugas in that lumpy sea when alternating levels of 'grunt' were being demanded from the engine vs. the relatively more calm waters when you did your trials. Who knows: Maybe you're in the process of becoming a Sharrow expert! 🤓

[@udgdaddy]

I often can't go fast enough to get into my efficient range because of the sea state. it would be great to have efficient cruising at slower speeds. that's why i'm ordering one.

[@floridaboatguy]

Exactly what I like about it in rough seas!

[@marcusbutzin8368]

Did you find a suitable floating prop wrench? Did you do a zero speed to a time on plane?

[@floridaboatguy]

I have not, ended up using a socket to tighten the nut. Still looking for something long enough. No zero to time on plane unfortunately. I should have done that with the old prop for comparison

[@teamspinningballyhoo904]

Did installing the Sharron eliminate the coter pin or did you just omit that part… just curious, not criticizing.

[@floridaboatguy]

Good question, I did reinstall the pin but did not video it!

[@teamspinningballyhoo904]

@@floridaboatguy thanks!!! Good independant vid! They did do it on the Worldcat 325DC (which I own a 325CC) and even with the slight MPG gain… it just didnt seem to justify $10K in props…

[@Cammo-vp1gl]

I've just put a new 300 Zuke on my pride and joy and have been thinking about Sharrow props for some time now. I'm getting about 1.5 to 1.6 km/l (3.7 US mpg) The problem is, I'm in Australia and the exchange rate would mean the $5000 US prop would hit my door at about $7, 550 AU plus courier fees. Unleaded is about $1.85 per litre ($7 per US gallon) and was recently at $2.30 litre!! ($8.74 per US Gallon). It would be a long time before the Sharrow paid for itself.

[@floridaboatguy]

Ouch! Yes that would be a pricey investment. I would think the price of these props might come down in the future may want to hang tight and see what happens in the market I do definitely recommend it, but as others have pointed out you may be able to obtain similar results going to a prop shop and having them custom fit a four blade. Congrats on the new motor!

[@Cammo-vp1gl]

@@floridaboatguy I’ll sit tight for a while. My wife would kill me if dropped another $8K into the boat 😬🤔🍺🍺

[@DonziGT230]

If you bought a Sharrow you'd essentially be pre-paying for about 1,000 gallons of gas. Even if you got lucky and gained 30% efficiency, it would take a hell of a lot of miles to make up the difference.

[@MrSilviable]

Why would you need to change a prop offshore?

[@floridaboatguy]

In a situation where maybe you hit something, get a crab pop tangled in the prop or spin the hub you might have to pull the prop and put on a spare to get home. Just always something I’m thinking about with only a single engine.

[@csrboltfan2643]

If I were buying a brand new boat, maybe, just maybe, I might consider plunking the money for a Sharrow prop (or two). But, unless I hit the lottery sometime soon, meh. No way on Earth would I spend that kind of money just to re-prop. Plus, I personally believe if Sharrow props really begin to grab some sort of marketshare in the boating industry, Mercury will buy them out, and either do away with it, or offer it as an option for pontoon boats.

[@floridaboatguy]

Would be great for a pontoon! I suspect once the patent expires there will be plenty of copycat designs out there. It is a great prop, just too pricey for the average boater at this point.

[@TripSmith]

I believe Sharrow hooked up with Yamaha Marine Precision Propellers for global distribution and manufacturing....

[@D2O2]

How well matched was the original prop? For the price of the sharrow, you can buy a decent amount of fuel. Glad to see some real world results.

[@floridaboatguy]

Original prop was matched very well when it was repowered. Reached max RPM. However, this boat is VERY heavy with full load of fuel and hard top. So getting on plane with either prop takes a bit…that being said the Sharrow gets it going quicker and much lower RPM. Thanks for watching. Follow up video coming soon

[@D2O2]

@@floridaboatguy Would love to see slip numbers for both props

[@karatejoe5049]

Did you say the price?

[@floridaboatguy]

I did not discuss price in the video, I strictly wanted to focus on differences in the propeller

[@SydneySewerat]

Suggest you see FloridaBoatGuy's followup video which gives better results and explains the Sharrow input. Seems like the benefit here is not as good due to the particulars of this boat being short/deep. The data for other boats that Sharrow supported/advised videos give is much better and for commercial/charter operators, I'd dare say it's a major game changer. Certainly a product that needs to be ordered to suit your circumstances and preferences.

[@scottparker6219]

I would like to see the difference in the sound decibels between the old prop and the new one it didn't seem that quiet.

[@floridaboatguy]

Hey Scott, I don’t have a DB meter (probably should have had one for the test), but to my ears there was noticeably less noise. Engine seemed not to be quite as strained and near no prop wash noise. Also less vibration, it was definitely a welcome difference. Worth the price of the prop…eh, don’t know if I would go that far but it is certainly quieter

[@TripSmith]

Something else to look at Chris is the water behind the boat. It's more "clean" with the sharrow which indicated it's moving through the water more efficiently. Not as much white water in the center of your wake.

[@chrisrancat2808]

I wonder if Sharrow will contact you telling you what you supposedly did wrong so as not to reach their efficiency numbers.

[@floridaboatguy]

Yes in fact they did call after seeing this video with some suggestions regarding trim position. I am going to re-test next week and see if we can do better on the numbers!

[@chrisrancat2808]

@@floridaboatguy That's an episode that alot of people will be anxious to watch iam sure. With your good production and video content so far this is just the beginning of a successful channel.

[@GoldenCroc]

I am not convinced he did anything wrong. I am not convinced they (sharrow) are quoting any efficency numbers without a big asterisk by it either, if one reads the fine print. Most people dont, though....

[@Derkenblosh2]

​@@GoldenCroc yeah, I'm assuming it's efficiency at specific RPM's In a specific spot in the water off the hull... Without a tuned variable geometry, you're not going to get your cake and eat it too. These props are just boat-ramp flexing / jewelery.

[@wadebass5600]

What kind of scars will these leave on the manatees

[@floridaboatguy]

Less scars than a duo prop at least!

[@wadebass5600]

@@floridaboatguy they look like they will scoop out the meat.

[@davidhall1779]

no scars they will chop them into pieces.

[@dacvidz]

What about removing the trim tab, how is that on your steering?

[@floridaboatguy]

Good question…surprisingly did not notice any difference in steering effort. I don’t know if the design of the propeller inherently reduces the counter rotating steering forces or if the trim tab had minimal effect to begin with but really did not miss it.

[@dacvidz]

@@floridaboatguy do you have hydraulic steering? I'm assuming you must from the size of your boat?

[@timlong1462]

@@floridaboatguyThis was what I came to ask as well. Was the replacement part just a flat puck? It almost looked like it had some asymmetric feature to it but hard to tell in the video.

[@prairiepegger]

I was looking at doing the same on twin Suzuki's to gain the 20% fuel efficiencies that is claimed but after viewing your analysis, that's not going to happen. In fact, if you compare your before/after data at 4400 rpm's, the propeller is less efficient. Your miles/gallon (MPG) went down with the new prop- by 1/2 gallon! Since you did a good job at ensuring variables and conditions were as close as possible between both runs, I would not expect different results if you were to conduct this study again. It's a no-go for me. Thanks for posting.

[@brillowolf]

Keep in mind that there was a difference in current. If it was producing more drag then it’s totally feasible for that to account for the discrepancy. It would be nice to see more data in varying conditions before drawing a conclusion.

[@DashiellParr411]

Good test. Remember, it is always “RPM” never RPMs which would mean “Revolutions Per Minutes” which makes no sense.

[@floridaboatguy]

Thank you! Yes, very good point. Videos are all non-scripted so sometimes I do make mistakes. I appreciate you watching!

[@peteh8077]

@DashirllParr411 please stfu you're not smart. The S on RPMs is the the S carried over from Revolution>s< Per Minute to maintain plurality. It's not Revolution Per Minute. Please get a life