Bulitz

I am buliding a bbc 572 motor on my 26 Scarab and have a bravo one drive everyone said i'm going to blow it up on the first run.
So i am making some resurce and found Arneson ASD6 conversion kit for bravo.
Has anyone here used this ? And if its so good why all boats are with this drive ?


http://www.arneson-industries.com/pa...ravoConversion

502ss

iTrader: (3)

Probably initial cost!

fountain4play

I have ASD7M's and they've been problem free. Give Rik a call at Arneson, he's a great resource. Jim

NevrThrottleBack

Arneson are great drives!

offshorexcursion

iTrader: (5)

Sounds like a great setup for you boat you will love it!

Yes you will break/blow/prematurely wear out ANY bravo based drive. In the long run keeping a bravo based drive is a payment plan rebuilding them constantly. Plus who wants to baby the sticks????? Might as well get a pontoon if you have to drive like a grandma....

All boats do not have Arneson's ONLY because Mercury has the market controlled by selling ENGINE and DRIVE packages.

A new Arneson Bravo conversion cost less then a complete new XR sitting on an extension box with transom assembly when rigging a boat new. So initial cost is NOT why you do not see more of them.

And the cost of the conversion if very reasonable when you consider everything, and less expensive then converting to any other drive that wishes it was as good of a surface drive...

stirling

Is the transmission included in the Bravo conversion kit when you compare pricing ?

fountain4play

It was when I did mine back in 07. They came with Bam 1350's.

JP-8

I recall a particulary interesting discussion about this very topic back in 2003 when I would lurk around here periodically.

The point was raised that a surface drive is arguably a superior way of getting power to the water, so why aren't they mainstream?

It was acknowledged that Arneson's lack of an engine and drive package is the main barrier, but a very insightful gentleman (SuperTremoli was his handle here, I believe) appropriately pointed out that the traditional stern drive configuration has a resolute, unyielding cultural acceptance that will always be very difficult to change.

I'd have to agree with that assessment. The stern drive has its place, and works well enough for a great many applications, but the surface drive could do a much better job in most cases and should be more common.

It could rightly be said that Mercury has ruthlessly maintained a status quo for themselves that's had ripple effects on the industry at large.

Obviously, it is very good for business if everyone is out there grenading Bravos, only to rinse and repeat. Merc doesn't want that to change, it's their bread and butter.

For this and other reasons of similar nature, it is difficult for me to regard the company with anything but cynicism.

pstorti

iTrader: (2)

everybody likes to bash Merc and the bravo drive, but with stock power levels they are problem free, they are light compact and don't require a transmission. Yes abuse them or overpower them and they break how is that Mercury's fault?? Also I am pretty sure Mercury is not getting rich selling Bravo parts, I have a feeling selling engine packages to OEM's is the bulk of the business.

Not knocking Arnesons or any surface drive but in the right application Bravos work.

offshorexcursion

iTrader: (5)

Stock 496s outlast bravos X drives by two to three times as many hours.....that's not right.

Yes bravos are a good drive at stock power levels UNDER 500 but they are not perfect.

Bravo XRs do NOT last behind stock merc 525s or 600s.

Actually they ARE getting rich of selling parts. That's where the money is. The cost to make a set of gears is Penny's on the dollar compared to the $1800 price tag for those gears. Its mind blowing how cheap they mass produce those weak azz gears.