They claim you run this one deeper in the water, don't want to get suckered again, need to see it and try it before purchase.

It's only a picture and they always seem to take them from the best angle.

I'm starting to think these things aren't selling, no feedback from anyone.

I can’t imagine they’re flying off the shelf for 10 grand. If they made something like the bullet on a #6 maybe, but not what basically is a dual downshaft bravo lower.

Here's some feedback (though I'm guessing the boat's owner is on this thread ... screen names make it hard to know :)), https://speedonthewater.com/boat-res...te-application.

This story was from September, so while the product in question is relatively new it's not exactly brand new.

I don’t think you’d want to run this lower deeper in the water. Look at how thick the it is above the bullet in the picture from dsmawd350. If that’s underwater or near the surface I’d think it’d create an air pocket in front of the prop. See pic below of standard SCX lower next to bravo lower, much thinner above bullet. The SCX-4 lower is thick above the bullet as well but I think most of those drives are ran as a surfacing drive with cleavers.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...a1ede074f.jpeg

Props to imco for innovating. Would love to see same day back to back results of standard scx lower vs the dual downshaft lowwr

Thanks for the input, it helps seeing more pictures, seems to me the wide flat area on the back of the drive would cause major aeration of the prop. Can't really tell if the bulbous mass has been removed from the sides of the housing. I would like to compare the SC lower with the dual down shaft lower, we've already experienced the poor handling and loss of speed caused by the SCX lower in our application. It would be nice to find the missing link that actually worked.