ContinuousWave
Whaler
Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
New Mercury ENERTIA Propeller
search | FAQ |
profile | register | author help
|
|
ContinuousWave Whaler Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
New Mercury ENERTIA Propeller
|
| Author | Topic: New Mercury ENERTIA Propeller |
| LHG |
posted 12-10-2005 07:51 PM ET (US) 
[This discussion contains speculation about the performance of the ENERTIA propeller. Actual test result data is avalable in a subsequent dicsussion. See http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/005046.html.--jimh.] Mercury Marine's website (see link below) is announcing a new three-blade propeller series for outboards and I/O's, called "Enertia". (And just after I just bought a pair of Rev-4's!) Some new material is used, which they say is better than SS. They say it's faster top end, and much faster on acceleration (but don't say in comparison to what prop). Looks quite interesting. Have not yet heard any other information about these, in pitches from 14-22 in 1" increments, and also CR versions. [Link given is no longer active.] Be sure to play the video link at the bottom. They are also announcing their previous hot bass boat prop, the Tempest Plus, is now avaialable in Counter rotation for offshore center consoles. A Boston Whaler 240 Outrage with twin 150 Verados is shown in the example. Keeping up with the latest in propellers from Mercury is like keeping up with computer technology! You'll go broke trying to do so! |
| Perry |
posted 12-10-2005 08:15 PM ET (US)
Interesting video. I'd sure like to try one of those in 18 pitch. I wonder what diameter the 15-19 pitch props will be and how much more they will cost in comparison to Mercury's other top end props? |
| LHG |
posted 12-10-2005 08:53 PM ET (US)
Perry - I'm sure that Honda needs all the extra HP it can get! I'm going to give one a try also, I think, for my old Classic 150 Merc. They say they won't be available until 1st qtr, 2006. Since bottom line E-bay Store pricing on Merc's other props is around $400, I would imagine these might go for maybe $450? I am suspecting these are kind of a three blade version of the 4 blade Rev 4 and the 5 blade Maximus. The prop line does seem to be slanted toward big single installations, and maybe particularly, all the new 4-strokes, where because of higher redline RPM, lower pitch props are needed. Look for these to be showing up on the new Whalers. |
| Backfire |
posted 12-10-2005 10:55 PM ET (US)
Just an observation or two. I'll bet the price is $200-$300 or more than a Tempest. Just how many prop shops will be able to repair it? and what will that cost? Will it,in fact, be repairable-bend or break? Difficult to repair if 1/3 of the blade is gone. The only reason it is "better" is that it consumes less horepower than aluminum and stainless. That means it is thinner than stainless-stronger metal allows it to be as thin as possible to gain performance and stay together.Better no doubt, you will pay more to play with this one. Backfire |
| jimh |
posted 12-10-2005 10:56 PM ET (US)
Video at: http://www.mercurymarine.com/uploads/images/1817/PROP_Approval_Rev_3. mpeg [Above link has gone to dead-link status.] |
| DaveH |
posted 12-12-2005 09:43 AM ET (US)
I performed a search of the US Patent office records under "Mercury Marine" and found no reference to this X7 metal alloy in any of the patents listed back through 1998. Can someone assist me and post a link to the information? |
| Peter |
posted 12-12-2005 10:48 AM ET (US)
The following are the most recent patents issued to Brunswick containing the words "alloy" and "propeller". 6,923,935 Hypoeutectic aluminum-silicon alloy having reduced microporosity 6,796,362 Apparatus for producing a metallic slurry material for use in semi-solid forming of shaped parts 6,427,759 Investment cast stainless steel marine propeller I have no idea whether any of these relate to the magical "X7" alloy. The article says the X7 alloy is "patent-pending" so its possible that there is no X7 alloy patent yet. |
| DaveH |
posted 12-12-2005 12:45 PM ET (US)
Peter: Thank you for the extended search. I already read several of the patents you show, but the first one you posted, Patent 6,923,935, was new and shows a very interesting feature about the use of this aluminum alloy for propellers. It was originally designed to reduce scrap for machined engine blocks and sterndrive housings. Although this new alloy and treatment shows promise for low cost aluminum propellers, I do not believe this is the actual "X7" alloy due to the low tensile and yield strength versus 304L or 316L stainless steel (roughly half). Possibly the lessons learned in the use of the Semi-Solid Metal (SSM) casting process, the new molten alloy mixing techniques and enhanced granular structure through low temperature annealing allowed some more experimentation that we have yet to read about. Neat stuff. |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 12-12-2005 11:42 PM ET (US)
Far be it from me to point out that some of the claims in this advertisement, be it in the form of a press release, video or magazine article (they are all almost verbatim, the same) are questionable, but saying the new Inertia propeller is 2 MPH faster than a "conventional stainless steel propeller" is largely meaningless unless you say WHICH particular stainless steel propeller you are comparing it to. On the other hand the idea of of a new stainless steel alloy that is so much stronger that it allows blades of a propeller to be thinner does make sense to me. Thinner blades means less drag and faster, more efficient boating, something that would benefit us all. I, for one, would like to hear more about what this "X7" alloy really is and some quantified data explaining just HOW MUCH stronger it is than conventional stainless steel. Information like that would get my attention. |
| LHG |
posted 12-13-2005 01:37 AM ET (US)
I can see it now, the next "Bass and Walleye Boats" magazine shootout. They always require that each manufacturer set the boats (all the same) up as they wish, using their own products. I can see the Evinrude and Yamaha people screaming already, when the "Enertia" propped Mercury blows their doors off. They will all cry foul, that the Mercury not only had an unfair advantage from a superior Sportmaster gear case, with better gear ratios, but a better prop too! Not fair. |
| RJG |
posted 12-13-2005 07:24 AM ET (US)
When I replaced my "ordinary" stainless steel prop with my Yamaha SWS prop I gained about 2 mph. Did my new SWS prop effectively give me more hp? |
| Peter |
posted 12-13-2005 08:50 AM ET (US)
RJG its all about how efficiently a propeller creates useable thrust. If your new propeller adds 2 MPH to the top, then as compared to your old propeller, its as if you added more HP to your transom to turn the old propeller. |
| DaveH |
posted 12-13-2005 09:35 AM ET (US)
The claim of more horsepower is market-ese, but the effect of a lighter propeller that is strong enough to withstand impact and is repaiable would be a great benefit. I do not believe that the "X7" alloy claimed to be an alloy of stainless steel. It may be a 4xxx series aluminum (high Si, low Mg) with T7 treatment. We will need to wait on that for now until more info is posted. Why would this low weight and thin blade section be significant? Part of the power losses an engine experiences is drivetrain or gearing losses. We all know that powerhead horsepower is different from propeller rated horsepower (genuflect to Mercury). One way of reducing power loss is to reduce rotational mass. In autoracing, teams strive to reduce rotational mass by using low weight wheels and low-mass flywheels, etc. It takes power to turn weight in a circle. Likewise, a low weight but strong propeller would reduce the power loss and "be like getting more horsepower" on your transom. I wouldn't spank the marketing group too bad on this. If marketing told you everything you needed to know about the technology, you'd lose "Joe Lunchbox" on the first sentence. I'm sure Brunswick will have a patent advertising party on this new X7 alloy when approved. |
| jimh |
posted 12-13-2005 12:34 PM ET (US)
I found it confusing that the video demonstrated the blades of the propeller flexing. I always thought that blade flex was a bad attribute, and typical of aluminum propellers. What would be a reasonable interpretation of why I ought to be impressed with the video demonstration showing the new propeller's blades flexing? |
| Whalerific |
posted 12-13-2005 01:00 PM ET (US)
DaveH: good point. Prop weight is rarely disclosed or discussed in prop selection criteria. A LaserII 19P weighs 9 lbs. and a Revolution4 19P weighs 14 lbs., a huge load difference to the motor and gears apart from differing blade configurations and geometries. |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 12-13-2005 01:50 PM ET (US)
I have to disagree somewhat with DaveH. Ceteris paribus, it takes no more energy to spin greater mass. It does take more energy to accelerate or decelerate that mass at a given rate. But the implications for a greater mass is greater friction. This is what the Inertia propeller is (apparently) trying to overcome with its thinner blades. If the weight of the prop is reduced too that is also very good. It allows the prop to spin up faster and makes for more gentle gear shifts; a good thing. I cannot imagine that this "X7" alloy is aluminum. It has to be stainless steel. I also find it interesting that no record of this patent, applied for or granted, has been found. Having done some patent searching myself, I do know that it is not a simple process. It may well be that Mercury (or some related business entity) has a patent but we have not found it yet. As to the blade flexing in the video, my take on that was a demonstration of how resistant the new alloy is to severe flexing and the resultant metal fatigue that could weaken the steel. You note that the machinery in the test is nothing like a prop turning in water. We have no idea how great a load is being applied. I imagine it is far greater than anything a prop on a boat would ever see. As to aluminum blades flexing more than stainless steel, I assume that is true base on my own knowledge of how strong aluminum is and how strong stainless steel is, but I have never witnessed a propeller blade flex while being drive by an outboard motor on a boat. I doubt anybody here has. It is something you read about that intuitively makes sense to you so you develop a mental image of it that may or may not have anything to do with reality. |
| DaveH |
posted 12-13-2005 02:58 PM ET (US)
Tom W. Clark: I agree with your statement about needing more power for acceleration of larger rotating masses. I did not state this properly. I also agree with you that X7 is some form of S/S. The reference to aluminum noted in my statements was to only highlight the fact that Mercury has patented a new aluminum alloy for machined engine surfaces that they found also exhibits great potential for propeller design. I was trying (unsuccesfully) to play devil's advocate by saying Mercury never really told us what X7 is yet and that we cannot assume until the patent is published. The pictures in the Enertia video (in my opinion) appear to show an electropolished S/S finish.
quote: I'd much prefer to be corrected than to read unclear or misleading statements. No problems, mate. Cheers. |
| Backfire |
posted 12-13-2005 10:48 PM ET (US)
As to stainless or not, I would think if the prop is REALLY THIN, then likely it is alloy of steel as stainless is not really that hard. "Stainless" props have been out since the late '60's. The original SST by OMC rusted bad enough that OMC coated it with black teflon so it did not look like something was wrong with it. A few sand bars took care of the coating and speckled rust pits appeared, no harm to the prop. Maybe they will chrome it, easy to see if it flexs. The mystery deepens. If Mercury could turn out these new props with all three blades the exact same pitch, it would be an improvement over the Tempest and Trophy which too often have each blade a different pitch. Backfire |
| high sierra |
posted 12-14-2005 07:03 PM ET (US)
It's advertising on Mercury's part just like the BMC's E TEC's ads. They are pushing a product. high sierra |
| jimh |
posted 12-14-2005 09:45 PM ET (US)
I find it very interesting that this new propeller will be manufactured in pitch increments of only one inch. This is something of a deviation for Mercury. My recollection is that they have generally only offered propellers within a particular design family in two-inch steps. (I guess they took a cue from OMC/Bombardier who has offered their SST series of propellers in one-inch steps for many years, although not all pitches are available in left-hand propellers.) The one-inch pitch increments might be a good marketing strategy. It may be possible to sell a few more propellers to those boaters seeking the last tiny bit of optimization from their boats. I have heard some anecdotal reports that the manufacture of stainless steel propellers is a very big business in China these days. A lot of hand labor is required to grind and polish a propeller casting into a finished propeller, particularly one where the goal is mirror-finished stainless steel. Lower labor cost makes this an attractive manufacturing operation to locate in low-wage areas like Asia. I have not heard any announcements about where Mercury propeller manufacturing is located these days. Perhaps this new alloy premium propeller will be made domestically, and some of the other lines shifted to offshore production. I just checked the box for a MIRAGEplus propeller I own; it clearly says "Made in USA." |
| DaveH |
posted 12-15-2005 10:08 AM ET (US)
Jimh: Here is an article about Plant 98; where Mercury manufactures 100,000 props a year. [Link now redirects to a generic top page.] |
| LHG |
posted 12-15-2005 01:54 PM ET (US)
Jim, as I mentioned in my 2nd post to this thread, I agree the 1" increments indicates these props are oriented to the big single situation, and specifically, 4 strokes. Note the the CR versions are only in 2" increments, which is revealing. Mercury has made the bass boat Trophy Plus props in 1" increments for years, which are also oriented to single engine situations. Also, since they are indicating improved acceleration, that is another indication they are for the 4 stroke market. The 1" increments could indicate anticipated marketing to the Japanese big block 4-stroke owners, who could use the extra acceleration. Mercury interchangeable hubs must be a huge success, as now we are seeing Mercury props widely used on all other brands. They hold their value the best of any line of props, partly because of the interchangeability factor, and the internet/Ebay make it easy to readily buy, sell and exhange them. The true cost of a prop is now what you buy it for, less the cost of what you sell it for. This makes them a bargain one can't afford to not own. The plant/foundry in Fond-du-Lac advertizes that it produces 550 props a day, and with over 700 models and sizes! |
| jimh |
posted 12-15-2005 02:35 PM ET (US)
100,000 per year and 550 per day; about the same number. I do agree with one premise: by making 700 different propellers it does increaese the odds that one of them will be right for your boat. We've gone over the merits or lack of merit of the FLO-TORQ hubs before, and, I'll say it again, they are of the most benefit to Mercury, not necessarily to the boater. It is too bad someone doesn't make an insert for those propellers which provided a rubber-hub coupling. That would give you the best of both worlds: quiet shifting and interchangable hubs. |
| LHG |
posted 12-15-2005 03:35 PM ET (US)
Jim - It may be possible to have a prop shop insert a replacement conventional hub in the Mercury props. The reason I say this is because when one my older style Laser II props, purchased new circa 1992, ended up with a spun hub, the prop guy just punched out the old one and handed me a new Flo-Torque II interchangeable hub kit. It surprised me that this prop, originally designed for the old style press-in hub, could use the new design. So perhaps this can work in reverse, and an old style Mercury hub can be pressed into a newer prop? Just speculating here, but it makes sense to me. I will check with my Dealer in a few days. |
| jimh |
posted 12-15-2005 08:13 PM ET (US)
Larry--that is a very interesting observation. I wonder if a FLO-TORQ propeller from Mercury could have a new hub installed with a conventional rubber coupling? You could have the best of both worlds, so to speak, with that approach! I am going to call a propeller shop tomorrow and ask them. Let us know what you find out from the dealer. |
| kglinz |
posted 12-15-2005 08:29 PM ET (US)
There's an ad in Go Boating showing a price of $646. Thats about the same as a 13 Foot Boston Whaler the first time I priced one. |
| KGF |
posted 12-15-2005 09:49 PM ET (US)
I happen to work in the propeller division at Mercury Marine........ I would like to try and answer some of the topics brought up here regarding the New Enertia Propellers..... -The suggested retail price for the Enertia will be $646- each. -The new X7 alloy is as stated..... 30% stronger and 4 times more durable...... this allows us to cast the propeller with thinner blades (thinner blades = less resistance = greater performance) with out sacrificing durability. -We are a member of the N.M.P.A. (National Marine Propeller Association) and we have sent several of our earlier prototype X7 Enertia propellers to various members to perform welding tests and various types of repairs and the response we received was that they are not that much different to work with than conventional stainless propellers.... so I would guess that any type of repairs that you might need would be relative to what you might pay currently for a conventional stainless propeller repair. -These propellers have been tested and still are being tested on a variety of applications and conditions.... which is part of the reason the propellers will not be available until the 2nd quarter. -The HP claims are based upon the fact that we gained 2 MPH top end speed during our testing......if you compare that increase in speed to HP is results in 17 HP gain.... -The testing results that you see in a lot of the Enertia promotional material are using a Mirage Propeller as a baseline propeller... - We have found that the Enertia propellers tend to turn another 2-300 RPMs pitch for pitch which should prove to be beneficial on the newer higher horsepower fourstrokes.... - Additionally we are offering the propellers in 1" pitch increments to help dial in the appropriate WOT range of the a lot of the higher horsepower fourstroke outboards. Thanks, KGF. |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 12-15-2005 09:54 PM ET (US)
KGF, Thank you for sharing that information. If you used a Mirage Plus as a point of comparison, then you have set the bar very high indeed. Would you please send me an email? |
| kglinz |
posted 12-15-2005 09:56 PM ET (US)
quote:...Thats a pretty broad statement..Does that mean a 35 HP motor only goes 4 (and a tad) MPH. |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 12-15-2005 10:02 PM ET (US)
KGF, I didn't see your email address before. Never mind. One of your comments raises an interesting question. If the alloy used in the new INERTIA propellers is a proprietary alloy, what does a repair shop use when welding an inertia? Would you care to cite a patent number for the alloy used in the INERTIA propeller? |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 12-15-2005 10:09 PM ET (US)
Kevin, A couple more questions. Is the blade geometry of the new INERTIA propeller based on one of your existing propellers, like the Mirage Plus, or is entirely new design. In other words is this merely a prop with thinner blades or a prop with thinner blades and a radically new blade design? Are there any photos available of the INERTIA propeller itself? |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 12-15-2005 10:21 PM ET (US)
One more. Is the patent on the X7 alloy held by Mercury Marine (or Brunswick) or is it held my another company in another industry and licensed by Mercury? Stainless steel is broadly used. Is (will) this X7 alloy useful to marine propellers exclusively? |
| thomasfxlt |
posted 12-17-2005 09:11 AM ET (US)
So, what's with all the cynicism? These props aren't even on the market yet. Independant test will soon prove if they are full of it or not. Personally, I'm optimistic. I think it would be a pretty big organizational waste of time to develop and patent a prop like this, make a bunch of phony claims, only to have real world tests debunk it all. I'd venture to guess Mercury has something here wothwhile. It may be expensive, but I bet it does much of what they claim. |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 12-20-2005 11:35 AM ET (US)
Well I guess Kevin is not going to answer those questions. He did not respond to an email inquiry either. I'm still curious.... |
| |
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.