What is your opinion about B.&W.B. prop test on the 620...

[DanG]

What do the owners of the Ranger 620 think about the findings of Bass and Walleye Boats four blade prop test? What is your main motor and where is it on the transom? When the kicker motor and extra gear is added, is a four blade 23 pitch prop a good choice? What prop would you use on Lake of the Woods to drive the bow through the waves but not jumping over them? Has anyone tried the BWB tested props?
Thanks for any real world information.
Dan G

[Toolman]

ttt

[Dutchman]

I was left to wonder if they used a Cavring on the Trophy Prop. If they did not use one, holeshot would be lousey on this heavy of a boat and midrange performance would suffer also. B&W/B mag does a great job testing and I use alot of their testing and tech tips for guidlines.
If you loaded that boat with the extra weight of a kicker and full gear you would see lower RPM's from the extra weight and the resulting slower speed.
Personally I feel the Trophy is still the best pick, and B&W/B does state that the Trophy is the most tunable prop of the group tested. For those intersted in getting the Maximum from their rig, the Trophy prop properly tweaked would be the best choice of the props tested.

"Fishing is the pursuit of what is elusive but attainable, a perpetual series of occasions for hope"

[Fishboy]

I don't have that rig but it struck me that they were using a questionable prop as their base line. It would have been nice to see more of a tweaking with some 3 blades before seeing what they could do with a 4 blade. I know that had some "leasons learned" comments and did't play with heigh either. Of cousre they could have gone on forever but I think a lot of guys first try to dial in with a 3 blade more and then go to a 4 blade. JMHO.

Fishboy

[Huskie]

The fact that they did not change motor heights is a really lousey way to make a comparison test. They should have put a jackplate on it, and actually saw the maximized settings for each prop. The results would be quite different. (example the Powertech TR04 works much better at very high transom heights, and most three blades run reasonably well in a larger range of heights, so they are more forgiving. Some props were small hub (trophy and tr04) and cavitation because of this (no hub ring used) was an important factor with a boat of this weight.

All and all, to t to choose "the best" with that tye of testing really does a disservice to their credibility. They would have been better off just listing the performance of each prop and leave it at that. They would then have retained their objectivity.

Winter is just too darn long lately!

[MrWalleye73]

Not a bad article. They took a standard three blade, that a good portion of boaters use, and slapped on some 4 blades and tested them. Most of us don't mess with heights and jackplates. For the average boater, a nice way to see what changing from three to four blades can do for us.

Chris

[TR04R FAN]

Not to be picky but...

The TR04 that was run in the test was a 24 pitch model. It pulled the Yamahas' rpm's to 5200.

They should've gave a 23 pitch model the spotlight. I've tried 3 tro4's: the 22, 23 and 24 pitch. Same boat (620) only with a rude on the back and a the weight of a kicker to boot. The 24 also drag's the r's down on the rude. Put the 23 on and hold on. On my boat: 56.4 with the 22, 59.3 with the 23 and 57 flat with the 24.

I wish they'd given some room in the article to a merc Revolution 4. Either 21 or 23 would've been some cool info...

2 cents