Radical New Propeller Design... Sharrow?

They're a waste of time. If you compared all of there test boats, the origional prop boats tests are all doctored when compared to the same boat/engine/propeller tested by magazines, the manufacturer,yamaha, or mercury. There are almost NO gains when you look at real boat tests of the baseline props. That being said, you do NOT want to go with a bigger diameter prop than you have and less blade tip clearance. It will NOT reduce any vibration only exasperates it and will cause prop burn.

We have an owner who has a set of Sharrows on order for his boat that will arrive later this year. Once he puts them on I will definitely get undoctord performance comparisons to traditional props. Its very hard to believe Sharrow's comparisons when the traditionally prop powered boats' numbers are way off.

If you're referencing the review of the Sharrow prop by BoatTest, be aware these are PAID reviews which is somewhat contradictory to the BoatTest slogan...

Given the competition for faster and more efficient boat/motor combos out there I would think we would be seeing these everywhere by now if they did what they said or even close. Yamaha, Merc or any of the big volume hull builders would have snatched this up and be off and running. If something sounds too good to be true...........

I have been eyeballing Sharrow props since day 1 and read numerous test reports and seen all the test-video's.
To me it looks like the real thing with great numbers around mid-range RPM.
I sure would buy a Sharrow prop if the price was also mid-range rather than extremely high end.
The technology will certainly benefit the merchant vessels running 24/7 year around, they would embrace a 5% fuel saving and go nuts over a 50% better efficiency.
Not sure why these props are not all over by now..?

Look at the test boat. Now compare Sharrow's base prop test, with other tests out there by the Manufacturer, Mercury/Yamaha/Suzuki or magazines. The base prop test Sharrow uses is always doctored to be bad.

And if they weren't heavily patented, I would think.
Just saying - I'm as skeptic as anyone, but I wouldn't assume they are bad just because nobody copied them so far.

Some magazines have been testing the Sharrow props, also Yamaha will start producing and distribute the Sharrow props now.
https://fishtalkmag.com/blog/sharrow-props-about-bust-loose-boats

I wasn’t saying they are bad or suggesting anyone should copy them. Just seems like if they were that good somebody would have bought the patent or teamed up with them. Looks like the article Norseman just posted indicates that’s exactly what’s happening. If they do what they say I sure hope they come to the Sportfish market.

I wonder how easy/hard it will be to repair them or re-pitch them

Sorry to spin this thread back up, but I recently spoke with a representative from Sharrow who informed these props are actually 3D machined. I was racking my brain trying to figure out how the molds were engineered to extract a pattern with numerous negative pulls. Without 3D machining, these props wouldn’t exist. The upside is no molds are needed for varying sizes or degrees of pitch. The downside is they are made one at a time, per machine.

Look forward to seeing some real world test and comparison data. Really hoping the magic is real!

The partnership with Veem is a huge industry move, with the Sharrow design patent matched to the Veem Interceptor strip patent:

VEEM Propellers | World leaders in propeller design and manufacturing (veemmarine.com)

With Sharrow being in Michigan, they have had a significant automotive machining base to create the radical propeller geometry with lots of established 3D printers suppliers for their molds:

3D printing casting cores for all-electric Cadillac | voxeljet

Nice to see some new technology to hit the inboard propulsions system world, Veem has grown into a large technology company in Australia and have to think they have done the right research in this move.

I don't think so. All of Sharrow's baseline tests have been doctored to show performance much worse than independent boat tests, mercury and yamaha performance bulletins of the same boat, motors, and propellers. If the design is that good, there wouldn't be a need to make the baseline propeller look much worse than it is. There have been a few independent people that put them on their boats and posted on The Hull Truth and most of them didn't see any gains that were worthwhile. They also haven't compared them to better economy designs on the same boat with Eco enertia propellers. I think in some really small niches they may perform better. Such as boats that have trouble staying on plane at cruise speed.

Interesting observations. I haven’t investigated their claims as thoroughly. I’m curious though about whether they might be smoother (less vibration) than the VEEMS that I’m running now, which I’m told are very smooth relative to other props. What I have read about Sharrow design suggests that they may be.

I have a little vibration that I’d like to solve for. This is after engine alignment, new shaft couplers, shafts and cutlass bearings checked. Probably no one else would be fussed about it, but I’m a little obsessed with having everything as perfect as possIble. Sharrow props would be an expensive experiment to find out!

Our power boat industry has always been resistant to change, unlike the sailboat industry which has made huge technological in recent years.

The investment of millions of $$$ in the Michigan Sharrow plant, the partnership with leading technology companies like Veem and Yamaha (who manufacture their own lines of conventional propellers and have invested millions in the US on a competing product) would lead most people to believe that there is sound reasoning behind the improvements available with the cutting-edge design, not to mention the independent tests out on the public record:

Sharrow Propeller™ (boattest.com)

New Yamaha Marine Precision Propeller Facility in Greenfield, Ind. Reaches Full Production Capacity - Yamaha Outboards

For the average boater who has tried to resolve his OB prop issues with a buy a swap approach, this would be a no go. You need to engage the application engineers and give them reliable data and in return will get a dialed in solution where you will see the benefits in efficiency and range.