Bravo1 vs Bravo1FS
#1
VIP Member
VIP Member
Thread Starter
Bravo1 vs Bravo1FS
Guys,
So, I'm considering a prop offered to me by a fellow OSO member. I am curious what the real difference is, specific to my boat.
PowerQuest 280 (single step), 496HO/M1 Procharger/Whipple stage 2 tune. I am currently running a stock Bravo1 28P. It planes well and rides nice with a top speed around 76 right at 5000RPM. I have noticed that I have to trim it out further than I think is appropriate to reach that RPM, and usually end up dancing a line between top end and porpoising. It seems like the boat would like less stern lift at WOT. The FS is supposed to provide that, but that should increase planing time, too. Just wondering what others' observations have been.
Thanks. Brad.
(937)545-8991
So, I'm considering a prop offered to me by a fellow OSO member. I am curious what the real difference is, specific to my boat.
PowerQuest 280 (single step), 496HO/M1 Procharger/Whipple stage 2 tune. I am currently running a stock Bravo1 28P. It planes well and rides nice with a top speed around 76 right at 5000RPM. I have noticed that I have to trim it out further than I think is appropriate to reach that RPM, and usually end up dancing a line between top end and porpoising. It seems like the boat would like less stern lift at WOT. The FS is supposed to provide that, but that should increase planing time, too. Just wondering what others' observations have been.
Thanks. Brad.
(937)545-8991
Last edited by Brad Christy; 04-14-2023 at 08:32 AM.
#2
Registered
From Teague's site:
With the introduction of the four-blade Bravo FS, bass, multispecies, bay boat, and center-console applications have realized much quicker planing compared to three-blade propellers. In addition, the Bravo FS provides a much smoother ride by improving the angle of attack. By switching to a Bravo FS, the engine can be raised as much as an inch, getting the most performance of any engine application and improving the driving experience. For some stepped hulls, the Bravo FS offers more bow lift than the Rev 4, improving ride quality because the boat rides on the steps correctly.
We’ve added four new models, ranging from 34-inch to 37-inch in pitch and designed specifically for our 4.6L V8 300R FourStroke outboards with the right-hand rotation: 1.75:1 gear ratio Sport Master gearcase.
With the introduction of the four-blade Bravo FS, bass, multispecies, bay boat, and center-console applications have realized much quicker planing compared to three-blade propellers. In addition, the Bravo FS provides a much smoother ride by improving the angle of attack. By switching to a Bravo FS, the engine can be raised as much as an inch, getting the most performance of any engine application and improving the driving experience. For some stepped hulls, the Bravo FS offers more bow lift than the Rev 4, improving ride quality because the boat rides on the steps correctly.
We’ve added four new models, ranging from 34-inch to 37-inch in pitch and designed specifically for our 4.6L V8 300R FourStroke outboards with the right-hand rotation: 1.75:1 gear ratio Sport Master gearcase.
- Compared to a three-blade propeller, the shortened barrel of the four-blade Bravo FS provides the same impressive bow lift, with a slight degree of added stern lift.
- In light to medium chop, the Bravo FS offers a smoother ride.
- In rough conditions, four blades improve the angle of attack with the motor trimmed in. This means the boat can stay on plane at lower speeds.
- Greatly improved hole shot and midrange fuel economy
- Four blades allow for higher running heights and improved efficiency over a three-blade thanks to less drag from the gearcase in the water.
#3
Registered
BBlades labbed a Bravo 1 for me and removed half of the diffuser ring , much like an fs. It really squats the stern down and very little trim is needed. I have a non stepped 24 degree hull for reference.
The following users liked this post:
JaniH (04-15-2023)
#4
Registered
Guys,
So, I'm considering a prop offered to me by a fellow OSO member. I am curious what the real difference is, specific to my boat.
PowerQuest 280 (single step), 496HO/M1 Procharger/Whipple stage 2 tune. I am currently running a stock Bravo1 28P. It planes well and rides nice with a top speed around 76 right at 5000RPM. I have noticed that I have to trim it out further than I think is appropriate to reach that RPM, and usually end up dancing a line between top end and porpoising. It seems like the boat would like less stern lift at WOT. The FS is supposed to provide that, but that should increase planing time, too. Just wondering what others' observations have been.
Thanks. Brad.
(937)545-8991
So, I'm considering a prop offered to me by a fellow OSO member. I am curious what the real difference is, specific to my boat.
PowerQuest 280 (single step), 496HO/M1 Procharger/Whipple stage 2 tune. I am currently running a stock Bravo1 28P. It planes well and rides nice with a top speed around 76 right at 5000RPM. I have noticed that I have to trim it out further than I think is appropriate to reach that RPM, and usually end up dancing a line between top end and porpoising. It seems like the boat would like less stern lift at WOT. The FS is supposed to provide that, but that should increase planing time, too. Just wondering what others' observations have been.
Thanks. Brad.
(937)545-8991
#5
Transom lift speeds up time to plane. Transom lift creates more wet bow area which leads to reduced top speeds. Quick solution to reduce time to plane is a bag full of hundred dollar bills.
The following 4 users liked this post by im MartinB:
#6
I’ve found the lack of the diffuser actually allows more natural bow lift, where the diffused props help lift the stern, at same time faster plane.
For the OP I’d suggest trying a Bravo 26, or possibly have your existing 28p labbed down to a 27p leaving full diameter and diffuser. If it runs better but you still feel the need is than suggest as a second alternative to trim approximately half the diffuser.
For the OP I’d suggest trying a Bravo 26, or possibly have your existing 28p labbed down to a 27p leaving full diameter and diffuser. If it runs better but you still feel the need is than suggest as a second alternative to trim approximately half the diffuser.
#7
VIP Member
VIP Member
Thread Starter
I’ve found the lack of the diffuser actually allows more natural bow lift, where the diffused props help lift the stern, at same time faster plane.
For the OP I’d suggest trying a Bravo 26, or possibly have your existing 28p labbed down to a 27p leaving full diameter and diffuser. If it runs better but you still feel the need is than suggest as a second alternative to trim approximately half the diffuser.
For the OP I’d suggest trying a Bravo 26, or possibly have your existing 28p labbed down to a 27p leaving full diameter and diffuser. If it runs better but you still feel the need is than suggest as a second alternative to trim approximately half the diffuser.
I'm actually planning on going the other way. My hope is to secure a second 28P and have my current prop repaired (slight tip deformation from an unfortunate shallow water incident since my original posting), labbed and pitched UP to 29. Labbing is supposed to garner a couple hundred RPM, and an increase in pitch reduces RPM. The hope being that the give-n-take will result in a better top end without any loss in performance elsewhere or any increase in RPM.
I have also come to the conclusion that my thinking on stern lift has been backward. The RPM is coming up while trimming due to reducing the blade engagement with the oncoming water, and an INCREASE in stern lift would actually aid in reducing porpoise, faster planing, etc...
Thanks. Brad.
#8
25Orion,
I'm actually planning on going the other way. My hope is to secure a second 28P and have my current prop repaired (slight tip deformation from an unfortunate shallow water incident since my original posting), labbed and pitched UP to 29. Labbing is supposed to garner a couple hundred RPM, and an increase in pitch reduces RPM. The hope being that the give-n-take will result in a better top end without any loss in performance elsewhere or any increase in RPM.
I have also come to the conclusion that my thinking on stern lift has been backward. The RPM is coming up while trimming due to reducing the blade engagement with the oncoming water, and an INCREASE in stern lift would actually aid in reducing porpoise, faster planing, etc...
Thanks. Brad.
I'm actually planning on going the other way. My hope is to secure a second 28P and have my current prop repaired (slight tip deformation from an unfortunate shallow water incident since my original posting), labbed and pitched UP to 29. Labbing is supposed to garner a couple hundred RPM, and an increase in pitch reduces RPM. The hope being that the give-n-take will result in a better top end without any loss in performance elsewhere or any increase in RPM.
I have also come to the conclusion that my thinking on stern lift has been backward. The RPM is coming up while trimming due to reducing the blade engagement with the oncoming water, and an INCREASE in stern lift would actually aid in reducing porpoise, faster planing, etc...
Thanks. Brad.
#9
VIP Member
VIP Member
Thread Starter
While I wholly agree with that, I can also watch the GPS climb as the RPM increases. My hope is to get a bit more top end without sacrificing the rest of the RPM range. If I could get a bit more stern lift, I can trim it out to get there without the porpoising.
Two points of note:
1) We recently got to really wind the boat out in near perfect conditions: Coolish, dry weather, “flat” water with about a 6” consistent wind chop. We saw 78MPH at ~51-5200 RPM. According to BBlades’ prop slip calculator, that represents <15% slip.
2) The “OSO member” I spoke about wasn’t a member at all, but someone who’d gleaned my ph# from my posts and was trying to scam me. Which is why I don’t include it in my posts anymore. FWIW….
Thanks. Brad.
#10
Registered
Brad,
FWIW I trimmed the diffuser on my 30p Bravo I's that ore on my 380 PQ, as everything I have done to reduce stern lift has been a positive gain on my boat, however not so much with the diffuser removal. Boat won't get on plane without extreme measures and just blows props out as boat begins to level out. When I did get on plane, props had a lot of slip and lost 5-6 mph. Just had diffusers welded back on.
With the high x-dimension that these hulls have, I don't think it will work for you either.
FWIW I trimmed the diffuser on my 30p Bravo I's that ore on my 380 PQ, as everything I have done to reduce stern lift has been a positive gain on my boat, however not so much with the diffuser removal. Boat won't get on plane without extreme measures and just blows props out as boat begins to level out. When I did get on plane, props had a lot of slip and lost 5-6 mph. Just had diffusers welded back on.
With the high x-dimension that these hulls have, I don't think it will work for you either.