![]() |
Wow... I have never seen a negative word said about a nosecone. They are designed to improve prop bite and reduce blowout by reducing turbulance, improve efficiency (speed) with better hydrodynamics, and allow trimmed up power through corners. On every application I have seen, it was always a very noticeable improvement for one reason or another. Based on the design itself and physics in general I can't imagine any drawback... If it works at 70+, 80+, 90+, how can it not work at 60+? Just curious, I really can't imagine a negative influence a nosecone could have...?
|
Originally Posted by wexrocks
(Post 3619768)
Wow... I have never seen a negative word said about a nosecone. They are designed to improve prop bite and reduce blowout by reducing turbulance, improve efficiency (speed) with better hydrodynamics, and allow trimmed up power through corners. On every application I have seen, it was always a very noticeable improvement for one reason or another. Based on the design itself and physics in general I can't imagine any drawback... If it works at 70+, 80+, 90+, how can it not work at 60+? Just curious, I really can't imagine a negative influence a nosecone could have...?
Increased surface area ( drag) at slower speeds ( less than 80) The 90' and up bravo gearcase was reported to be good up to 95 mph before blowout. |
Originally Posted by wexrocks
(Post 3619768)
Wow... I have never seen a negative word said about a nosecone. They are designed to improve prop bite and reduce blowout by reducing turbulance, improve efficiency (speed) with better hydrodynamics, and allow trimmed up power through corners. On every application I have seen, it was always a very noticeable improvement for one reason or another. Based on the design itself and physics in general I can't imagine any drawback... If it works at 70+, 80+, 90+, how can it not work at 60+? Just curious, I really can't imagine a negative influence a nosecone could have...?
|
Originally Posted by wexrocks
(Post 3619768)
Wow... I have never seen a negative word said about a nosecone. They are designed to improve prop bite and reduce blowout by reducing turbulance, improve efficiency (speed) with better hydrodynamics, and allow trimmed up power through corners. On every application I have seen, it was always a very noticeable improvement for one reason or another. Based on the design itself and physics in general I can't imagine any drawback... If it works at 70+, 80+, 90+, how can it not work at 60+? Just curious, I really can't imagine a negative influence a nosecone could have...?
|
Originally Posted by wexrocks
(Post 3619768)
Wow... I have never seen a negative word said about a nosecone. They are designed to improve prop bite and reduce blowout by reducing turbulance, improve efficiency (speed) with better hydrodynamics, and allow trimmed up power through corners. On every application I have seen, it was always a very noticeable improvement for one reason or another. Based on the design itself and physics in general I can't imagine any drawback... If it works at 70+, 80+, 90+, how can it not work at 60+? Just curious, I really can't imagine a negative influence a nosecone could have...?
|
Originally Posted by Sledge Hammer
(Post 3622392)
Lots of people have lost MPH adding a nose cone. I lost 4 MPH adding one to my Hammer running a 25 pitch labbed Mirage prop and a 468 allegedly putting out about 500 HP. It ran 78 without the nose cone. I always heard that over 80 it would probably help. I thought I was only 2 MPH off and wanted bragging rights of 80. This is based on GPS rather than the happy meter. I couldn't get the bow lift I was able to previously. Result was 4 MPH lost. It really looked cool out of the water on the trailer, but I couldn't give up the 4 MPH. I am confident nothing is being gained and are likely MPH is being lost.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:59 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.