Next message: (no name): "Re: [world-cruising] To Fold Or To Feather?"
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:38:39 -0400, you wrote:
>On 8/18/06, Lynn H. Ogden <> wrote:
>>
>> Non are as efficient as a fixed two or three blade prop. They cost a lot
>> of money. They require more maintenance than a fixed prop, and some
>> expensive replacement components. For me, I think they are a waste of money
>> - unless you race a lot. Further, having a component with a lot of moving
>> parts that can foul or break under the boat, under water, that you can't see
>> or repair with out a diver or a haul out or extra spare parts isn't for me.
>
>Simple is always good (KISS), but every so often, simple can be improved.
>
>Feathering props are one of those improvements. They *are* more efficient
>than fixed props in reverse. They *are* robustly made, and rarely, if ever,
>fail. Maintenance might involve five minutes per year to add grease...not
>exactly a back-breaker. The winches on your sailboat are more fragile and
>require more maintenance than the feathering prop. Further, they can be
>adjusted by the owner to most efficient pitch, depending upon your cruising
>RPM. Some - like the Autostream - can be adjusted while the boat is in the
>water.
>
>A feathering prop will probably add one-half knot of speed over a fixed and
>locked prop. That's 12 miles/day or two hours/day of cruising time. A
>fixed-blade prop will be more efficient when you're moving forward under
>power. Definitely a benefit if you prefer motoring to sailing.
>
>I've had a three-blade Max-Prop for 18+ years. I never race. I'd
>cheerfully "waste" my money on another, if I were to purchase a new cruising
>boat.
Exactly what I was trying to think of a way to say (except that we've
only had ours for 8 years
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/world-cruising/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
