Discussion:
What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
(too old to reply)
MLapla4120
2004-08-28 00:50:46 UTC
Permalink
I'm going to re-power soon and am also going to get new shaft and prop.
It seems that in my boat class (Westsail 32), some people are going
to folding props to help speed under sail.
I'm for increased speed, but also want reliability. My current bronze
propeller is pitted and old. Every time I turn around and look at it, it
is full of sea growth. That makes me think I'm getting poor performance.
So, I'm for an improvement, but I am unsure of what kind.
Any opinions from boaters that have encountered this situation would be
appreciated.

Thanks,
Mark , "Belle" Westsail 32
Paul L
2004-08-28 01:58:12 UTC
Permalink
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop. Depending on the prop you buy, you should see better
power/control in reverse too. They are very reliable now, so I don't think
that is a down side. The biggest downside is their cost. I have a Max prop
and think it great.

Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by MLapla4120
I'm going to re-power soon and am also going to get new shaft and prop.
It seems that in my boat class (Westsail 32), some people are going
to folding props to help speed under sail.
I'm for increased speed, but also want reliability. My current bronze
propeller is pitted and old. Every time I turn around and look at it, it
is full of sea growth. That makes me think I'm getting poor performance.
So, I'm for an improvement, but I am unsure of what kind.
Any opinions from boaters that have encountered this situation would be
appreciated.
Thanks,
Mark , "Belle" Westsail 32
JAXAshby
2004-08-28 03:37:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop
no, you won't. folding props only hve value for racing boats, where 2 seconds
a mile means the difference between 2nd place and 6th.

According to MIT tests, a folding prop means a savings of a mere 170 pounds
drag at 5 knots (or 40 pounds drag at 2-1/2 knots, or 10 pounds drag at 1-1/4
knots) over a ---------> three <------------ blade prop. ***Much*** less with
compared to a two-blade, and even less compared to a two-blade rotated verticle
behind the keel.

Wanna guess just how much powered is required to pull 170# at 5 knots?
Paul L
2004-08-28 05:02:39 UTC
Permalink
Its real easy to test, as I can get my folding 3 blade to stay open. I can
see the boat speed, then have it fold and measure the speed. It is
significant. If the MIT tests say otherwise then they are not testing
reality - wanna guess what errors they made in the test or you in the
interpretation??.

Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop
no, you won't. folding props only hve value for racing boats, where 2 seconds
a mile means the difference between 2nd place and 6th.
According to MIT tests, a folding prop means a savings of a mere 170 pounds
drag at 5 knots (or 40 pounds drag at 2-1/2 knots, or 10 pounds drag at 1-1/4
knots) over a ---------> three <------------ blade prop. ***Much*** less with
compared to a two-blade, and even less compared to a two-blade rotated verticle
behind the keel.
Wanna guess just how much powered is required to pull 170# at 5 knots?
Ayesha
2004-08-28 08:48:16 UTC
Permalink
Assuming you're talking about a sailboat, then I'm currently taking a
look at www.kiwiprops.co.nz which look neat, and the testimonials
read well. But I've no personal experience. I'd like to hear from
anyone who has
JAXAshby
2004-08-28 13:30:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul L
Its real easy to test, as I can get my folding 3 blade to stay open. I can
see the boat speed, then have it fold and measure the speed. It is
significant. If the MIT tests say otherwise then they are not testing
reality - wanna guess what errors they made in the test or you in the
interpretation??.
sure, paul lever knows more testing props than MIT. good on ya, paul.
Post by Paul L
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop
no, you won't. folding props only hve value for racing boats, where 2 seconds
a mile means the difference between 2nd place and 6th.
According to MIT tests, a folding prop means a savings of a mere 170 pounds
drag at 5 knots (or 40 pounds drag at 2-1/2 knots, or 10 pounds drag at 1-1/4
knots) over a ---------> three <------------ blade prop. ***Much*** less with
compared to a two-blade, and even less compared to a two-blade rotated verticle
behind the keel.
Wanna guess just how much powered is required to pull 170# at 5 knots?
Paul L
2004-08-28 18:01:55 UTC
Permalink
bite me.
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Paul L
Its real easy to test, as I can get my folding 3 blade to stay open. I can
see the boat speed, then have it fold and measure the speed. It is
significant. If the MIT tests say otherwise then they are not testing
reality - wanna guess what errors they made in the test or you in the
interpretation??.
sure, paul lever knows more testing props than MIT. good on ya, paul.
Post by Paul L
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop
no, you won't. folding props only hve value for racing boats, where 2 seconds
a mile means the difference between 2nd place and 6th.
According to MIT tests, a folding prop means a savings of a mere 170 pounds
drag at 5 knots (or 40 pounds drag at 2-1/2 knots, or 10 pounds drag at 1-1/4
knots) over a ---------> three <------------ blade prop. ***Much***
less
with
compared to a two-blade, and even less compared to a two-blade rotated verticle
behind the keel.
Wanna guess just how much powered is required to pull 170# at 5 knots?
JAXAshby
2004-08-28 23:37:34 UTC
Permalink
now, THAT is an informed response.
Date: 8/28/2004 2:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time
bite me.
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Paul L
Its real easy to test, as I can get my folding 3 blade to stay open. I can
see the boat speed, then have it fold and measure the speed. It is
significant. If the MIT tests say otherwise then they are not testing
reality - wanna guess what errors they made in the test or you in the
interpretation??.
sure, paul lever knows more testing props than MIT. good on ya, paul.
Post by Paul L
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop
no, you won't. folding props only hve value for racing boats, where 2 seconds
a mile means the difference between 2nd place and 6th.
According to MIT tests, a folding prop means a savings of a mere 170 pounds
drag at 5 knots (or 40 pounds drag at 2-1/2 knots, or 10 pounds drag at 1-1/4
knots) over a ---------> three <------------ blade prop. ***Much***
less
with
compared to a two-blade, and even less compared to a two-blade rotated verticle
behind the keel.
Wanna guess just how much powered is required to pull 170# at 5 knots?
JAXAshby
2004-08-29 00:11:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by JAXAshby
Wanna guess just how much powered is required to pull 170# at 5 knots?
about 2-1/2 hp. that's a LOT, isn't it.
Glenn Ashmore
2004-08-28 14:17:26 UTC
Permalink
As usual, Jax has taken some good data and come up with a completely
erroneous conclusion. The drag from the prop increases as the square of
the speed. Using the MIT figures, at 8 knots you are looking at
something over 430 pounds of drag. For a medium displacement boat that
can add up to 15% or more in improved performance. For a 40' LWL
cruiser that means an extra 20 to 25 miles a day.
Post by Paul L
Its real easy to test, as I can get my folding 3 blade to stay open. I can
see the boat speed, then have it fold and measure the speed. It is
significant. If the MIT tests say otherwise then they are not testing
reality - wanna guess what errors they made in the test or you in the
interpretation??.
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop
no, you won't. folding props only hve value for racing boats, where 2 seconds
a mile means the difference between 2nd place and 6th.
According to MIT tests, a folding prop means a savings of a mere 170 pounds
drag at 5 knots (or 40 pounds drag at 2-1/2 knots, or 10 pounds drag at 1-1/4
knots) over a ---------> three <------------ blade prop. ***Much*** less with
compared to a two-blade, and even less compared to a two-blade rotated verticle
behind the keel.
Wanna guess just how much powered is required to pull 170# at 5 knots?
--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com
JAXAshby
2004-08-28 15:42:41 UTC
Permalink
glenn, just where is it you found you "facts" that "a medium displacement boat"
has 2,866.66666666 pounds of drag?

btw, "a medium displacement boat" that does 8 knots continuous is rare indeed.

btw-2: that 15% that is so often bandied about comes from a marketing
department at a folding prop company.

btw-3: ------> folding <-------- three blade props are rare indeed.

btw-4: the subject of this thread is folding, not feathering (a hugely more
expensive breed of cat)

btw-5, the 170# figures from MIT were for ---------> three <--------- bladed
props. Two bladed props have much less drag, and two bladed props aligned
behind the keel have even less.

btw-6, when the winds are sufficient to drive ""a medium displacement boat" at
8 knots, you have more than enough wind to drive the boat at 8 knots with a
bucket dragging behind just by putting up anothe 20 square feet of sail.

btw-7: most folding/feathering props are promoted by their marketers as an
improvement in **LITE** airs, not heavy.
Post by Glenn Ashmore
As usual, Jax has taken some good data and come up with a completely
erroneous conclusion. The drag from the prop increases as the square of
the speed. Using the MIT figures, at 8 knots you are looking at
something over 430 pounds of drag. For a medium displacement boat that
can add up to 15% or more in improved performance. For a 40' LWL
cruiser that means an extra 20 to 25 miles a day.
Post by Paul L
Its real easy to test, as I can get my folding 3 blade to stay open. I can
see the boat speed, then have it fold and measure the speed. It is
significant. If the MIT tests say otherwise then they are not testing
reality - wanna guess what errors they made in the test or you in the
interpretation??.
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop
no, you won't. folding props only hve value for racing boats, where 2 seconds
a mile means the difference between 2nd place and 6th.
According to MIT tests, a folding prop means a savings of a mere 170 pounds
drag at 5 knots (or 40 pounds drag at 2-1/2 knots, or 10 pounds drag at 1-1/4
knots) over a ---------> three <------------ blade prop. ***Much*** less with
compared to a two-blade, and even less compared to a two-blade rotated verticle
behind the keel.
Wanna guess just how much powered is required to pull 170# at 5 knots?
--
Glenn Ashmore
I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com
Glenn Ashmore
2004-08-28 16:48:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by JAXAshby
glenn, just where is it you found you "facts" that "a medium displacement boat"
has 2,866.66666666 pounds of drag?
From the VPP diagrams and backup data on my boat, the VPP for a
Beneteau First 47, C.A. Marchaj's "Sail Performance" and working
backwards from Dave Gerr's figures. The VPPs were run with standard and
Gori folding 3 bladed props and showed from 12 to 15% increased speeds
with the folding props up to about 80% of the first reef point.

20 miles a day is a 15% improvement on a base 5.6 knot cruising speed
and you are correct that folding props make the most difference in light
air.

Reducing drag has the advantage over adding sail area in that it does
not add to heeling moment.

BTW, Gori, Martec, Brunton/Varifold and others make 3 blade folders.
Volvo even makes a 4 bladed folder.

Now, you can continue to rant and make an ass of yourself as usual but
that is all I have to say about it.
--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com
Paul L
2004-08-28 18:02:43 UTC
Permalink
There aren't too many other things you can do to gain that much performance
that easily.

Paul
Post by JAXAshby
glenn, just where is it you found you "facts" that "a medium displacement boat"
has 2,866.66666666 pounds of drag?
From the VPP diagrams and backup data on my boat, the VPP for a Beneteau
First 47, C.A. Marchaj's "Sail Performance" and working backwards from
Dave Gerr's figures. The VPPs were run with standard and Gori folding 3
bladed props and showed from 12 to 15% increased speeds with the folding
props up to about 80% of the first reef point.
20 miles a day is a 15% improvement on a base 5.6 knot cruising speed and
you are correct that folding props make the most difference in light air.
Reducing drag has the advantage over adding sail area in that it does not
add to heeling moment.
BTW, Gori, Martec, Brunton/Varifold and others make 3 blade folders. Volvo
even makes a 4 bladed folder.
Now, you can continue to rant and make an ass of yourself as usual but
that is all I have to say about it.
--
Glenn Ashmore
I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com
JAXAshby
2004-08-28 23:50:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul L
There aren't too many other things you can do to gain that much performance
that easily.
sure there are. you can clean the bottom of your boat. you can thoroughly
fair the hull before you bottom paint. you can take 500# of useless junk out
of your boat. you can trim the sails. you can buy better sails. you can take
down your dodger and/or bimini and/or 3 of your 8 solar panels. you can use a
hank on jib instead of a roller furled jib. you can use a vinyl bottom paint.
you can do polars on your boat to sail it smarter. you can move your anchor
and 275 foot of chain to the center of the boat. you can sail more so you need
300# less fuel onboard. -----------------------> you can install a two blade
prop <------------------------- which i damned cheap and damned effective. you
can line up your prop with the keel.

To name just a few.
Post by Paul L
Paul
Post by JAXAshby
glenn, just where is it you found you "facts" that "a medium displacement boat"
has 2,866.66666666 pounds of drag?
From the VPP diagrams and backup data on my boat, the VPP for a Beneteau
First 47, C.A. Marchaj's "Sail Performance" and working backwards from
Dave Gerr's figures. The VPPs were run with standard and Gori folding 3
bladed props and showed from 12 to 15% increased speeds with the folding
props up to about 80% of the first reef point.
20 miles a day is a 15% improvement on a base 5.6 knot cruising speed and
you are correct that folding props make the most difference in light air.
Reducing drag has the advantage over adding sail area in that it does not
add to heeling moment.
BTW, Gori, Martec, Brunton/Varifold and others make 3 blade folders. Volvo
even makes a 4 bladed folder.
Now, you can continue to rant and make an ass of yourself as usual but
that is all I have to say about it.
--
Glenn Ashmore
I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com
Rosalie B.
2004-08-29 01:43:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Paul L
There aren't too many other things you can do to gain that much performance
that easily.
sure there are. you can clean the bottom of your boat. you can thoroughly
If you sail instead of sitting in the marina your boat will have a
clean bottom.
Post by JAXAshby
fair the hull before you bottom paint. you can take 500# of useless junk out
of your boat. you can trim the sails. you can buy better sails. you can take
down your dodger and/or bimini and/or 3 of your 8 solar panels. you can use a
hank on jib instead of a roller furled jib. you can use a vinyl bottom paint.
you can do polars on your boat to sail it smarter. you can move your anchor
and 275 foot of chain to the center of the boat. you can sail more so you need
300# less fuel onboard. -----------------------> you can install a two blade
prop <------------------------- which i damned cheap and damned effective. you
can line up your prop with the keel.
The person that inquired has a Westsail. This is not a racing boat.
He wants to sail faster WITH the dodger and bimini, and with the
roller furled jib and with the solar panels and the fuel etc. He
isn't racing.

Just because these are all things that can make a boat go faster
doesn't mean that they are viable options for a cruising sailboat nor
that the folding prop isn't also an option that he can use
effectively.


grandma Rosalie
JAXAshby
2004-08-29 12:03:31 UTC
Permalink
putting a folding prop on Westsail is like putting Nikes on an obese man.
Post by Rosalie B.
The person that inquired has a Westsail. This is not a racing boat.
He wants to sail faster WITH the dodger and bimini, and with the
roller furled jib and with the solar panels and the fuel etc. He
isn't racing.
Just because these are all things that can make a boat go faster
doesn't mean that they are viable options for a cruising sailboat nor
that the folding prop isn't also an option that he can use
effectively.
grandma Rosalie
Robert Larder
2004-08-29 12:12:45 UTC
Permalink
The other way of looking at it is that the Westsail needs all the help it
can get ;-))
Bob Larder
Post by JAXAshby
putting a folding prop on Westsail is like putting Nikes on an obese man.
Post by Rosalie B.
The person that inquired has a Westsail. This is not a racing boat.
He wants to sail faster WITH the dodger and bimini, and with the
Gene Kearns
2004-08-31 01:56:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by JAXAshby
putting a folding prop on Westsail is like putting Nikes on an obese man.
And all of this from a guy that should know!
--
Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Southport, NC.

http://myworkshop.idleplay.net/cavern/ Homepage
http://www.southharbourvillageinn.com/directions.asp Where Southport,NC is located.
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
JAXAshby
2004-08-28 23:44:53 UTC
Permalink
Glenn, how does it feel to have a fish hook in your mouth?

the marketing people done did snag you.

170# at 5 knots is 85# at 2.5 knots is 42# a 1.25 knots. For a fixed
***three*** blade prop.

In other words, zip.

In fact, a two blade at 5 knots was IIRC about 75# and a two blade behind the
keel wwas about 45#.

In other words, "You how the f*&*% much to gain 0.05 knots speed??"

And, that damned feathering three blade cost you HOW much in forward speed
because the blades are flat?

Folding props are for race boat boats, and boat owners who like to brag how
much *they* spent on their boat. Sorta like the suburban home owner bragging
about spending $400/week to have his LARGE swimming pool cleaned.

btw, glenn, Dave Gerr rehashes other people's writings without all that much
verification.
Post by Glenn Ashmore
Post by JAXAshby
glenn, just where is it you found you "facts" that "a medium displacement
boat"
Post by JAXAshby
has 2,866.66666666 pounds of drag?
From the VPP diagrams and backup data on my boat, the VPP for a
Beneteau First 47, C.A. Marchaj's "Sail Performance" and working
backwards from Dave Gerr's figures. The VPPs were run with standard and
Gori folding 3 bladed props and showed from 12 to 15% increased speeds
with the folding props up to about 80% of the first reef point.
20 miles a day is a 15% improvement on a base 5.6 knot cruising speed
and you are correct that folding props make the most difference in light
air.
Reducing drag has the advantage over adding sail area in that it does
not add to heeling moment.
BTW, Gori, Martec, Brunton/Varifold and others make 3 blade folders.
Volvo even makes a 4 bladed folder.
Now, you can continue to rant and make an ass of yourself as usual but
that is all I have to say about it.
--
Glenn Ashmore
I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com
rhys
2004-08-30 02:43:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Glenn Ashmore
20 miles a day is a 15% improvement on a base 5.6 knot cruising speed
and you are correct that folding props make the most difference in light
air.
Reducing drag has the advantage over adding sail area in that it does
not add to heeling moment.
BTW, Gori, Martec, Brunton/Varifold and others make 3 blade folders.
Volvo even makes a 4 bladed folder.
Now, you can continue to rant and make an ass of yourself as usual but
that is all I have to say about it.
For what it's worth:

Buddy of mine with a steel Wallstrom-designed (partner to Brewer) 1979
ketch popped for a three-bladed AutoProp, a feathering design. He had
to haul out for many reasons: 1) to confirm the exact geometry of his
hull around the shaft; 2) to cut back his rudder at that point for the
install; and 3) to get the prop itself on. 1) was because it's
essentially a custom casting, and NOT cheap (about $3,500 Cdn.).

After three seasons now, he's happy as a clam with his decision and
outlay. He says the following:

Advantages:

Bigger prop, better bite and power curve. He's got a 35 HP Volvo
(probably 15-25 HP too small for a 28,000 lb. boat), but according to
him, the power he transmits to the prop is greatly increased. His top
speed without redlining has gone from 6.5 to 8.2 knots, or
approximately hull speed.

He says he gains 1/2 knot due to the self-feathering action, a
significant gain in typical light Lake Ontario air for this
essentially blue-water cruiser.

He backs down (after a quick rev to feather out the blades) far more
effectively now. He stops far more rapidly.

His docking is far more controlled. He can move his heavy, trad.
keeled boat like a minivan now. It's quite interesting to see.

Disadvantages:

The cones in his transmission have been wearing far more quickly and
have required replacement. He can handle this himself as a repair, so
it's more an annoyance than a tragedy, and spares from Volvo are
pricey.

He figures that shifting the gears with a bigger, heavier prop is
causing wear and tear beyond the engine spec. You can hear the "clunk"
of his shifting outside the boat, actually. He is consulting with a
marine engineer to determine a better course of action, but he is
leaning towards a shock-absorbing coupler and a thrust bearing
designed to isolate the engine transmission more effectively from the
sheer inertia of this otherwise fine prop.

Overall, he is so happy with the performance, however, both under sail
and power, that he would consider getting a new diesel to make full
use of the prop, rather than sticking with the small but still viable
diesel that perhaps doesn't have the beef at the back end to cope with
God's Own Feathering Prop <G>.

Hope this little tale helps.

R.
JAXAshby
2004-08-30 03:34:57 UTC
Permalink
rhys, hate to tell you this, but an Auto-Prop doesn't feather.

Still, the clown spent $3,500 Cdn, so you gotta expect him to tell you
*something*.
Post by rhys
Post by Glenn Ashmore
20 miles a day is a 15% improvement on a base 5.6 knot cruising speed
and you are correct that folding props make the most difference in light
air.
Reducing drag has the advantage over adding sail area in that it does
not add to heeling moment.
BTW, Gori, Martec, Brunton/Varifold and others make 3 blade folders.
Volvo even makes a 4 bladed folder.
Now, you can continue to rant and make an ass of yourself as usual but
that is all I have to say about it.
Buddy of mine with a steel Wallstrom-designed (partner to Brewer) 1979
ketch popped for a three-bladed AutoProp, a feathering design. He had
to haul out for many reasons: 1) to confirm the exact geometry of his
hull around the shaft; 2) to cut back his rudder at that point for the
install; and 3) to get the prop itself on. 1) was because it's
essentially a custom casting, and NOT cheap (about $3,500 Cdn.).
After three seasons now, he's happy as a clam with his decision and
Bigger prop, better bite and power curve. He's got a 35 HP Volvo
(probably 15-25 HP too small for a 28,000 lb. boat), but according to
him, the power he transmits to the prop is greatly increased. His top
speed without redlining has gone from 6.5 to 8.2 knots, or
approximately hull speed.
He says he gains 1/2 knot due to the self-feathering action, a
significant gain in typical light Lake Ontario air for this
essentially blue-water cruiser.
He backs down (after a quick rev to feather out the blades) far more
effectively now. He stops far more rapidly.
His docking is far more controlled. He can move his heavy, trad.
keeled boat like a minivan now. It's quite interesting to see.
The cones in his transmission have been wearing far more quickly and
have required replacement. He can handle this himself as a repair, so
it's more an annoyance than a tragedy, and spares from Volvo are
pricey.
He figures that shifting the gears with a bigger, heavier prop is
causing wear and tear beyond the engine spec. You can hear the "clunk"
of his shifting outside the boat, actually. He is consulting with a
marine engineer to determine a better course of action, but he is
leaning towards a shock-absorbing coupler and a thrust bearing
designed to isolate the engine transmission more effectively from the
sheer inertia of this otherwise fine prop.
Overall, he is so happy with the performance, however, both under sail
and power, that he would consider getting a new diesel to make full
use of the prop, rather than sticking with the small but still viable
diesel that perhaps doesn't have the beef at the back end to cope with
God's Own Feathering Prop <G>.
Hope this little tale helps.
R.
Jim Richardson
2004-08-30 05:00:22 UTC
Permalink
On 30 Aug 2004 03:34:57 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
rhys, hate to tell you this, but an Auto-Prop doesn't feather.
The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this
not feathering?
Post by JAXAshby
Still, the clown spent $3,500 Cdn, so you gotta expect him to tell you
*something*.
What would have done the job as well, for less money?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
'Windows' really does make a fine swear word, representing all that's
taboo and awful - just like 'shit', 'fuck', etc."
-- Mark Hughes, sdm
JAXAshby
2004-08-30 11:58:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Richardson
The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this
not feathering?
take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but they
certainly don't "feather".
Rosalie B.
2004-08-30 12:45:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this
not feathering?
take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but they
certainly don't "feather".
Blades can be set to in-line with the keel (two blade props), but the
prop still has the blades at about 90 degrees to the shaft. For two
blade props on boats where there is something of the keel sticking
down into the water past where the prop is (like on many sailboats),
this does reduce drag. I think however that many sailboats don't have
two blade props and this doesn't work well with a 3 or more blade
prop.

In feathering and/or folding (since I know there is a difference but
don't remember what it is), the blades move to align themselves along
the shaft - kind of like furling an umbrella.

Some props can be folded or have the pitch changed from inside the
boat and some you have to either haul or go into the water. I think
that is variable pitch. A fixed prop where everything is one solid
piece is a non-feathering/folding and constant pitch prop.


grandma Rosalie
Glenn Ashmore
2004-08-30 13:39:46 UTC
Permalink
There seems to be a bit of confusion here. There are basically 4
different types of props with movable blades. All can improve sailing
performance to one degree or another.

Folding props: Blades with a fixed pitch are pivoted along the axis of
the shaft so that they fold back in the fore and aft direction. Blades
may be geared together or independent. In forward they are held open by
the forward thrust. Most have some camber so they are close to the
efficiency of fixed blades in forward but in reverse they are held open
by centrifugal force which means that you have to apply more power to
get them to perform in reverse. Folding props are preferred when sail
performance take preference over powered performance.

Feathering props: Blades are pivoted (more or less) perpendicular to the
shaft. They remain extended when idle but align themselves with the
flow to present the smallest cross section. The blades are geared to
the shaft so that they are held open by the torque. Pitch can be
adjusted by modifying the stops. In reverse the torque flips the blade
over so that you get the same pitch (and performance) in forward and
reverse. However, to achieve the lowest drag the blades usually do not
have any camber making them slightly less efficient. Feathering props
are preferred where a balance must be struck between sail and powered
performance.

Variable Pitch Props: Blades are assembled similar to feathering props
but are geared to a control shaft concentric to the drive shaft. By
adjusting the position of the control shaft relative to the drive shaft
from inside the hull the pitch can be varied to meet current conditions.
Usually the blades are cambered to optimize forward performance.
Variable pitch props are preferred where maximum performance under power
in all conditions is desired and cost is not a limiting factor.

Auto-Prop: Blades are pivoted similar to feathering props but are
independent of each other and can rotate a full 360º. The offset
geometry of each blade is designed to find its own most efficient pitch
by balancing torque against water pressure. Auto-Props can give close
to optimum performance in most conditions in forward or reverse. They
are not truly feathering however. With no torque water pressure forces
the blades back slightly which results in considerably more drag than
normal feathering props. Also they have considerably more mass which
puts a lot of strain on the drive train when shifting from forward to
reverse and back. If left idle for any length of time they require
considerably more maintenance than the others to keep the blades
rotating freely. Auto-Props are best where powered performance takes
precedence over sailing performance.
--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com
rhys
2004-08-30 16:46:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Glenn Ashmore
Auto-Prop: Blades are pivoted similar to feathering props but are
independent of each other and can rotate a full 360º. The offset
geometry of each blade is designed to find its own most efficient pitch
by balancing torque against water pressure. Auto-Props can give close
to optimum performance in most conditions in forward or reverse. They
are not truly feathering however.
They are close enough in function to use the term constructively. I
don't think Autoprop's self-description of their product as a
"feathering prop" constitutes trade fraud in this instance.


With no torque water pressure forces
Post by Glenn Ashmore
the blades back slightly which results in considerably more drag than
normal feathering props. Also they have considerably more mass which
puts a lot of strain on the drive train when shifting from forward to
reverse and back.
Agreed. As noted, my friend accepts the wear as adequate pay-off for
the motoring performance enhancements he was seeking. I wouldn't put
an Autoprop on a J-Boat, for instance, or any racer-cruiser. It's a
good compromise if you understand the pros and cons, not a universal
panacea for prop drag.

If left idle for any length of time they require
Post by Glenn Ashmore
considerably more maintenance than the others to keep the blades
rotating freely.
He hauls in a TraveLift once a year (luckily his club possesses one)
and inspects and adjusts then as part of his general yearly hull
maintenance/cleaning/repainting. He says it's pretty straightforward
so far, but he acknowledges that they are complex pieces of machinery
for props.


Auto-Props are best where powered performance takes
Post by Glenn Ashmore
precedence over sailing performance.
Debatable, if you consider the alternative as being a fixed prop or a
folding prop. I think you have to consider hull type, displacement and
engine output along with intended use. My friend takes his large steel
ketch out alone a great deal, and while he is fine sailing it solo, he
appreciates the degree of control his Autoprop gives him in tight
situations and in solo docking. Certainly that aspect--the degree of
control of a 15 ton boat-- is quite noticeable and is obviously worth
it to him in his use of a heavy displacement cruiser.

That's why I tried to give both pros and cons, as the Autoprop isn't
particularly well-known, being British. Getting one personally would
be senseless for my current boat, but seems a good compromise for him
and has bought him a few more years out of his 35 HP Volvo, even if he
has to rethink transmission isolation and so on.

But it's not for everyone. No "marine solution" is, except maybe for
those wooden tapered plugs people hang off seacocks. <G>

R.
Jim Richardson
2004-08-31 18:30:25 UTC
Permalink
On 30 Aug 2004 11:58:56 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this
not feathering?
take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but they
certainly don't "feather".
I have, the blades rotate to line up with the axis of the shaft, how is
that *not* feathering?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed... Oh wait, he does
JAXAshby
2004-09-01 02:03:35 UTC
Permalink
the blades are curved, and rather dramatically so.
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this
not feathering?
take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but they
certainly don't "feather".
I have, the blades rotate to line up with the axis of the shaft, how is
that *not* feathering?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed... Oh wait, he does
otnmbrd
2004-09-01 02:20:09 UTC
Permalink
So,Doodles, what you are saying, is that unless the blades are totally
flat, the term "feathering" can not be used?

otn
Post by JAXAshby
the blades are curved, and rather dramatically so.
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this
not feathering?
take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but they
certainly don't "feather".
I have, the blades rotate to line up with the axis of the shaft, how is
that *not* feathering?
JAXAshby
2004-09-01 02:24:56 UTC
Permalink
of course, or very nearly so. That is what the word means. At least to the
professionals. rubber ducky sailors are a different breed, of course.
Subject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
Date: 8/31/2004 10:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time
So,Doodles, what you are saying, is that unless the blades are totally
flat, the term "feathering" can not be used?
otn
Post by JAXAshby
the blades are curved, and rather dramatically so.
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this
not feathering?
take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but they
certainly don't "feather".
I have, the blades rotate to line up with the axis of the shaft, how is
that *not* feathering?
otnmbrd
2004-09-01 03:54:22 UTC
Permalink
Well, golly, gee, Doodles, I'm impressed. A simple direct answer to a
simple direct question.
Simply stated, for those who live in the real world of boating and
propellors, when discussing "Feathering" props with Doodles, keep in
mind that if there is any curvature or cupping to the blades, then you
will have to determine and use the "Doodles terminology" for this blade
and condition, as it does not fully meet the requirements of "Doodles
terminology" and is thus unacceptable usage.

otn
Post by JAXAshby
of course, or very nearly so. That is what the word means. At least to the
professionals. rubber ducky sailors are a different breed, of course.
Subject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
Date: 8/31/2004 10:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time
So,Doodles, what you are saying, is that unless the blades are totally
flat, the term "feathering" can not be used?
otn
JAXAshby
2004-09-01 11:36:57 UTC
Permalink
over the knee, English was not your first or second language. please stay out
of discussions on any subject in English.
Date: 8/31/2004 11:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Well, golly, gee, Doodles, I'm impressed. A simple direct answer to a
simple direct question.
Simply stated, for those who live in the real world of boating and
propellors, when discussing "Feathering" props with Doodles, keep in
mind that if there is any curvature or cupping to the blades, then you
will have to determine and use the "Doodles terminology" for this blade
and condition, as it does not fully meet the requirements of "Doodles
terminology" and is thus unacceptable usage.
otn
Post by JAXAshby
of course, or very nearly so. That is what the word means. At least to
the
Post by JAXAshby
professionals. rubber ducky sailors are a different breed, of course.
Subject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
Date: 8/31/2004 10:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time
So,Doodles, what you are saying, is that unless the blades are totally
flat, the term "feathering" can not be used?
otn
JAXAshby
2004-09-01 02:28:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by otnmbrd
So,Doodles, what you are saying, is that unless the blades are totally
flat, the term "feathering" can not be used?
otn
let me help improve, over the knee, with your understanding of English words.

v. feath·ered, feath·er·ing, feath·ers

v. tr.
To turn (an oar blade) almost horizontal as it is carried back after each
stroke.

To alter the pitch of (a propeller) so that the chords of the blades are
parallel with the line of flight.
otnmbrd
2004-09-01 04:11:26 UTC
Permalink
<G> Isn't it great how easily you can look up these simple definitions,
Doodles?
Isn't it a shame that so many people allow these slight variations to
the pure and simple definitions of your life to totally corrupt the
English language?

otn
Post by JAXAshby
let me help improve, over the knee, with your understanding of English words.
v. feath·ered, feath·er·ing, feath·ers
v. tr.
To turn (an oar blade) almost horizontal as it is carried back after each
stroke.
To alter the pitch of (a propeller) so that the chords of the blades are
parallel with the line of flight.
JAXAshby
2004-09-01 11:37:53 UTC
Permalink
over the knee. the definition was for your ignorant sake. I knew the term
correctly a long bit ago.
Date: 9/1/2004 12:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time
<G> Isn't it great how easily you can look up these simple definitions,
Doodles?
Isn't it a shame that so many people allow these slight variations to
the pure and simple definitions of your life to totally corrupt the
English language?
otn
Post by JAXAshby
let me help improve, over the knee, with your understanding of English
words.
Post by JAXAshby
v. feath·ered, feath·er·ing, feath·ers
v. tr.
To turn (an oar blade) almost horizontal as it is carried back after each
stroke.
To alter the pitch of (a propeller) so that the chords of the blades are
parallel with the line of flight.
otnmbrd
2004-09-01 16:03:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by JAXAshby
over the knee. the definition was for your ignorant sake. I knew the term
correctly a long bit ago.
<G> Knowing the "term" correctly, is one thing. Being able to apply the
term to various situations seems to be beyond your abilities.
I'd hate to see what you'd do if I sent you to stand by the "forward
spring".

otn
JAXAshby
2004-09-02 02:35:06 UTC
Permalink
"various", eh?
Date: 9/1/2004 12:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Post by JAXAshby
over the knee. the definition was for your ignorant sake. I knew the term
correctly a long bit ago.
<G> Knowing the "term" correctly, is one thing. Being able to apply the
term to various situations seems to be beyond your abilities.
I'd hate to see what you'd do if I sent you to stand by the "forward
spring".
otn
otnmbrd
2004-09-02 03:16:15 UTC
Permalink
Yup, Doodles, "various" ..... course now we have to wait and see which
definition ( the simple, complex, or interpretive) you will use to
create this argument <BG>
Btw Which line WOULD you go to, to "stand by the fwd spring"?

otn
Post by JAXAshby
"various", eh?
Date: 9/1/2004 12:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Post by JAXAshby
over the knee. the definition was for your ignorant sake. I knew the term
correctly a long bit ago.
<G> Knowing the "term" correctly, is one thing. Being able to apply the
term to various situations seems to be beyond your abilities.
I'd hate to see what you'd do if I sent you to stand by the "forward
spring".
otn
Jim Richardson
2004-09-01 09:30:35 UTC
Permalink
On 01 Sep 2004 02:28:28 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by otnmbrd
So,Doodles, what you are saying, is that unless the blades are totally
flat, the term "feathering" can not be used?
otn
let me help improve, over the knee, with your understanding of English words.
v. feath·ered, feath·er·ing, feath·ers
v. tr.
To turn (an oar blade) almost horizontal as it is carried back after each
stroke.
To alter the pitch of (a propeller) so that the chords of the blades are
parallel with the line of flight.
Well, that fits the autoprop, thanks.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
-- Calvin
JAXAshby
2004-09-01 11:38:55 UTC
Permalink
no it doesn't. take a look at those blades and you will understand, probably.
if not, ask any passing yardworker or dockboy to explain it to you.
Date: 9/1/2004 5:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time
On 01 Sep 2004 02:28:28 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by otnmbrd
So,Doodles, what you are saying, is that unless the blades are totally
flat, the term "feathering" can not be used?
otn
let me help improve, over the knee, with your understanding of English
words.
Post by JAXAshby
v. feath·ered, feath·er·ing, feath·ers
v. tr.
To turn (an oar blade) almost horizontal as it is carried back after each
stroke.
To alter the pitch of (a propeller) so that the chords of the blades are
parallel with the line of flight.
Well, that fits the autoprop, thanks.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
-- Calvin
Jim Richardson
2004-09-02 08:30:28 UTC
Permalink
On 01 Sep 2004 11:38:55 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
no it doesn't. take a look at those blades and you will understand, probably.
if not, ask any passing yardworker or dockboy to explain it to you.
Even the definition of feathering that you yourself brought into this
discussion fits the autoprop.
Post by JAXAshby
Date: 9/1/2004 5:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time
On 01 Sep 2004 02:28:28 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by otnmbrd
So,Doodles, what you are saying, is that unless the blades are totally
flat, the term "feathering" can not be used?
otn
let me help improve, over the knee, with your understanding of English
words.
Post by JAXAshby
v. feath·ered, feath·er·ing, feath·ers
v. tr.
To turn (an oar blade) almost horizontal as it is carried back after each
stroke.
To alter the pitch of (a propeller) so that the chords of the blades are
parallel with the line of flight.
Well, that fits the autoprop, thanks.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
-- Calvin
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Instrument of Darwin
JAXAshby
2004-09-02 12:17:42 UTC
Permalink
and green is lollipops to a true-believer, jim.

look up the term "cognitive dissidense" (pardon the terbil spelink, but you
ain't gonna look the psychological underpinnings to your behavior anyway)
Date: 9/2/2004 4:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time
On 01 Sep 2004 11:38:55 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
no it doesn't. take a look at those blades and you will understand,
probably.
Post by JAXAshby
if not, ask any passing yardworker or dockboy to explain it to you.
Even the definition of feathering that you yourself brought into this
discussion fits the autoprop.
Post by JAXAshby
Date: 9/1/2004 5:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time
On 01 Sep 2004 02:28:28 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by otnmbrd
So,Doodles, what you are saying, is that unless the blades are totally
flat, the term "feathering" can not be used?
otn
let me help improve, over the knee, with your understanding of English
words.
Post by JAXAshby
v. feath·ered, feath·er·ing, feath·ers
v. tr.
To turn (an oar blade) almost horizontal as it is carried back after each
stroke.
To alter the pitch of (a propeller) so that the chords of the blades are
parallel with the line of flight.
Well, that fits the autoprop, thanks.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
-- Calvin
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Instrument of Darwin
Jim Richardson
2004-09-02 18:00:29 UTC
Permalink
On 02 Sep 2004 12:17:42 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
and green is lollipops to a true-believer, jim.
look up the term "cognitive dissidense" (pardon the terbil spelink, but you
ain't gonna look the psychological underpinnings to your behavior anyway)
There's a trend here, When JAXAshby loses a debate on the technical
issues, he starts flinging insults.

noted.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Instruction ends in the schoolroom -- but education
ends only with life. -- Publilius Syrus.
JAXAshby
2004-09-03 04:04:08 UTC
Permalink
jim, it is you who lost the debate two days ago when you told one and all you
didn't even understand that terms, let alone the principles involved.

even when I explained the terms to you, you still couldn't keep up.
Date: 9/2/2004 2:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time
On 02 Sep 2004 12:17:42 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
and green is lollipops to a true-believer, jim.
look up the term "cognitive dissidense" (pardon the terbil spelink, but you
ain't gonna look the psychological underpinnings to your behavior anyway)
There's a trend here, When JAXAshby loses a debate on the technical
issues, he starts flinging insults.
noted.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Instruction ends in the schoolroom -- but education
ends only with life. -- Publilius Syrus.
Jim Richardson
2004-09-03 08:00:31 UTC
Permalink
On 03 Sep 2004 04:04:08 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
jim, it is you who lost the debate two days ago when you told one and all you
didn't even understand that terms, let alone the principles involved.
even when I explained the terms to you, you still couldn't keep up.
You haven't explained anything yet. But I am still hopeful.

So how is the autoprop not a feathering propellor JAXAshby?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Remember - if all you have is an axe, every problem looks like hours of fun.
Frossie
JAXAshby
2004-09-03 11:58:59 UTC
Permalink
oh, jim, it has been explained in terms even a 10 year kid could understand.
get your older sister to explain it to you.
Date: 9/3/2004 4:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time
On 03 Sep 2004 04:04:08 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
jim, it is you who lost the debate two days ago when you told one and all
you
Post by JAXAshby
didn't even understand that terms, let alone the principles involved.
even when I explained the terms to you, you still couldn't keep up.
You haven't explained anything yet. But I am still hopeful.
So how is the autoprop not a feathering propellor JAXAshby?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Remember - if all you have is an axe, every problem looks like hours of fun.
Frossie
Jim Richardson
2004-09-04 02:51:23 UTC
Permalink
On 03 Sep 2004 11:58:59 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
oh, jim, it has been explained in terms even a 10 year kid could
understand. get your older sister to explain it to you.
Well, I don't have an older sister JAXAshy, so perhaps you can try
again.

How is the autoprop not feathering?

The blades swivel to be inline with the axis of the shaft, and present
less drag than in the forward or reverse config. How is that not
feathering?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in
tolerance and free speech," - David Brin
Shen44
2004-09-04 17:15:55 UTC
Permalink
Subject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
Date: 09/03/2004 19:51 Pacific Standard Time
On 03 Sep 2004 11:58:59 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
oh, jim, it has been explained in terms even a 10 year kid could
understand. get your older sister to explain it to you.
Well, I don't have an older sister JAXAshy, so perhaps you can try
again.
How is the autoprop not feathering?
The blades swivel to be inline with the axis of the shaft, and present
less drag than in the forward or reverse config. How is that not
feathering?
Jim, the issue is not whether the autoprop can be called a feathering prop.
The issue is, how long can Doodles keep you arguing the point.


Shen
Jim Richardson
2004-09-04 19:00:34 UTC
Permalink
On 04 Sep 2004 17:15:55 GMT,
Post by Shen44
Subject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
Date: 09/03/2004 19:51 Pacific Standard Time
On 03 Sep 2004 11:58:59 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
oh, jim, it has been explained in terms even a 10 year kid could
understand. get your older sister to explain it to you.
Well, I don't have an older sister JAXAshy, so perhaps you can try
again.
How is the autoprop not feathering?
The blades swivel to be inline with the axis of the shaft, and present
less drag than in the forward or reverse config. How is that not
feathering?
Jim, the issue is not whether the autoprop can be called a feathering prop.
The issue is, how long can Doodles keep you arguing the point.
Yeah, the old adage about mud wrestling with a pig springs to mind...
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Windows XP... now runs all your favorite viruses.
JAXAshby
2004-09-04 21:21:42 UTC
Permalink
that's okay, jimmy. I think of you as a fourth year sophomore failing in his
fifth major on his 12th cup of coffee in the student union cutting yet another
three classes.
Date: 9/4/2004 3:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time
On 04 Sep 2004 17:15:55 GMT,
Post by Shen44
Subject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
Date: 09/03/2004 19:51 Pacific Standard Time
On 03 Sep 2004 11:58:59 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
oh, jim, it has been explained in terms even a 10 year kid could
understand. get your older sister to explain it to you.
Well, I don't have an older sister JAXAshy, so perhaps you can try
again.
How is the autoprop not feathering?
The blades swivel to be inline with the axis of the shaft, and present
less drag than in the forward or reverse config. How is that not
feathering?
Jim, the issue is not whether the autoprop can be called a feathering prop.
The issue is, how long can Doodles keep you arguing the point.
Yeah, the old adage about mud wrestling with a pig springs to mind...
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Windows XP... now runs all your favorite viruses.
Jim Richardson
2004-09-01 09:30:34 UTC
Permalink
On 01 Sep 2004 02:03:35 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
the blades are curved, and rather dramatically so.
So what? feathering a prop doesn't require that there be *no* drag, it's
a way to reduce drag, not eliminate it.

The autoprop blades rotate to parallel to the axis of the shaft, how is
that not feathering?
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this
not feathering?
take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but they
certainly don't "feather".
I have, the blades rotate to line up with the axis of the shaft, how is
that *not* feathering?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed... Oh wait, he does
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Never be in the company of anyone with whom you would not want to die.
-- Fremen Saying
JAXAshby
2004-09-01 11:41:09 UTC
Permalink
jimmy, look at the blades. if you can't see what they look like and what they
do, look at a prop that feathers and you **should** see the difference. if
still not, ask a dockboy to explain it to you.
Date: 9/1/2004 5:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time
On 01 Sep 2004 02:03:35 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
the blades are curved, and rather dramatically so.
So what? feathering a prop doesn't require that there be *no* drag, it's
a way to reduce drag, not eliminate it.
The autoprop blades rotate to parallel to the axis of the shaft, how is
that not feathering?
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this
not feathering?
take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but they
certainly don't "feather".
I have, the blades rotate to line up with the axis of the shaft, how is
that *not* feathering?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed... Oh wait, he
does
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Never be in the company of anyone with whom you would not want to die.
-- Fremen Saying
Jim Richardson
2004-09-02 08:30:27 UTC
Permalink
On 01 Sep 2004 11:41:09 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
jimmy, look at the blades. if you can't see what they look like and what they
do, look at a prop that feathers and you **should** see the difference. if
still not, ask a dockboy to explain it to you.
I had hoped you would have a point, and debate it, rather than simply
sliding into insults.

I guess I was hoping for too much.
Post by JAXAshby
Date: 9/1/2004 5:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time
On 01 Sep 2004 02:03:35 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
the blades are curved, and rather dramatically so.
So what? feathering a prop doesn't require that there be *no* drag, it's
a way to reduce drag, not eliminate it.
The autoprop blades rotate to parallel to the axis of the shaft, how is
that not feathering?
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this
not feathering?
take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but they
certainly don't "feather".
I have, the blades rotate to line up with the axis of the shaft, how is
that *not* feathering?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed... Oh wait, he
does
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Never be in the company of anyone with whom you would not want to die.
-- Fremen Saying
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Contrary to popular belief, Unix is user friendly.
It just happens to be very selective about who its friends are.
-- Kyle Hearn
JAXAshby
2004-09-02 12:14:22 UTC
Permalink
jim, if you choose to redefine every English word to suit your fancy, there is
no debate possible. green is carrots, rum is gravel, curved prop blades are
straight. makes no room for discussion.

you bought one and are trying to convince yourself it was a wise "investment".
Just like gold will reach $2,000 an ounce six weeks after the election.

you are a true-believer, jim, and you pushed the English language around to
form it to your convictions.

who could debate that?
Date: 9/2/2004 4:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time
On 01 Sep 2004 11:41:09 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
jimmy, look at the blades. if you can't see what they look like and what
they
Post by JAXAshby
do, look at a prop that feathers and you **should** see the difference. if
still not, ask a dockboy to explain it to you.
I had hoped you would have a point, and debate it, rather than simply
sliding into insults.
I guess I was hoping for too much.
Post by JAXAshby
Date: 9/1/2004 5:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time
On 01 Sep 2004 02:03:35 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
the blades are curved, and rather dramatically so.
So what? feathering a prop doesn't require that there be *no* drag, it's
a way to reduce drag, not eliminate it.
The autoprop blades rotate to parallel to the axis of the shaft, how is
that not feathering?
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is
this
Post by JAXAshby
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
not feathering?
take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but
they
Post by JAXAshby
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
certainly don't "feather".
I have, the blades rotate to line up with the axis of the shaft, how is
that *not* feathering?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed... Oh wait, he
does
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Never be in the company of anyone with whom you would not want to die.
-- Fremen Saying
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Contrary to popular belief, Unix is user friendly.
It just happens to be very selective about who its friends are.
-- Kyle Hearn
Jim Richardson
2004-09-02 17:30:30 UTC
Permalink
On 02 Sep 2004 12:14:22 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
jim, if you choose to redefine every English word to suit your fancy, there is
no debate possible. green is carrots, rum is gravel, curved prop blades are
straight. makes no room for discussion.
The definition you yourself provided for feathering, fits the autoprop.
The blades rotate to inline with the fluid flow. How is that not
feathering?
Post by JAXAshby
you bought one and are trying to convince yourself it was a wise "investment".
Just like gold will reach $2,000 an ounce six weeks after the election.
you are a true-believer, jim, and you pushed the English language around to
form it to your convictions.
who could debate that?
Well, given that your assumption that I bought one, is in error, the
rest of your "logic" proceding from that error, is equally flawed.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux: There is no conspiracy... yet
-- Matthew Adair
JAXAshby
2004-09-03 04:01:46 UTC
Permalink
no, the chord does. which word don't you understand?
Date: 9/2/2004 1:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time
On 02 Sep 2004 12:14:22 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
jim, if you choose to redefine every English word to suit your fancy, there
is
Post by JAXAshby
no debate possible. green is carrots, rum is gravel, curved prop blades
are
Post by JAXAshby
straight. makes no room for discussion.
The definition you yourself provided for feathering, fits the autoprop.
The blades rotate to inline with the fluid flow. How is that not
feathering?
Post by JAXAshby
you bought one and are trying to convince yourself it was a wise
"investment".
Post by JAXAshby
Just like gold will reach $2,000 an ounce six weeks after the election.
you are a true-believer, jim, and you pushed the English language around to
form it to your convictions.
who could debate that?
Well, given that your assumption that I bought one, is in error, the
rest of your "logic" proceding from that error, is equally flawed.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux: There is no conspiracy... yet
-- Matthew Adair
Jim Richardson
2004-09-03 08:00:30 UTC
Permalink
On 03 Sep 2004 04:01:46 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
no, the chord does. which word don't you understand?
The "chord does" What JAXAshby ?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"Human beings can always be counted on to assert with vigor
their God-given right to be stupid."
-- Dean Koontz
JAXAshby
2004-09-03 11:57:24 UTC
Permalink
jim, redefine any and all words you can to "prove" (to yourself and any
doubters out there) that your spending $2,200 for a prop to make your boat go
1/10th knot faster was one hell of a smart "investment".

the word "feathering" can not be used in the context of a corkscrew prop such
as an auto-prop. except by "investers" mentioned above.

an auto-prop is an auto-prop. the blades twist a little under high power/low
speed, twist a little differently under low power/low speed, and twist
something differently under no power/any speed. the drag on the prop is still
very high indeed (as a percentage) compared to a genuine feathering prop.
auto-props are sold (by the manufacturer at least, if not always by the dealer)
as a variable speed transmission.

keep in mind that props don't drag all that much anyway. according to the MIT
data, even a fixed 3 blade only pulled 170# on a boat at 5 knots, or about the
equivelent of 2-1/2 hp.
Date: 9/3/2004 4:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time
On 03 Sep 2004 04:01:46 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
no, the chord does. which word don't you understand?
The "chord does" What JAXAshby ?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"Human beings can always be counted on to assert with vigor
their God-given right to be stupid."
-- Dean Koontz
Jim Richardson
2004-09-04 02:49:58 UTC
Permalink
On 03 Sep 2004 11:57:24 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
jim, redefine any and all words you can to "prove" (to yourself and
any doubters out there) that your spending $2,200 for a prop to make
your boat go 1/10th knot faster was one hell of a smart "investment".
Why do you insist on claiming I bought an autoprop?
Post by JAXAshby
the word "feathering" can not be used in the context of a corkscrew
prop such as an auto-prop. except by "investers" mentioned above.
Then why did you post a definition of feathering, which fit the
autoprop?
Post by JAXAshby
an auto-prop is an auto-prop. the blades twist a little under high
power/low speed, twist a little differently under low power/low speed,
and twist something differently under no power/any speed. the drag on
the prop is still very high indeed (as a percentage) compared to a
genuine feathering prop. auto-props are sold (by the manufacturer at
least, if not always by the dealer) as a variable speed transmission.
Fact remains, the blades on the autoprop swivel to be inline with the
shaft, and present less drag than in the forward or reverse direction,
how is that not feathering?
Post by JAXAshby
keep in mind that props don't drag all that much anyway. according to
the MIT data, even a fixed 3 blade only pulled 170# on a boat at 5
knots, or about the equivelent of 2-1/2 hp.
Not relevent to the issue. It may mean that the autoprop wouldn't be
worth the cost, don't know, haven't bought one, don't plan to. Although
we will be replacing WindWalker's prop this next year, it's likely going
to be a fixed prop, simply because of cost. Some possibility of a
maxprop, but that's only if we think the cost is affordable.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Does Emacs have the Buddha nature? Why not? It has bloody well
everything else
JAXAshby
2004-09-04 13:06:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Richardson
Why do you insist on claiming I bought an autoprop?
because no one but someone who threw $2,200 on the table for such a tiny
improvement in forward speed would write the junk you write. an auto-prop is a
variable speed transmission, not a feathering prop.
Jim Richardson
2004-09-04 17:30:33 UTC
Permalink
On 04 Sep 2004 13:06:10 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Why do you insist on claiming I bought an autoprop?
because no one but someone who threw $2,200 on the table for such a
tiny improvement in forward speed would write the junk you write. an
auto-prop is a variable speed transmission, not a feathering prop.
the prop is a *transmission*? OK, that's funny.

But given your accuracy in other areas, I guess that kind of claim is to
be expected.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"$HOME is where your dotfiles are"
- Gym Quirk
JAXAshby
2004-09-04 21:16:40 UTC
Permalink
jim, the word transmission was used a metaphor. the auto-prop changes its
pitch to match engine power with boat speed. kinda.
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Why do you insist on claiming I bought an autoprop?
because no one but someone who threw $2,200 on the table for such a
tiny improvement in forward speed would write the junk you write. an
auto-prop is a variable speed transmission, not a feathering prop.
the prop is a *transmission*? OK, that's funny.
But given your accuracy in other areas, I guess that kind of claim is to
be expected.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"$HOME is where your dotfiles are"
- Gym Quirk
JAXAshby
2004-09-04 13:08:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Richardson
Then why did you post a definition of feathering, which fit the
autoprop?
it does not fit. not even close. and if you had not blown $2,200 on a prop
hoping against hope you could make your boat *sail* faster you would know the
difference.

Did the dealer tell you you could pass Island Packets and Westsail 32 if you
bought an auto-prop?
Jim Richardson
2004-09-04 17:30:34 UTC
Permalink
On 04 Sep 2004 13:08:18 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Then why did you post a definition of feathering, which fit the
autoprop?
it does not fit. not even close. and if you had not blown $2,200 on a prop
hoping against hope you could make your boat *sail* faster you would know the
difference.
Did the dealer tell you you could pass Island Packets and Westsail 32 if you
bought an auto-prop?
I didn't buy one JAXAshby. I simply wanted to know what you meant by
calling it a non-feathering prop. Alas, I should have known better than
to expect rational discourse from you.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
'Windows' really does make a fine swear word, representing all that's
taboo and awful - just like 'shit', 'fuck', etc."
-- Mark Hughes, sdm
JAXAshby
2004-09-04 21:19:13 UTC
Permalink
jim, the term "feathering" means to twist the blades into a streamline position
with a teeny, tiny, itzy, bitsy, little, small fraction of the drag presented
by blades in operating under power position.

understand now?
Date: 9/4/2004 1:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time
On 04 Sep 2004 13:08:18 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Then why did you post a definition of feathering, which fit the
autoprop?
it does not fit. not even close. and if you had not blown $2,200 on a
prop
Post by JAXAshby
hoping against hope you could make your boat *sail* faster you would know
the
Post by JAXAshby
difference.
Did the dealer tell you you could pass Island Packets and Westsail 32 if
you
Post by JAXAshby
bought an auto-prop?
I didn't buy one JAXAshby. I simply wanted to know what you meant by
calling it a non-feathering prop. Alas, I should have known better than
to expect rational discourse from you.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
'Windows' really does make a fine swear word, representing all that's
taboo and awful - just like 'shit', 'fuck', etc."
-- Mark Hughes, sdm
Jim Richardson
2004-09-04 23:30:33 UTC
Permalink
On 04 Sep 2004 21:19:13 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
jim, the term "feathering" means to twist the blades into a streamline
position with a teeny, tiny, itzy, bitsy, little, small fraction of
the drag presented by blades in operating under power position.
understand now?
yeah, the autoprop turns it's blades, to be parallel to the axis of the
shaft, resulting in less drag than in the fwd or reverse direction,.
How is that not feathering?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Go the extra mile. It makes your boss look like an
incompetent slacker.
Jeff Morris
2004-09-04 21:40:54 UTC
Permalink
If you insist on calling the Autoprop "feathering" then you have to admit its a
pretty poor one, having 5 to 10 times the drag of other feathering props. For
example, in the MIT/Practical Sailor test, at about 7 knots the Autoprop had 10
pounds of drag, while the 2 and 3 blade Maxprop feathering props had about 1 and
2 pounds respectively. The folding props were so low they weren't shown. 10
pounds of drag is pretty good, compared to the 25 to 35 pounds for many of the
props in the test, but it isn't the same as feathering. The Autoprop has some
interesting properties, like very good performance in reverse, if you rev it up.
Post by Jim Richardson
On 04 Sep 2004 13:08:18 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Then why did you post a definition of feathering, which fit the
autoprop?
it does not fit. not even close. and if you had not blown $2,200 on a prop
hoping against hope you could make your boat *sail* faster you would know the
difference.
Did the dealer tell you you could pass Island Packets and Westsail 32 if you
bought an auto-prop?
I didn't buy one JAXAshby. I simply wanted to know what you meant by
calling it a non-feathering prop. Alas, I should have known better than
to expect rational discourse from you.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
'Windows' really does make a fine swear word, representing all that's
taboo and awful - just like 'shit', 'fuck', etc."
-- Mark Hughes, sdm
JAXAshby
2004-09-04 21:54:28 UTC
Permalink
jeff, are you sure of that 25 to 35 pound figure at 7 knots? I recall 170# at
5 knots.

35# at 7 knots is only about 3/4 hp. not worth thinking about.
Post by Jeff Morris
If you insist on calling the Autoprop "feathering" then you have to admit its a
pretty poor one, having 5 to 10 times the drag of other feathering props.
For
example, in the MIT/Practical Sailor test, at about 7 knots the Autoprop had 10
pounds of drag, while the 2 and 3 blade Maxprop feathering props had about 1 and
2 pounds respectively. The folding props were so low they weren't shown. 10
pounds of drag is pretty good, compared to the 25 to 35 pounds for many of the
props in the test, but it isn't the same as feathering. The Autoprop has some
interesting properties, like very good performance in reverse, if you rev it up.
Post by Jim Richardson
On 04 Sep 2004 13:08:18 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Then why did you post a definition of feathering, which fit the
autoprop?
it does not fit. not even close. and if you had not blown $2,200 on a
prop
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
hoping against hope you could make your boat *sail* faster you would know
the
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
difference.
Did the dealer tell you you could pass Island Packets and Westsail 32 if
you
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
bought an auto-prop?
I didn't buy one JAXAshby. I simply wanted to know what you meant by
calling it a non-feathering prop. Alas, I should have known better than
to expect rational discourse from you.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
'Windows' really does make a fine swear word, representing all that's
taboo and awful - just like 'shit', 'fuck', etc."
-- Mark Hughes, sdm
Jeff Morris
2004-09-04 23:15:38 UTC
Permalink
I'm reading from the Jan 1,1995 article "MIT Propeller Test - Part 2." The
Michigan Wheel 3-blade had about 70 pounds drag at 8 knots. This is a huge
amount of drag, costing maybe 10% of boat speed. The earlier article (Oct 1,
'93) had the same numbers plus a discussion on how much speed this would cost.
They predicted 1/3 of a knot improvement, averaged over a wide variety of
conditions, for a 25 foot boat when removing a 3 blade prop.

I'd agree with some of your conclusions, especially that a folding prop is
perhaps not useful for the OP's Westsail. Since a 2-blade fixed can be lined up
in the aperture to minimize drag, there's little reason to sacrifice reverse
capability with a folder. I can't imagine trying to "crash stop" a Westsail
with a poor performing prop.

However, this is not true for a lot of boats. Many fin keel boats have the prop
too far from the keel to benefit from lining it up. Boats with Saildrives don't
have that option. Light weight boats that rely on low drag would be affected
worse by a high drag prop. And catamarans, with two props would have double the
drag with fixed props.
Post by JAXAshby
jeff, are you sure of that 25 to 35 pound figure at 7 knots? I recall 170# at
5 knots.
35# at 7 knots is only about 3/4 hp. not worth thinking about.
Post by Jeff Morris
If you insist on calling the Autoprop "feathering" then you have to admit its a
pretty poor one, having 5 to 10 times the drag of other feathering props.
For
example, in the MIT/Practical Sailor test, at about 7 knots the Autoprop had 10
pounds of drag, while the 2 and 3 blade Maxprop feathering props had about 1 and
2 pounds respectively. The folding props were so low they weren't shown. 10
pounds of drag is pretty good, compared to the 25 to 35 pounds for many of the
props in the test, but it isn't the same as feathering. The Autoprop has some
interesting properties, like very good performance in reverse, if you rev it up.
Post by Jim Richardson
On 04 Sep 2004 13:08:18 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Then why did you post a definition of feathering, which fit the
autoprop?
it does not fit. not even close. and if you had not blown $2,200 on a
prop
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
hoping against hope you could make your boat *sail* faster you would know
the
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
difference.
Did the dealer tell you you could pass Island Packets and Westsail 32 if
you
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
bought an auto-prop?
I didn't buy one JAXAshby. I simply wanted to know what you meant by
calling it a non-feathering prop. Alas, I should have known better than
to expect rational discourse from you.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
'Windows' really does make a fine swear word, representing all that's
taboo and awful - just like 'shit', 'fuck', etc."
-- Mark Hughes, sdm
JAXAshby
2004-09-05 00:51:15 UTC
Permalink
10% of max boat speed = 1/3 knot??

That one heap slow mutha boat.
Post by Jeff Morris
I'm reading from the Jan 1,1995 article "MIT Propeller Test - Part 2." The
Michigan Wheel 3-blade had about 70 pounds drag at 8 knots. This is a huge
amount of drag, costing maybe 10% of boat speed. The earlier article (Oct 1,
'93) had the same numbers plus a discussion on how much speed this would cost.
They predicted 1/3 of a knot improvement, averaged over a wide variety of
conditions, for a 25 foot boat when removing a 3 blade prop.
I'd agree with some of your conclusions, especially that a folding prop is
perhaps not useful for the OP's Westsail. Since a 2-blade fixed can be lined up
in the aperture to minimize drag, there's little reason to sacrifice reverse
capability with a folder. I can't imagine trying to "crash stop" a Westsail
with a poor performing prop.
However, this is not true for a lot of boats. Many fin keel boats have the prop
too far from the keel to benefit from lining it up. Boats with Saildrives don't
have that option. Light weight boats that rely on low drag would be affected
worse by a high drag prop. And catamarans, with two props would have double the
drag with fixed props.
Post by JAXAshby
jeff, are you sure of that 25 to 35 pound figure at 7 knots? I recall 170#
at
Post by JAXAshby
5 knots.
35# at 7 knots is only about 3/4 hp. not worth thinking about.
Post by Jeff Morris
If you insist on calling the Autoprop "feathering" then you have to admit
its
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jeff Morris
a
pretty poor one, having 5 to 10 times the drag of other feathering props.
For
example, in the MIT/Practical Sailor test, at about 7 knots the Autoprop
had
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jeff Morris
10
pounds of drag, while the 2 and 3 blade Maxprop feathering props had about
1
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jeff Morris
and
2 pounds respectively. The folding props were so low they weren't shown.
10
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jeff Morris
pounds of drag is pretty good, compared to the 25 to 35 pounds for many of the
props in the test, but it isn't the same as feathering. The Autoprop has some
interesting properties, like very good performance in reverse, if you rev
it
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jeff Morris
up.
Post by Jim Richardson
On 04 Sep 2004 13:08:18 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Then why did you post a definition of feathering, which fit the
autoprop?
it does not fit. not even close. and if you had not blown $2,200 on
a
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jeff Morris
prop
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
hoping against hope you could make your boat *sail* faster you would
know
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jeff Morris
the
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
difference.
Did the dealer tell you you could pass Island Packets and Westsail 32
if
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jeff Morris
you
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
bought an auto-prop?
I didn't buy one JAXAshby. I simply wanted to know what you meant by
calling it a non-feathering prop. Alas, I should have known better than
to expect rational discourse from you.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
'Windows' really does make a fine swear word, representing all that's
taboo and awful - just like 'shit', 'fuck', etc."
-- Mark Hughes, sdm
Shen44
2004-09-04 23:25:53 UTC
Permalink
ubject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
From: "Jeff Morris"
If you insist on calling the Autoprop "feathering" then you have to admit its a
pretty poor one, having 5 to 10 times the drag of other feathering props.
For
example, in the MIT/Practical Sailor test, at about 7 knots the Autoprop had 10
pounds of drag, while the 2 and 3 blade Maxprop feathering props had about 1 and
2 pounds respectively. The folding props were so low they weren't shown. 10
pounds of drag is pretty good, compared to the 25 to 35 pounds for many of the
props in the test, but it isn't the same as feathering. The Autoprop has some
interesting properties, like very good performance in reverse, if you rev
From this, and looking at diagrams of both the "maxprop" and "autoprop", it
appears that both designs can rightly call themselves "feathering".
However, it appears that the design of the hub of the autoprop is such that it
still creates a marked amount of drag which has little to do with the
shape/curvature of the blades.
Agree/disagree/comments?

Shen
Jim Richardson
2004-09-05 00:00:35 UTC
Permalink
On 04 Sep 2004 23:25:53 GMT,
Post by Shen44
ubject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
From: "Jeff Morris"
If you insist on calling the Autoprop "feathering" then you have to admit its a
pretty poor one, having 5 to 10 times the drag of other feathering props.
For
example, in the MIT/Practical Sailor test, at about 7 knots the Autoprop had 10
pounds of drag, while the 2 and 3 blade Maxprop feathering props had about 1 and
2 pounds respectively. The folding props were so low they weren't shown. 10
pounds of drag is pretty good, compared to the 25 to 35 pounds for many of the
props in the test, but it isn't the same as feathering. The Autoprop has some
interesting properties, like very good performance in reverse, if you rev
From this, and looking at diagrams of both the "maxprop" and "autoprop", it
appears that both designs can rightly call themselves "feathering".
However, it appears that the design of the hub of the autoprop is such that it
still creates a marked amount of drag which has little to do with the
shape/curvature of the blades.
Agree/disagree/comments?
Shen
Sounds about right to me, the autprop looks like it would produce
significantly more drag than the Max prop to me, and that both, would
produce less drag than a fixed. Since I think the autoprop is about the
same $$ as the Max prop, I'd go for the Max, unless there was some real
good reason otherwise. Maintenance maybe? is the Max prop a lot more
work to maintain?
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"`If there's anything more important than my ego around, I
want it caught and shot now.'"
-- Zaphod
Jim Richardson
2004-09-04 23:30:34 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 17:40:54 -0400,
Post by Jeff Morris
If you insist on calling the Autoprop "feathering" then you have to
admit its a pretty poor one, having 5 to 10 times the drag of other
feathering props. For example, in the MIT/Practical Sailor test, at
about 7 knots the Autoprop had 10 pounds of drag, while the 2 and 3
blade Maxprop feathering props had about 1 and 2 pounds respectively.
The folding props were so low they weren't shown. 10 pounds of drag
is pretty good, compared to the 25 to 35 pounds for many of the props
in the test, but it isn't the same as feathering. The Autoprop has
some interesting properties, like very good performance in reverse, if
you rev it up.
I agree that it's not as low drag as the max prop, it also has way too
much rotating mass for my likes, which is one reason I wouldn't buy one.
But the mechanism is pretty simple, and the thing has a fairly
significant reduction in drag, over a fixed prop yes?

I do find JAXAshby's posts amusing however. although I suppose it's rude
to toy with the retarded kid.
Post by Jeff Morris
Post by Jim Richardson
On 04 Sep 2004 13:08:18 GMT,
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Then why did you post a definition of feathering, which fit the
autoprop?
it does not fit. not even close. and if you had not blown $2,200 on a prop
hoping against hope you could make your boat *sail* faster you would know
the
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
difference.
Did the dealer tell you you could pass Island Packets and Westsail 32 if you
bought an auto-prop?
I didn't buy one JAXAshby. I simply wanted to know what you meant by
calling it a non-feathering prop. Alas, I should have known better than
to expect rational discourse from you.
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
'Windows' really does make a fine swear word, representing all that's
taboo and awful - just like 'shit', 'fuck', etc."
-- Mark Hughes, sdm
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Sin lies only in hurting other people unnecessarily. All other 'sins' are
invented nonsense. (Hurting yourself is not sinful - just stupid.)
-- Lazarus Long
JAXAshby
2004-09-04 13:09:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Richardson
Fact remains, the blades on the autoprop swivel to be inline
a corkscrew surface can not be "inline" with anything except another corkscrew
surface
Post by Jim Richardson
with the
shaft, and present less drag than in the forward or reverse direction,
how is that not feathering?
Robert Larder
2004-09-04 14:37:17 UTC
Permalink
JAX,
Just to get something clear, are you talking about the prop shown under
"Diagram" on the Autoprop website- http://www.autoprop.com/ ?
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Jim Richardson
Fact remains, the blades on the autoprop swivel to be inline
a corkscrew surface can not be "inline" with anything except another
corkscrew surface
Post by Jim Richardson
with the
shaft, and present less drag than in the forward or reverse
direction,
how is that not feathering?
JAXAshby
2004-09-04 13:15:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Richardson
Post by JAXAshby
keep in mind that props don't drag all that much anyway. according to
the MIT data, even a fixed 3 blade only pulled 170# on a boat at 5
knots, or about the equivelent of 2-1/2 hp.
Not relevent to the issue. It may mean that the autoprop wouldn't be
worth the cost, don't know, haven't bought one, don't plan to. Although
we will be replacing WindWalker's prop this next year, it's likely going
to be a fixed prop, simply because of cost. Some possibility of a
maxprop, but that's only if we think the cost is affordable.
but, it very much was the question asked in the beginning of this tread.

an auto-prop is NOT a folding prop -- which gives the least drag as compared
to a fixed prop -- and is NOT a feathering prop in any sense in which the word
feathering is used.

an auto-prop is a variable speed transmission.

in addition, in the context of the title of this thread, NO a folding prop is
not much use except to racers. The drag of a fixed three blade prop ain't all
that much, the drag of a fixed two blade prop is much less than a three, and a
fixed two blade aligned behind the keel has even less drag.

the difference in drag between a fixed two blade prop aligned behind the keel
and a folding prop is like picking up nickles on the street.
Post by Jim Richardson
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Does Emacs have the Buddha nature? Why not? It has bloody well
everything else
Jeff Morris
2004-09-04 22:32:33 UTC
Permalink
"JAXAshby" <***@aol.com> wrote in message news:***@mb-m22.aol.com...
...
Post by JAXAshby
keep in mind that props don't drag all that much anyway. according to the MIT
data, even a fixed 3 blade only pulled 170# on a boat at 5 knots, or about the
equivelent of 2-1/2 hp.
That's not much drag??? That's roughly the drag from a 25 knot breeze! Are
you saying that this would have no affect on boat speed?

Are you claiming that a having a 2.5 hp engine pulling backwards would have
little affect on speed? At the low RPMs many boats use to go 5 knots, they only
use 10 to 12 hp to go forward
JAXAshby
2004-09-05 00:49:37 UTC
Permalink
jeffies, a boat under sail has one hell of a lot more drag than a boat motoring
in a flat calm.

also, keep in mind that the boat under discussion is a Westsail 32, a boat
usually having a minimum of 30 hp installed, and often 40+ hp.

A Westsail 32 with a 10 to 12 hp engine installed is unmarketable. One would
need one hell of a lot patience to wait for wind and tide before setting off.
Post by Jeff Morris
Post by JAXAshby
keep in mind that props don't drag all that much anyway. according to the
MIT
Post by JAXAshby
data, even a fixed 3 blade only pulled 170# on a boat at 5 knots, or about
the
Post by JAXAshby
equivelent of 2-1/2 hp.
That's not much drag??? That's roughly the drag from a 25 knot breeze!
Are
you saying that this would have no affect on boat speed?
Are you claiming that a having a 2.5 hp engine pulling backwards would have
little affect on speed? At the low RPMs many boats use to go 5 knots, they only
use 10 to 12 hp to go forward
Shen44
2004-09-02 18:34:34 UTC
Permalink
Subject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
I had hoped you would have a point, and debate it, rather than simply
sliding into insults.
I guess I was hoping for too much.
He had neither a point to make nor the ability or interest to debate it.
As per usual, Doodles was just trying to "stir the pot".
He probably has less experience with feathering props than I do, and I have
none .... only used to "zero pitch" type props.

Shen
rhys
2004-08-30 16:33:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by JAXAshby
rhys, hate to tell you this, but an Auto-Prop doesn't feather.
From www.autoprop.com

"In forward the propellor rotates to the correct pitch automatically.
This results in increased propulsion efficiency whcih reduces fuel
consumption, and extends cruising range.

"While under sail the propellor feathers itself to reduce drag by 85%
compared to conventional 3-blade propellors.

"The Autoprop also self pitches in reverse to give you the same thrust
in reverse as you would get in forward. This greatly improves stopping
power, backing down, and overall maneuverability."

Note the use of the word "feather" as in "feathers itself", a concept
with which I believe you would be familiar, JAX, particularly on
those lonely Saturday nights.
Post by JAXAshby
Still, the clown spent $3,500 Cdn, so you gotta expect him to tell you
*something*
That "clown" has seen more salt water than Mr. Morton during a flash
flood, JAX, including the first private yacht transit of Hudson's Bay
since...well, Hudson, so let's just say he doesn't quite have the
credibility gap you exhibit with most of your bilious, ill-informed,
poorly argued and borderline dyslexic posts.

Now, punk, go measure a footwell or something. Sailors are speaking
here.

Really, could the barrel get any smaller or the fish and the cannon
any bigger?

R.
Rodney Myrvaagnes
2004-08-29 00:21:26 UTC
Permalink
There is another J36 at our marina, which has a fixed prop. It is
astonishingly slower than our boat. I know the sails aren't identical,
but we have caught them going to windward when we didn't even have a
jib hoisted.

Their bottom is cleaner or as clean.On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 05:02:39 GMT,
Post by Paul L
Its real easy to test, as I can get my folding 3 blade to stay open. I can
see the boat speed, then have it fold and measure the speed. It is
significant. If the MIT tests say otherwise then they are not testing
reality - wanna guess what errors they made in the test or you in the
interpretation??.
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop
no, you won't. folding props only hve value for racing boats, where 2 seconds
a mile means the difference between 2nd place and 6th.
According to MIT tests, a folding prop means a savings of a mere 170 pounds
drag at 5 knots (or 40 pounds drag at 2-1/2 knots, or 10 pounds drag at 1-1/4
knots) over a ---------> three <------------ blade prop. ***Much*** less with
compared to a two-blade, and even less compared to a two-blade rotated verticle
behind the keel.
Wanna guess just how much powered is required to pull 170# at 5 knots?
Rodney Myrvaagnes NYC


We have achieved faith-based science,
faith-based economics, faith-based law
enforcement, and faith-based missile
defense.
What's next? Faith-based air traffic control?
Rosalie B.
2004-08-28 15:13:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop. Depending on the prop you buy, you should see better
power/control in reverse too. They are very reliable now, so I don't think
that is a down side. The biggest downside is their cost. I have a Max prop
and think it great.
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by MLapla4120
I'm going to re-power soon and am also going to get new shaft and prop.
It seems that in my boat class (Westsail 32), some people are going
to folding props to help speed under sail.
I'm for increased speed, but also want reliability. My current bronze
propeller is pitted and old. Every time I turn around and look at it, it
is full of sea growth. That makes me think I'm getting poor performance.
So, I'm for an improvement, but I am unsure of what kind.
Any opinions from boaters that have encountered this situation would be
appreciated.
We have a feathering prop (vs a folding prop) and we do get an
increase of about 1/2 knot under sail, and it also backs better under
power. I haven't tried to quantify the backing under power - it is
just what we feel.

Disadvantages are - you lose a bit of power forward because the blades
are flat and the prop takes a bit more maintenance than a fixed prop.

[We were sailing but had the engine on in neutral so the prop was not
feathered - we were running the refrigeration- and when we had
finished that, we turned off the engine and feathered the prop, and
our speed increased 1/2 knot - same wind and current. Now I know this
is not a completely scientific test, but it is significant to us.
There are also people in our group who did tests with a fixed prop
over a measured course, and then did the same tests with a folding
prop over the same course and found a similar result.]




grandma Rosalie
JAXAshby
2004-08-28 15:44:58 UTC
Permalink
Rosalie, your prop was also turning while you were running the engine. that
alone is one hell of a drag.
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop. Depending on the prop you buy, you should see better
power/control in reverse too. They are very reliable now, so I don't think
that is a down side. The biggest downside is their cost. I have a Max prop
and think it great.
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by MLapla4120
I'm going to re-power soon and am also going to get new shaft and prop.
It seems that in my boat class (Westsail 32), some people are going
to folding props to help speed under sail.
I'm for increased speed, but also want reliability. My current bronze
propeller is pitted and old. Every time I turn around and look at it, it
is full of sea growth. That makes me think I'm getting poor performance.
So, I'm for an improvement, but I am unsure of what kind.
Any opinions from boaters that have encountered this situation would be
appreciated.
We have a feathering prop (vs a folding prop) and we do get an
increase of about 1/2 knot under sail, and it also backs better under
power. I haven't tried to quantify the backing under power - it is
just what we feel.
Disadvantages are - you lose a bit of power forward because the blades
are flat and the prop takes a bit more maintenance than a fixed prop.
[We were sailing but had the engine on in neutral so the prop was not
feathered - we were running the refrigeration- and when we had
finished that, we turned off the engine and feathered the prop, and
our speed increased 1/2 knot - same wind and current. Now I know this
is not a completely scientific test, but it is significant to us.
There are also people in our group who did tests with a fixed prop
over a measured course, and then did the same tests with a folding
prop over the same course and found a similar result.]
grandma Rosalie
Rosalie B.
2004-08-28 17:28:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by JAXAshby
Rosalie, your prop was also turning while you were running the engine. that
alone is one hell of a drag.
That's what I was saying. When the engine is running the prop is
turning. When we shut the engine down and feather the prop the prop
doesn't spin the shaft anymore. That's why we got it - so that the
shaft wouldn't spin under sail.

I don't know if the prop spinning under sail has more drag than one (a
three blade one) that is stationary but not feathered, but the only
way we could keep it from turning while under sail would be to put
vise grips on the shaft.
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop. Depending on the prop you buy, you should see better
power/control in reverse too. They are very reliable now, so I don't think
that is a down side. The biggest downside is their cost. I have a Max prop
and think it great.
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by MLapla4120
I'm going to re-power soon and am also going to get new shaft and prop.
It seems that in my boat class (Westsail 32), some people are going
to folding props to help speed under sail.
I'm for increased speed, but also want reliability. My current bronze
propeller is pitted and old. Every time I turn around and look at it, it
is full of sea growth. That makes me think I'm getting poor performance.
So, I'm for an improvement, but I am unsure of what kind.
Any opinions from boaters that have encountered this situation would be
appreciated.
We have a feathering prop (vs a folding prop) and we do get an
increase of about 1/2 knot under sail, and it also backs better under
power. I haven't tried to quantify the backing under power - it is
just what we feel.
Disadvantages are - you lose a bit of power forward because the blades
are flat and the prop takes a bit more maintenance than a fixed prop.
[We were sailing but had the engine on in neutral so the prop was not
feathered - we were running the refrigeration- and when we had
finished that, we turned off the engine and feathered the prop, and
our speed increased 1/2 knot - same wind and current. Now I know this
is not a completely scientific test, but it is significant to us.
There are also people in our group who did tests with a fixed prop
over a measured course, and then did the same tests with a folding
prop over the same course and found a similar result.]
grandma Rosalie
grandma Rosalie
JAXAshby
2004-08-28 23:51:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rosalie B.
I don't know if the prop spinning under sail has more drag than one (a
three blade one) that is stationary but not feathered,
It does, but quite a bit.
MMC
2004-08-28 19:34:55 UTC
Permalink
Uh huh, and the point would be?
Post by JAXAshby
Rosalie, your prop was also turning while you were running the engine.
that
Post by JAXAshby
alone is one hell of a drag.
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with a
folding prop. Depending on the prop you buy, you should see better
power/control in reverse too. They are very reliable now, so I don't think
that is a down side. The biggest downside is their cost. I have a Max prop
and think it great.
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by MLapla4120
I'm going to re-power soon and am also going to get new shaft and prop.
It seems that in my boat class (Westsail 32), some people are going
to folding props to help speed under sail.
I'm for increased speed, but also want reliability. My current bronze
propeller is pitted and old. Every time I turn around and look at it, it
is full of sea growth. That makes me think I'm getting poor performance.
So, I'm for an improvement, but I am unsure of what kind.
Any opinions from boaters that have encountered this situation would be
appreciated.
We have a feathering prop (vs a folding prop) and we do get an
increase of about 1/2 knot under sail, and it also backs better under
power. I haven't tried to quantify the backing under power - it is
just what we feel.
Disadvantages are - you lose a bit of power forward because the blades
are flat and the prop takes a bit more maintenance than a fixed prop.
[We were sailing but had the engine on in neutral so the prop was not
feathered - we were running the refrigeration- and when we had
finished that, we turned off the engine and feathered the prop, and
our speed increased 1/2 knot - same wind and current. Now I know this
is not a completely scientific test, but it is significant to us.
There are also people in our group who did tests with a fixed prop
over a measured course, and then did the same tests with a folding
prop over the same course and found a similar result.]
grandma Rosalie
JAXAshby
2004-08-28 23:52:23 UTC
Permalink
uhhhhhhhh, mmc? which word didn't you understand?
Date: 8/28/2004 3:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Uh huh, and the point would be?
Post by JAXAshby
Rosalie, your prop was also turning while you were running the engine.
that
Post by JAXAshby
alone is one hell of a drag.
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with
a
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
folding prop. Depending on the prop you buy, you should see better
power/control in reverse too. They are very reliable now, so I don't
think
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
that is a down side. The biggest downside is their cost. I have a Max
prop
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
and think it great.
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by MLapla4120
I'm going to re-power soon and am also going to get new shaft and
prop.
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
It seems that in my boat class (Westsail 32), some people are going
to folding props to help speed under sail.
I'm for increased speed, but also want reliability. My current
bronze
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
propeller is pitted and old. Every time I turn around and look at it,
it
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
is full of sea growth. That makes me think I'm getting poor
performance.
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
So, I'm for an improvement, but I am unsure of what kind.
Any opinions from boaters that have encountered this situation would
be
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
appreciated.
We have a feathering prop (vs a folding prop) and we do get an
increase of about 1/2 knot under sail, and it also backs better under
power. I haven't tried to quantify the backing under power - it is
just what we feel.
Disadvantages are - you lose a bit of power forward because the blades
are flat and the prop takes a bit more maintenance than a fixed prop.
[We were sailing but had the engine on in neutral so the prop was not
feathered - we were running the refrigeration- and when we had
finished that, we turned off the engine and feathered the prop, and
our speed increased 1/2 knot - same wind and current. Now I know this
is not a completely scientific test, but it is significant to us.
There are also people in our group who did tests with a fixed prop
over a measured course, and then did the same tests with a folding
prop over the same course and found a similar result.]
grandma Rosalie
MMC
2004-08-29 16:01:32 UTC
Permalink
What I understand from any of your postings is that you are incredibly
insecure, misinformed, and HAVE to have the last word.
My point was, Rosalie had performed her own test on drag with prop folded
and unfolded and stated her results. You're pointing out that her prop was
turning and creating drag really didn't support your fantasy position in
this discussion. My fixed prop turns too, when in forward, reverse, or in
idle and sailing. In fact, the only time it doesn't turn is when the boat is
dockside. Amazing, huh?
I've avoided responding to your posts for years, but couldn't when you
lamely tried to make Rosalie look bad when all she was doing was
participating in a discussion (which she understands better than you do).
Post by JAXAshby
uhhhhhhhh, mmc? which word didn't you understand?
Date: 8/28/2004 3:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Uh huh, and the point would be?
Post by JAXAshby
Rosalie, your prop was also turning while you were running the engine.
that
Post by JAXAshby
alone is one hell of a drag.
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail with
a
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
folding prop. Depending on the prop you buy, you should see better
power/control in reverse too. They are very reliable now, so I don't
think
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
that is a down side. The biggest downside is their cost. I have a Max
prop
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
and think it great.
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by MLapla4120
I'm going to re-power soon and am also going to get new shaft and
prop.
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
It seems that in my boat class (Westsail 32), some people are going
to folding props to help speed under sail.
I'm for increased speed, but also want reliability. My current
bronze
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
propeller is pitted and old. Every time I turn around and look at it,
it
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
is full of sea growth. That makes me think I'm getting poor
performance.
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
So, I'm for an improvement, but I am unsure of what kind.
Any opinions from boaters that have encountered this situation would
be
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
appreciated.
We have a feathering prop (vs a folding prop) and we do get an
increase of about 1/2 knot under sail, and it also backs better under
power. I haven't tried to quantify the backing under power - it is
just what we feel.
Disadvantages are - you lose a bit of power forward because the blades
are flat and the prop takes a bit more maintenance than a fixed prop.
[We were sailing but had the engine on in neutral so the prop was not
feathered - we were running the refrigeration- and when we had
finished that, we turned off the engine and feathered the prop, and
our speed increased 1/2 knot - same wind and current. Now I know this
is not a completely scientific test, but it is significant to us.
There are also people in our group who did tests with a fixed prop
over a measured course, and then did the same tests with a folding
prop over the same course and found a similar result.]
grandma Rosalie
JAXAshby
2004-08-30 03:37:59 UTC
Permalink
mmc, go away. you are a lying sack of squat trying to get people hurt. go
away.
Date: 8/29/2004 12:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time
What I understand from any of your postings is that you are incredibly
insecure, misinformed, and HAVE to have the last word.
My point was, Rosalie had performed her own test on drag with prop folded
and unfolded and stated her results. You're pointing out that her prop was
turning and creating drag really didn't support your fantasy position in
this discussion. My fixed prop turns too, when in forward, reverse, or in
idle and sailing. In fact, the only time it doesn't turn is when the boat is
dockside. Amazing, huh?
I've avoided responding to your posts for years, but couldn't when you
lamely tried to make Rosalie look bad when all she was doing was
participating in a discussion (which she understands better than you do).
Post by JAXAshby
uhhhhhhhh, mmc? which word didn't you understand?
Date: 8/28/2004 3:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Uh huh, and the point would be?
Post by JAXAshby
Rosalie, your prop was also turning while you were running the engine.
that
Post by JAXAshby
alone is one hell of a drag.
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
You will definitely will see a decent speed improvement under sail
with
Post by JAXAshby
a
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
folding prop. Depending on the prop you buy, you should see better
power/control in reverse too. They are very reliable now, so I don't
think
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
that is a down side. The biggest downside is their cost. I have a Max
prop
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
and think it great.
Paul
www.jcruiser.org
Post by MLapla4120
I'm going to re-power soon and am also going to get new shaft and
prop.
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
It seems that in my boat class (Westsail 32), some people are
going
Post by JAXAshby
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
to folding props to help speed under sail.
I'm for increased speed, but also want reliability. My current
bronze
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
propeller is pitted and old. Every time I turn around and look at
it,
Post by JAXAshby
it
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
is full of sea growth. That makes me think I'm getting poor
performance.
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
So, I'm for an improvement, but I am unsure of what kind.
Any opinions from boaters that have encountered this situation
would
Post by JAXAshby
be
Post by JAXAshby
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Paul L
Post by MLapla4120
appreciated.
We have a feathering prop (vs a folding prop) and we do get an
increase of about 1/2 knot under sail, and it also backs better under
power. I haven't tried to quantify the backing under power - it is
just what we feel.
Disadvantages are - you lose a bit of power forward because the blades
are flat and the prop takes a bit more maintenance than a fixed prop.
[We were sailing but had the engine on in neutral so the prop was not
feathered - we were running the refrigeration- and when we had
finished that, we turned off the engine and feathered the prop, and
our speed increased 1/2 knot - same wind and current. Now I know this
is not a completely scientific test, but it is significant to us.
There are also people in our group who did tests with a fixed prop
over a measured course, and then did the same tests with a folding
prop over the same course and found a similar result.]
grandma Rosalie
Paul L
2004-08-30 04:13:47 UTC
Permalink
now, THAT is an informed response.
Post by JAXAshby
mmc, go away. you are a lying sack of squat trying to get people hurt.
go
away.
JAXAshby
2004-08-30 11:57:48 UTC
Permalink
paul, AC is a newbie who has been deliberately trying to harm people with his
nonsense posts. AC is the kind of person you tell to go pull a fake gun on a
cop late at night. AC, has no value in any fashion.
Post by JAXAshby
now, THAT is an informed response.
Post by JAXAshby
mmc, go away. you are a lying sack of squat trying to get people hurt.
go
away.
Shen44
2004-08-29 02:41:27 UTC
Permalink
Subject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
We have a feathering prop (vs a folding prop) and we do get an
increase of about 1/2 knot under sail, and it also backs better under
power. I haven't tried to quantify the backing under power - it is
just what we feel.
Disadvantages are - you lose a bit of power forward because the blades
are flat and the prop takes a bit more maintenance than a fixed prop.
[We were sailing but had the engine on in neutral so the prop was not
feathered - we were running the refrigeration- and when we had
finished that, we turned off the engine and feathered the prop, and
our speed increased 1/2 knot - same wind and current. Now I know this
is not a completely scientific test, but it is significant to us.
There are also people in our group who did tests with a fixed prop
over a measured course, and then did the same tests with a folding
prop over the same course and found a similar result.]
grandma Rosalie
Question. Your engine was running but you were in neutral gear. Why wasn't the
prop feathered? i.e., does the prop "unfeather" when the engine starts or when
you put it in gear? What causes the prop to feather?
This is an area I'm not familiar with, though I frequently use VP/CP props.

Shen
Rosalie B.
2004-08-29 03:58:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shen44
Subject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
We have a feathering prop (vs a folding prop) and we do get an
increase of about 1/2 knot under sail, and it also backs better under
power. I haven't tried to quantify the backing under power - it is
just what we feel.
Disadvantages are - you lose a bit of power forward because the blades
are flat and the prop takes a bit more maintenance than a fixed prop.
[We were sailing but had the engine on in neutral so the prop was not
feathered - we were running the refrigeration- and when we had
finished that, we turned off the engine and feathered the prop, and
our speed increased 1/2 knot - same wind and current. Now I know this
is not a completely scientific test, but it is significant to us.
There are also people in our group who did tests with a fixed prop
over a measured course, and then did the same tests with a folding
prop over the same course and found a similar result.]
Question. Your engine was running but you were in neutral gear. Why wasn't the
prop feathered? i.e., does the prop "unfeather" when the engine starts or when
you put it in gear? What causes the prop to feather?
This is an area I'm not familiar with, though I frequently use VP/CP props.
I don't know what a VP/CP prop is.

When our engine is running the shaft is spinning because we have a
Borg-Warner transmission. Our shaft spins whenever the engine is on
regardless whether it is neutral or not. The prop feathers when the
engine is turned off and the shaft stops spinning. The stopping of
the shaft spinning feathers the prop if I understand it correctly.
You really wouldn't want the prop feathered if the engine was on - if
it feathered when you went through neutral when docking or something
it would be very awkward.



grandma Rosalie
Rick
2004-08-29 12:28:19 UTC
Permalink
Back in my racing days I used a Martec II folding prop. It I remember right
(Martec recommended) it was a 14x12 and replaced a 16x10 2 bladed and worked
ok. It was on a Yanmar 2GM20F. Less power in forward and significantly
less power in reverse. You need to be much more aggressive in reverse when
docking. Lots more walk to port also. Still had to line up the shaft (I
used the keyway since the two were inline) to get it to fold in light air
since the weight of the prop would cause it to open. I have even heard of
folks jumping overboard and putting a rubber band around them to keep it
closed. If it got fouled with growth so it would not open all the way it
would let you know by vibrating when trying to go forward. This is just
some of the things you need to put up with when you race.

I believe it did fold when going from forward to reverse. You could hear it
go "clunk."

With my current cruising boat I would look at feathering props if I were to
upgrade. I need a good reverse and these provide it.

I guess the question is did it help? I would guess so. Could I tell? No
not really.

I agree with JAX. There is quite a bit of stuff you can do to the bottom of
the boat for speed. But bolting on a folding prop is definitely easy. The
other speed improvements require hard work.
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Shen44
Subject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
We have a feathering prop (vs a folding prop) and we do get an
increase of about 1/2 knot under sail, and it also backs better under
power. I haven't tried to quantify the backing under power - it is
just what we feel.
Disadvantages are - you lose a bit of power forward because the blades
are flat and the prop takes a bit more maintenance than a fixed prop.
[We were sailing but had the engine on in neutral so the prop was not
feathered - we were running the refrigeration- and when we had
finished that, we turned off the engine and feathered the prop, and
our speed increased 1/2 knot - same wind and current. Now I know this
is not a completely scientific test, but it is significant to us.
There are also people in our group who did tests with a fixed prop
over a measured course, and then did the same tests with a folding
prop over the same course and found a similar result.]
Question. Your engine was running but you were in neutral gear. Why wasn't the
prop feathered? i.e., does the prop "unfeather" when the engine starts or when
you put it in gear? What causes the prop to feather?
This is an area I'm not familiar with, though I frequently use VP/CP props.
I don't know what a VP/CP prop is.
When our engine is running the shaft is spinning because we have a
Borg-Warner transmission. Our shaft spins whenever the engine is on
regardless whether it is neutral or not. The prop feathers when the
engine is turned off and the shaft stops spinning. The stopping of
the shaft spinning feathers the prop if I understand it correctly.
You really wouldn't want the prop feathered if the engine was on - if
it feathered when you went through neutral when docking or something
it would be very awkward.
grandma Rosalie
Rosalie B.
2004-08-29 13:17:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rick
Back in my racing days I used a Martec II folding prop. It I remember right
I have been told that a folding prop and a feathering prop are
different. I haven't seen a folding prop, so I don't know what the
difference is.
Post by Rick
(Martec recommended) it was a 14x12 and replaced a 16x10 2 bladed and worked
ok. It was on a Yanmar 2GM20F. Less power in forward and significantly
less power in reverse. You need to be much more aggressive in reverse when
docking. Lots more walk to port also. Still had to line up the shaft (I
used the keyway since the two were inline) to get it to fold in light air
since the weight of the prop would cause it to open. I have even heard of
folks jumping overboard and putting a rubber band around them to keep it
closed. If it got fouled with growth so it would not open all the way it
would let you know by vibrating when trying to go forward. This is just
some of the things you need to put up with when you race.
Yes, I sometimes go over to check and see if the prop is moving freely
and to wipe or chip off growth.

We had a 3 blade prop to start with, and we put on a 3 blade
feathering prop that was as close to the diameter and pitch of the old
prop as possible.
Post by Rick
I believe it did fold when going from forward to reverse. You could hear it
go "clunk."
This is transmission dependent to a certain extent. Our transmission
goes clunk when going from forward to reverse. I can't hear the prop
feather. The only way we know if it has not feathered is that we can
still hear the shaft rotating.
Post by Rick
With my current cruising boat I would look at feathering props if I were to
upgrade. I need a good reverse and these provide it.
I guess the question is did it help? I would guess so. Could I tell? No
not really.
I agree with JAX. There is quite a bit of stuff you can do to the bottom of
the boat for speed. But bolting on a folding prop is definitely easy. The
other speed improvements require hard work.
Post by Rosalie B.
Post by Shen44
Subject: Re: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
We have a feathering prop (vs a folding prop) and we do get an
increase of about 1/2 knot under sail, and it also backs better under
power. I haven't tried to quantify the backing under power - it is
just what we feel.
Disadvantages are - you lose a bit of power forward because the blades
are flat and the prop takes a bit more maintenance than a fixed prop.
[We were sailing but had the engine on in neutral so the prop was not
feathered - we were running the refrigeration- and when we had
finished that, we turned off the engine and feathered the prop, and
our speed increased 1/2 knot - same wind and current. Now I know this
is not a completely scientific test, but it is significant to us.
There are also people in our group who did tests with a fixed prop
over a measured course, and then did the same tests with a folding
prop over the same course and found a similar result.]
Question. Your engine was running but you were in neutral gear. Why wasn't the
prop feathered? i.e., does the prop "unfeather" when the engine starts or when
you put it in gear? What causes the prop to feather?
This is an area I'm not familiar with, though I frequently use VP/CP props.
I don't know what a VP/CP prop is.
When our engine is running the shaft is spinning because we have a
Borg-Warner transmission. Our shaft spins whenever the engine is on
regardless whether it is neutral or not. The prop feathers when the
engine is turned off and the shaft stops spinning. The stopping of
the shaft spinning feathers the prop if I understand it correctly.
You really wouldn't want the prop feathered if the engine was on - if
it feathered when you went through neutral when docking or something
it would be very awkward.
grandma Rosalie
grandma Rosalie
prodigal1
2004-08-29 14:31:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rosalie B.
I don't know what a VP/CP prop is.
variable pitch/constant pitch
the former you can feather, the latter you can't
Shen44
2004-08-29 16:49:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rosalie B.
I don't know what a VP/CP prop is.
Variable pitch/controlable pitch.
I use the terms interchangeably, but as you'll see, others use them slightly
differently.
Post by Rosalie B.
When our engine is running the shaft is spinning because we have a
Borg-Warner transmission. Our shaft spins whenever the engine is on
regardless whether it is neutral or not. The prop feathers when the
engine is turned off and the shaft stops spinning. The stopping of
the shaft spinning feathers the prop if I understand it correctly.
You really wouldn't want the prop feathered if the engine was on - if
it feathered when you went through neutral when docking or something
it would be very awkward.
Interesting, thanks for the info.
I would wonder if once you were underway and using your prop, even going from
ahead to astern (unless you had a shaft brake) that the shaft would generally
continue to rotate on it's own, keeping the prop "unfeathered", though I can
see where the manufacturer might want to guarantee it would stay that way (just
clarifying in my own mind <G>).

Shen
Rosalie B.
2004-08-29 20:40:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shen44
Post by Rosalie B.
I don't know what a VP/CP prop is.
Variable pitch/controlable pitch.
I use the terms interchangeably, but as you'll see, others use them slightly
differently.
Post by Rosalie B.
When our engine is running the shaft is spinning because we have a
Borg-Warner transmission. Our shaft spins whenever the engine is on
regardless whether it is neutral or not. The prop feathers when the
engine is turned off and the shaft stops spinning. The stopping of
the shaft spinning feathers the prop if I understand it correctly.
You really wouldn't want the prop feathered if the engine was on - if
it feathered when you went through neutral when docking or something
it would be very awkward.
Interesting, thanks for the info.
We have a Max-Prop BTW.
Post by Shen44
I would wonder if once you were underway and using your prop, even going from
ahead to astern (unless you had a shaft brake) that the shaft would generally
continue to rotate on it's own, keeping the prop "unfeathered", though I can
see where the manufacturer might want to guarantee it would stay that way (just
clarifying in my own mind <G>).
I'm not sure that I understand this question, or if it is a question,
but in our particular configuration (which is NOT the norm) with a
Borg-Warner transmission, the shaft cannot be stopped from turning by
putting the gear shift lever into reverse or neutral (whether the
engine is running or not) which I guess is what is done on most kinds
of engine/transmission linkages. We don't have a shaft brake.

[I do know one man who DOES stop the shaft rotation when under sail
with vice grips but that involves pulling up the cockpit hatch covers
and getting down into the engine room both to start and stop the shaft
rotation.]

In the beginning, we tried to ease the engine into neutral and then
shut it down, but the prop would not feather doing it that way. Some
people go overboard the other way and rev the engine way up before
they cut the power, but that isn't necessary. All that is necessary
is that you not throttle way back before you cut the engine.

grandma Rosalie

S/V RosalieAnn, Leonardtown, MD
CSY 44 WO #156
http://home.mindspring.com/~gmbeasley/id2.html
Jere Lull
2004-09-01 02:49:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by MLapla4120
I'm going to re-power soon and am also going to get new shaft and prop.
It seems that in my boat class (Westsail 32), some people are going
to folding props to help speed under sail.
I'm for increased speed, but also want reliability. My current bronze
propeller is pitted and old. Every time I turn around and look at it, it
is full of sea growth. That makes me think I'm getting poor performance.
So, I'm for an improvement, but I am unsure of what kind.
Any opinions from boaters that have encountered this situation would be
appreciated.
Thanks,
Mark , "Belle" Westsail 32
ANY modern prop will improve your performance under power, forward and
reverse. Technology has improved in 30 years.

A feathering prop can drastically improve sailing enjoyment if you don't
bother to park your prop behind the keel. Your Westsail may not get the
improvements we get as we're lighter and cleaner, but we pick up .5 to
.8 knots when I remember to stop the prop, which has us sailing more
than we used to.

Windward performance improved, allowing us to get a bit closer to the
wind.

We also get more comfortable sailing past hull speed, but the "wetsnail"
doesn't have a hullform that allows much of that.
--
Jere Lull
Xan-a-Deux ('73 Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD)
Xan's Pages: http://members.dca.net/jerelull/X-Main.html
Our BVI FAQs (290+ pics) http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/
Rosalie B.
2004-09-01 04:38:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jere Lull
Post by MLapla4120
I'm going to re-power soon and am also going to get new shaft and prop.
It seems that in my boat class (Westsail 32), some people are going
to folding props to help speed under sail.
I'm for increased speed, but also want reliability. My current bronze
propeller is pitted and old. Every time I turn around and look at it, it
is full of sea growth. That makes me think I'm getting poor performance.
So, I'm for an improvement, but I am unsure of what kind.
Any opinions from boaters that have encountered this situation would be
appreciated.
Thanks,
Mark , "Belle" Westsail 32
ANY modern prop will improve your performance under power, forward and
reverse. Technology has improved in 30 years.
A feathering prop can drastically improve sailing enjoyment if you don't
bother to park your prop behind the keel. Your Westsail may not get the
improvements we get as we're lighter and cleaner, but we pick up .5 to
.8 knots when I remember to stop the prop, which has us sailing more
than we used to.
Windward performance improved, allowing us to get a bit closer to the
wind.
We also get more comfortable sailing past hull speed, but the "wetsnail"
doesn't have a hullform that allows much of that.
We don't have a Westsail of course, but with enough wind, we've gone
faster than hull speed a couple of times. What do you mean by getting
more comfortable?

grandma Rosalie
Loading...