Considering Arneson
#11
Registered
I had a Pulsedrive. The company is no longer in business. It had it's pluses and minuses. Prop shafts were mounted to the underside of a platform. The whole platform was trimmable - great for swimming off the back of the boat. The rooster tail was different than that produced by the Arneson. The Pulsedrive threw the water high. Each chunk of water carved up by the blades tended to stay together so you had spirals getting thrown up instead of a solid spray. My passengers were usually facing backwards underway just mesmerized. Those features could not offset the impractical application on a boat with a ton of natural stern lift. It was enjoyable up to 65 mph. Not pleasant over 70 mph or in rough water. If I had the right hull for the Pulsedrive I would have kept it.
#12
Registered
I had a Pulsedrive. The company is no longer in business. It had it's pluses and minuses. Prop shafts were mounted to the underside of a platform. The whole platform was trimmable - great for swimming off the back of the boat. The rooster tail was different than that produced by the Arneson. The Pulsedrive threw the water high. Each chunk of water carved up by the blades tended to stay together so you had spirals getting thrown up instead of a solid spray. My passengers were usually facing backwards underway just mesmerized. Those features could not offset the impractical application on a boat with a ton of natural stern lift. It was enjoyable up to 65 mph. Not pleasant over 70 mph or in rough water. If I had the right hull for the Pulsedrive I would have kept it.
#13
arneson-industries.com
Offshoreonly Advertiser
I had a Pulsedrive. The company is no longer in business. It had it's pluses and minuses. Prop shafts were mounted to the underside of a platform. The whole platform was trimmable - great for swimming off the back of the boat. The rooster tail was different than that produced by the Arneson. The Pulsedrive threw the water high. Each chunk of water carved up by the blades tended to stay together so you had spirals getting thrown up instead of a solid spray. My passengers were usually facing backwards underway just mesmerized. Those features could not offset the impractical application on a boat with a ton of natural stern lift. It was enjoyable up to 65 mph. Not pleasant over 70 mph or in rough water. If I had the right hull for the Pulsedrive I would have kept it.
__________________
Arneson Surface Drives www.arneson-industries.com
Arneson Surface Drives www.arneson-industries.com
#15
Registered
Sorry but to bring you negative experience with something like a Pulse Drive onto an Arneson thread is nothing but pure idiocy. There are no comparisons to the two most evident by which one is out of business. The Pulse shares nothing in relation with an Arneson at all. I fell that most people that have had a Pulse drive regretted it yet like yourself they try to lump it with an Arneson which is totally unfair and off base to say the least. When one reads your original post they could defer that you had Arneson experience and that is certainly not the case.
We good?