Sharrow Propellor Pricing out

[rsn48]

So I just received an email from Sharrow they are ready to take orders. The aluminum prop will be $4,500 and the stainless steel prop will be $9000. They are shipping to Canada currently.

Here is a video for those not familiar with Sharrow props.

 

[MurrayM]

What size prop for what size/kind of engine/vessel?

 

[JDCAVE]

Not something I would consider. I’ll bet any damage would be very expensive to fix.

Jim

 

[MurrayM]

Not something I would consider. I’ll bet any damage would be very expensive to fix.

Jim

Not seduced by 10% to 15% more range? You could hang out on South Moresby longer...

 

[DDW]

$9000 buys around 3500 gallons of diesel. It'll take awhile to break even.

 

[O C Diver]

I think the technology is interesting, but see their market as either high performance (speed) boats, or ones that use lots of fuel either by hours of usage or size of vessel. Will be interesting to see if the technology gets adopted and the price drops.

Ted

 

[OldDan1943]

$9000 buys around 3500 gallons of diesel. It'll take awhile to break even.

 

[twistedtree]

Not something I would consider. I’ll bet any damage would be very expensive to fix.

Jim

That would be my biggest concern. And not just cost, but complexity and ability of local shops to do it.

 

[Voyager3]

Wow I feel cheap. My last prop cost 500.00, used but still 500.00.

 

[OldDan1943]

That would be my biggest concern. And not just cost, but complexity and ability of local shops to do it.

I doubt a local shop would even touch it.

 

[Nomad Willy]

It’s a fad thing.
Everybody’s gotta be the first on the block w the new thing.
And I can’t imagine any sane prop man trying to fix the thing.

 

[Woodland Hills]

These small props are nothing more than a large scale proof of concept. I suspect that their ultimate intended market will not see the price as an obstacle. It is cheaper to buy a set of these props than to increase fuel capacity and thus range or to repower and increase speed. And if you can afford to participate in billfish tournaments or are being paid to do so by others it is not really that much. How much is a set of Veems for a sport fisherman: $30k? Once they start making bronze wheels for this market and one guy gets a set all the rest will follow. If only for bragging rights. Don’t forget that another billionaire is made every 2.5 days worldwide: there’s lots of money around at that level!

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
I'll echo the above comments. A boat buck, potentially, for a bent prop? For a runabout or CC? Um...I don't think so. Solely commercial applications at this point, I think, IF the efficiency and fuel savings are correct.


That being said, the site mentions 3D wax printing for casting molds so IF SS, aluminum or bronze 3D printing ever comes to pass, costs will most probably drift into the recreational market.


I'd be very keen on getting one for our 23' Penn Yan Sport Fish. She'll do about 30 MPH (3400 RPM) lightly loaded and at that speed she is burning about 20+ GPH. Of course, that speed and consumption goes south/north really quickly when the Admiral loads all the "must have" gear aboard. Add 65 lbs of dog and a couple of teen kids and it's running from fuel dock to fuel dock.



About the ONLY drawback of the PY (tunnel hull) is that the prop size is limited by the tunnel dimensions. 13" is the max size that will fit in the pocket. C'mon affordable Sharrow!

 

[Dougcole]

I'll be interested when the price comes down, which hopefully it will. Seventeen percent increase brings my fast cruise from 15 knots to 17.5, that's a big deal. And burns 15% less fuel while doing it with less vibration and better handling? Holy cow.


I wonder if a big prop company is going to buy this technology. That would be my guess.



May be awhile before the price decrease happens, but I can wait.

 

[Comodave]

I think that the first market will be commercial and ships. 15% increase in fuel burn would mean a lot for a ship that runs all the time.

 

[OldDan1943]

I think that the first market will be commercial and ships. 15% increase in fuel burn would mean a lot for a ship that runs all the time.

There is also the proven kite propulsion for freighters but, the commercial market never expanded much beyond the recreational water skiing market.

 

[Art]

Wonder how many "motor" boats actually get over 100 hrs a year use.... even 50 hrs annual use for that matter.

I fairly often drive over Golden Gate Bridge [and other SF Bay bridges too]. Tiz a pretty great view of the bay off all bridges. Seldom can I count more than a couple to a few motor boats in the water; no matter what day nor time of day. Weekends [in select locations] sail boats can be seen; most going to no where - but, their crew and invitees seeming to really enjoy going around in circles!

I also notice plenty of marinas while passing over bridges... they are mostly completely full during all occasions. Our two primary marinas are basically filled to their brim with "dock queens". Besides ourselves... few and far between are the boats that go out.

Which brings me to this question... How many "pleasure boat" owners will either want to or need to alter their boat's props for these new style Sharrow props that cost an extra many thou$and of dollar$ each?

For working boats I can see the market! For super rich boaters with big, fancy yachts I see a market! For racing boat owners there is market! For sports fishers that are in competition, wherein speed to fishing grounds is a factor, the market will grow.

However, for the general boat owner [I'd guess 95 to 98% of the boat market] I see little to no market developing unitil Sparrow prop cost comes down and there becomes a readily available way for prop shops to repair these new design props if damage occurs.

 

[Dougcole]

Wonder how many "motor" boats actually get over 100 hrs a year use.... even 50 hrs annual use for that matter.

I fairly often drive over Golden Gate Bridge [and other SF Bay bridges too]. Tiz a pretty great view of the bay off all bridges. Seldom can I count more than a couple to a few motor boats in the water; no matter what day nor time of day. Weekends [in select locations] sail boats can be seen; most going to no where - but, their crew and invitees seeming to really enjoy going around in circles!

I also notice plenty of marinas while passing over bridges... they are mostly completely full during all occasions. Our two primary marinas are basically filled to their brim with "dock queens". Besides ourselves... few and far between are the boats that go out.

Which brings me to this question... How many "pleasure boat" owners will either want to or need to alter their boat's props for these new style Sharrow props that cost an extra many thou$and of dollar$ each?

For working boats I can see the market! For super rich boaters with big, fancy yachts I see a market! For racing boat owners there is market! For sports fishers that are in competition, wherein speed to fishing grounds is a factor, the market will grow.

However, for the general boat owner [I'd guess 95 to 98% of the boat market] I see little to no market developing unitil Sparrow prop cost comes down and there becomes a readily available way for prop shops to repair these new design props if damage occurs.

Agreed, the price is going to have to come down a good bit before there will be real volume potential in the recreational market. I wonder why they are so expensive? It's obviously not a cost of materials thing, is it maybe current sales volume or lack thereof?


In Florida the people who use their boats most often are fisherman in flats skiffs and center consoles. You see 25 fishing boats for every sail boat, at least. So it makes sense that they are targeting outboards first. Plus a stainless OB prop is considerably cheaper than a bronze or nibral inboard prop. If for no other reason because of the size.


Even if it is twice as much as a standard OB prop it's still within a quite a few budgets, unlike inboards where the sticker shock is just too much.


On the other hand, many offshore CC are running trips or sometimes quads now days, buying four of those props is going to leave a mark.

 

[Comodave]

There is also the proven kite propulsion for freighters but, the commercial market never expanded much beyond the recreational water skiing market.

There are a lot of reasons that it didn’t take off. Wear and tear on the kite, the trouble of putting it up and down, constant changes in the wind strength and direction to name a few. On the other hand there isn’t anymore work with a prop, put it on and then save fuel.

 

[Pete Meisinger]

I viewed their video with interest and also a grain of salt. The numbers look good but I agree that it would take a lot of hours of use to make the price difference affordable.

What I really noticed about the video was that they did not compare their prop to a four blade, must be a reason. Perhaps the numbers don't look so great?

pete

 

[Art]

I viewed their video with interest and also a grain of salt. The numbers look good but I agree that it would take a lot of hours of use to make the price difference affordable.

What I really noticed about the video was that they did not compare their prop to a four blade, must be a reason. Perhaps the numbers don't look so great?

pete

My understanding of the physics for correctly angled/sized/weighted "blade" or blades to best push an item forward while the blade cut through water or air: Less number of blades = the best efficiency ratio capability for cutting through water or air. And, for best chance of blade to blade weight balance then the more blades the easier it is to attain lesser vibration balance.

 

[rslifkin]

My understanding of the physics for correctly angled/sized/weighted "blade" or blades to best push an item forward while the blade cut through water or air: Less number of blades = the best efficiency ratio capability for cutting through water or air. And, for best chance of blade to blade weight balance then the more blades the easier it is to attain lesser vibration balance.

Less blades is more efficient in terms of less drag, but only provided you can get enough blade area within the available diameter without ending up with an inefficient blade shape. If you're limited to a sub-optimal diameter due to prop clearance (such as on a boat that's been repowered with more hp), then more blades can sometimes be more efficient. In other words, sometimes more blades are sufficiently better at pushing water that it outweights in the increased drag.

 

[Comodave]

Actually a 3 blade prop should be more efficient than a 4 blade prop. A 4 blade should be smoother though.

 

[Art]

My understanding of the physics for correctly angled/sized/weighted "blade" or blades to best push an item forward while the blade cut through water or air: Less number of blades = the best efficiency ratio capability for cutting through water or air. And, for best chance of blade to blade weight balance then the more blades the easier it is to attain lesser vibration balance.

Less blades is more efficient in terms of less drag, but only provided you can get enough blade area within the available diameter without ending up with an inefficient blade shape. If you're limited to a sub-optimal diameter due to prop clearance (such as on a boat that's been repowered with more hp), then more blades can sometimes be more efficient. In other words, sometimes more blades are sufficiently better at pushing water that it outweights in the increased drag.

Info in my quote from #21 [at top of page]... in regard to your quote [just above this paragraph]... was depicting only the physics of prop blade efficiency, irrespective of available diameter space available.

 

[mcarthur]

$9000 buys around 3500 gallons of diesel. It'll take awhile to break even.

But for the rest of the world, well those that pay for fuel , that only buys anything from 1600-2200 gallons (and you can offset the cost by selling your old prop of course or reducing it by the cost of a new non-Sharrow stainless prop).

Still quite a bit for recreational boats, but the other factors of less power needed (RPMs) for same speed, quicker to plane (if you can!), quieter, etc. may just be worth it to some non-commercials. Oh and props do last quite some time - maybe get the non-stainless for now as it's much cheaper, will still last, and payback is much less.

I doubt that diesel is going to get cheaper in most of the world...

 

[Pete Meisinger]

I stay away from discussions of diesel vs gas, avoid all anchor discussions, try not to get involved in single vs twin engine talks, but do I have to add 3 vs 4 bad prop discussions also?

For the record I have a single diesel. I have 3 anchors on board but I don't have a favorite and really don't know the difference between any of them. I ran a 3 blade for 4 years and am running a 4 blade now for about the same number of years. Im not sure which one I like best.

But...I love to talk about all these things. Just not for too long before I get bored or someone gets over excited.

pete

 

[OldDan1943]

But...I love to talk about all these things. Just not for too long before I get bored or someone gets over excited.

pete

Bingo. Some questions have no definitive answers.

 

[Painless]

They will drop to $150 once the Chinese start to manufacture them..