Anyone with labbed REV 4 results?
#11
Registered
Yep, you are correct Too Old. I cant wait to buy and or send my next prop to Houston. Upgrading the engine this winter and will wait to see where I am at with the new HP.
Way to go Darrin!
Ron
Way to go Darrin!
Ron
#12
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Mississippi River
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allan4,
Your top end gain (or should I say lack of) supprises me.
How did the wheel pull out of the hole and thru midrange after the work? Reason I ask is that I've spun a 23P 3 blade Laser and it absoulutly out pulls the Rev 4 from out of the hole all the way thru the midrange. Even taking into consideration the 23P Laser is underpropped on my set up I'd thought that the Rev 4 23P would still hold it's own against it at least. I can't be lacking the HP or torque as I'm running a slightly modified 454 Mag 385HP. Top RPM with it is right at 5000 with a normal load onboard spinning the Rev 4.
Your top end gain (or should I say lack of) supprises me.
How did the wheel pull out of the hole and thru midrange after the work? Reason I ask is that I've spun a 23P 3 blade Laser and it absoulutly out pulls the Rev 4 from out of the hole all the way thru the midrange. Even taking into consideration the 23P Laser is underpropped on my set up I'd thought that the Rev 4 23P would still hold it's own against it at least. I can't be lacking the HP or torque as I'm running a slightly modified 454 Mag 385HP. Top RPM with it is right at 5000 with a normal load onboard spinning the Rev 4.
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Darin, Precicsion Props in Indy.
Zp'd, I noticed a little gain thru out. I've got a nice tourqy (I know, not a word) motor at 575 ft/lbs. So, the midrange is sweet already, hard to tell if it gained much, but it definitely picked up some, but not nearly as much as I was looking for. I thought I would gain an honest 2-3 mph and an honet 2-300 revs. I am running a 520 horse 509 in a 24 Outlaw. Part of the problem may be the power it takes to move this boat, plus the low X. If others are getting nice gains, I say go for it. Not much down side besides I lost a little bit of handling. Again, I am dealing with a tough package here. Darin certainly knows more about this than I, and if the consensus is that it will help, then might be a good idea. Just passing on my experience.
Other than that, I absolutely love this prop. Not only is it the best handling prop I found, but also, the best mid range and the FASTEST!! Now, if that don't blow your hair back, what will
Zp'd, I noticed a little gain thru out. I've got a nice tourqy (I know, not a word) motor at 575 ft/lbs. So, the midrange is sweet already, hard to tell if it gained much, but it definitely picked up some, but not nearly as much as I was looking for. I thought I would gain an honest 2-3 mph and an honet 2-300 revs. I am running a 520 horse 509 in a 24 Outlaw. Part of the problem may be the power it takes to move this boat, plus the low X. If others are getting nice gains, I say go for it. Not much down side besides I lost a little bit of handling. Again, I am dealing with a tough package here. Darin certainly knows more about this than I, and if the consensus is that it will help, then might be a good idea. Just passing on my experience.
Other than that, I absolutely love this prop. Not only is it the best handling prop I found, but also, the best mid range and the FASTEST!! Now, if that don't blow your hair back, what will
#17
Rough Seas Lie Ahead
Gold Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 2,465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When i first got my 2002 288 with the 496HO the dealer said the factory was looking into possibly switching from the Bravo-I 24P to the Rev-4 and if results were positive they would switch out. Well eventually they said never mind because the Rev-4 would blow out on hole shots and tight turns with little noticeable top end gain. This is all I know about the Rev-4. What exactly are the differences compared to a like pitched Bravo1?...
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Reckless288
What exactly are the differences compared to a like pitched Bravo1?...
What exactly are the differences compared to a like pitched Bravo1?...
1. MAIN DIFFERENCE: The Rev 4 has a smaller diameter than the Bravo 1 (14 5/8" vs 15 1/4" typical) so it tends to work better on lower x-dimensions and non-stepped v-bottoms than the B1.
2. The Rev 4 has a straighter trailing edge (like a cleaver) which should mean more stern lift (not good for conventional v-hulls), but I think this is more than offset by a higher rake than the Bravo 1. I believe the Rev 4 creates more bow lift. (I could be wrong on this one, Darin.)
3. I don't know about blade thickness or cupping. But the Rev 4 appears to have a slight curl in the blade tips. I don't know what this accomplishes (help again, Darin).
4. It appears that the Bravo 1 may be made under better quality control as I think Darin has experienced more Rev 4's out of balance than Bravo's. This is an easy fix, though.
Overall, the Rev 4 was designed to serve as a good 4-blade alternative on smaller, non-stepped v-bottoms and by all accounts has been a tremendous success. The B1's really work best with high X-dim, steps and cats due to the large diameter. You also have pitch limitations with the Rev 4 (17P - 23P) versus the B1 (22P - 36P).