WakeWorld

WakeWorld (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/index.php)
-   Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=3183)
-   -   Prop for 2000 xstar (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=800217)

alcarlaw1 10-13-2013 9:52 AM

Prop for 2000 xstar
 
I need to recondition the prop on my Star. The current prop is a 13.7 x 17 OJ 4 blade. I have no idea what the numbers mean or translate to in the real world but I've never seen anybody with this prop size on any of the WW forum threads so that leads me to believe it may not be the right prop. We have around 2000lbs ballast in the boat and I can't see us adding any more. Both boarding and surfing,. Any suggestions welcome, should I keep the prop (doesn't cost much to recondition) or am I going to get better performance and economy if I change for a different size?

xstarrider 10-13-2013 5:23 PM

Hands down there is not a better prop for boarding on the 205v hull/XStar/x1 than the Acme 1235. Thing pushes all the weight that boat can handle and planes it no problem. U have the tapered shaft so the 1235 is the number. For those with the splined shaft I don't recall the exact number but 1239 rings a bell.


OJ has a similar prop but I notice a difference and prefer the Acme

ironj32 10-13-2013 5:24 PM

Yep, Acme 1235.

LYNRDSKYNRD 10-13-2013 5:41 PM

I've got a lightly used 1235 that I would sell if you are interested.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk now Free

Pad1Tai 10-13-2013 6:12 PM

The 1235 or 1273 will work perfect... Remember yours should be a splined 1 1/8 L/H prop..

xstarrider 10-13-2013 7:59 PM

Being his is a 2000 it is A 1 1/8 tapered shaft. Not a splined one.

alcarlaw1 10-14-2013 1:24 AM

thanks guy. Yes it's an 1 1/8 taper shaft. So going from the 13.7x17 to 14.5x14.25, how much would I expect the rpm to increase at say 22mph? I have not had any issues holding speed with the 17, but that said I am just dialling the boat in and getting used to it so when weighted up nearer 2000lbs this may be more of an issue. Fuel this side of the pond is expensive, so I dont want a considerable rpm increase for minor gain in holding speed.

scottb7 10-14-2013 11:08 AM

http://www.wakeprops.com/wakeboard-b...oat-propellers

Pad1Tai 10-14-2013 11:11 AM

Mine went up between 800 - 1000 rpms depending on the weight..

phillywakeboarder 10-14-2013 1:19 PM

You can't go wrong with the 1235. At riding speed you can expect around a 1000 rpm increase. But, the boat gets on plane so much quicker and requires so much less throttle coming out of turns that it pretty much evens everything out with respect to gas consumption, at least for those who don't have a really long riding spot. The only real downside is the reduction in top speed. If you have any barefooters in your crew they won't be happy.

jrw160 10-14-2013 2:41 PM

I'm running the OJ 14.25x14.5. I'm typically at 3600rpms at 24mph. It burns 7-8 gallons per hour loaded with 2500-3000lbs plus 4 or 5 people.

xstarrider 10-14-2013 3:02 PM

So did some testing with my 1235 vs my 13.7 X 17 OJ a while back. Here are some numbers for you

Here are some numbers

Acme 1235
Unweighted
3050rpm. @ 23mph
4200rpm. @ 32mph
4500rpm. @ 34mph
5550 rpm @ wot of 41 mph


Weighted up with 2700.
3300rpm @ 23mph
Holeshot at an unofficial just under 5 seconds to plane


OJ 13.7 X 17
Unweighted
2800rpm @23mph
3700 rpm @ 32mph
4000rpm. @34mph
5100rpm @wot 43.5mph

Weighted with 2700
3000rpm @ 23mph

Holeshot weighted at an unofficial 6 seconds to plane.

As mentioned I don't notice a difference at all in fuel between the props on a wakeboarding day. However if I ski or cruise down and around a bigger lake with the 1235 it does suck fuel way more. However the hole shot with weight from the 1235 is worth the ocassional extra fuel when I head to other lakes.

kainishida 10-14-2013 6:34 PM

Swatguy, awesome numbers. Are you running 750's in the rear lockers? Currently I have 550's in the rear and was curious if anyone was running 750's or if they fit.

phillywakeboarder 10-14-2013 7:28 PM

I started off with the fly high v-drive sacs, which I think are 400 pounds each, and then switched to the 750s. The 750s fit. The engine dividers bow in when they're full, but it's no big deal. The extra weight that far back makes a big difference.

xstarrider 10-14-2013 8:45 PM

I run 750's and a ton of people do as well. You just need to reinforce the dividers, more so on the early models. I just ran L channel brackets the length of the divider along the floor to prevent the divider from bowing against the exhaust manifolds and melting. Used stainless screws and bolted it right to the floor. Plenty of room and did the trick for like 20 bucks. Holding string after 1130hrs of use.


The downside of running the 750's in the rear is that you are going to need at least 800 in the nose to balance it out. However the wake will be as macking as any pro would love. I ran the v drive sacs at first. Then have the 750's a shot. Holy cow the wake upgrade was worth every penny going within 750's. Also if you surf at all 750's are a must. Def plenty of room for them to fill all the way.

dvsone79 10-15-2013 10:00 AM

If you get 750s for the back, I'd recommend an 1,100lb bow sac. That hull likes weight up front almost as much as in the back. I have 2 750s in the back of mine, a 350 ski locker sack, and a 750 in the bow walkway. It throws a great wake. However, a buddy with the same hull has the same 750s, same ski locker sac, but runs the 1100 triangle sac in the bow and his wake is noticeably better. Peakier and gives you a better vertical push on wake jumps. You lose the bow seating, but its worth it. No one likes to sit up there anyway.

kainishida 10-15-2013 10:48 AM

Good info everyone. It's amazing what the right prop can do. Guess I know what I'll be shopping around for this off season...

xstarrider 10-15-2013 1:08 PM

Lynard sent ya pm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 7:30 PM.