There's talk of a new type of prop!!!!

[Liam]

I didn't have one installed in the first place !

[US Marines]

I didn't have one installed in the first place !

 

Hi Liam,

 

Can we please ask that you have a look at Mike Lewis in terms of IP address etc and compare it to, say, axiom propellors....? Thanks !

 

JO and ourselves were/are a little suspicious that this thread was started as a bit of a marketing ploy...

 

Please note that (1) we've asked this here in open forum (rather than PM etc) so that Mike Lewis and Axiom aren't being kept in the dark about us asking, and (2) we note that Axiom have denied knowledge of Mike Lewis but hope they will understand that it is important for all business activities on the forum to be demonstrably 'above board' etc....

 

Apologies to everyone for us being so untrusting about these things but it can only be good news for Axiom (and Mike) if it is demonstrated that there is no link between them. Thanks all.

[dor]

I am quite bemused by this thread.

 

Someone clearly has tried to improve on something that affects nearly all of our boats. I'm not going to judge whether or not those improvements have actually been made, but why do people, with absolutely no knowledge of the research and trials that have been undertaken, start attacking the promoters and supporters of this new design? Let alone the ones with no practical experience that still spout with great authority on a subject they have little knowledge of.

 

The WW article I am sure will be interesting and I would expect it to be reasonably impartial (unless of course, lots of advertyising for the new design starts appearing....). Then time will tell, and if the claims are true the word will soon get around. If of course it is just another bright idea that doesn't quite meet up to expectations, the results will also be widely talked about I am sure.

 

But in the meantime let's keep it open and not damn it before we know what is going on. You never know - it might just be true!

[US Marines]

I am quite bemused by this thread......But in the meantime let's keep it open and not damn it before we know what is going on. You never know - it might just be true!

Hi dor

 

Not sure who you are aiming this at, but if its us then please see our earlier posts - we agree that it would be a fantastic thing if someone has come up with a radically better prop design.

 

We also agree that the research and trials etc should be studied and that we should keep an open mind.

 

We are however, wondering about the 'honesty' of the thread as a whole: i.e.

 

'I saw a magic box the other day, anyone know anything about it ?'

 

'Why yes, its the Spangle Box - available soon from a retailer near you from £199.99'

 

Hopefully, our concerns are entirely misplaced.....

[Liam]

Can we please return to the original topic of the new design of propellor. The matter of duplicate identities is a completely separate issue which I'm looking in to.

 

Thanks

[David Schweizer]

I take all these "new innovative" developments with a large pinch of salt. I well remenber a few years ago the Waterways press were going overboard about a new hull shape with a big lump on the bow and funny shaped swim at the back being the new answer to efficiency.

 

A few were built and then..... nothing. Why? because the were awful to handle, or so I was told by the unfortunate soul I met on the Thames, who had made the much regretted decision to buy one. I suspect this latest "development" will go the same way.

[dor]

take all these "new innovative" developments with a large pinch of salt.

 

And no doubt you would be happy living alongside your relatives in a cave somewhere.

 

I'm as cynical as anyone, but I find it amusing, and disappointing, that so many posts in this thread are immediately dismissive without any knowledge of the subject.

 

At least the human race has advanced a bit because not everyone is so dismissive of everything that seems to go against their (primitive?) understanding of the subject.

 

I suppose I will now be accused of being another alias of Mr Axiom.

[wonderdust]

That's Britain for you!

[Guest]

I have a British Seagull outboard in the shed from the 1960's. The prop is of a similar design to the "new" one in the picture, except the Seagull is a 5 bladed affair. Does it work well in reverse? I have no idea because Seagulls didn't have a reversing gearbox. Loads of torque though for a tiny two stroke engine.

 

Edited October 14, 2008 by Guest

[chris w]

And no doubt you would be happy living alongside your relatives in a cave somewhere.

 

I'm as cynical as anyone, but I find it amusing, and disappointing, that so many posts in this thread are immediately dismissive without any knowledge of the subject.

 

At least the human race has advanced a bit because not everyone is so dismissive of everything that seems to go against their (primitive?) understanding of the subject.

 

I suppose I will now be accused of being another alias of Mr Axiom.

 

I'm with you 100% on this one Dor - TBH even if there were a surreptitious commercial link, so what. If it's a new product with possible benefits, it's got to be worth looking at.

 

Chris

[Keeping Up]

I take all these "new innovative" developments with a large pinch of salt.

 

I do hope you've changed your anodes to a type more suited to salt water

 

I well remenber a few years ago the Waterways press were going overboard about a new hull shape with a big lump on the bow and funny shaped swim at the back being the new answer to efficiency.

 

A few were built and then..... nothing. Why? because the were awful to handle, or so I was told by the unfortunate soul I met on the Thames, who had made the much regretted decision to buy one.

When they were first introduced we followed one of the hireboats with that bow shape down the Llangollen. He was travelling as fast as he could, verging on making a breaking wash, and fiinding it really difficult to handle. Eventually we reached a straight bit of canal and he waved us past, and without making any wash from our conventionally-shaped bow we passed him and then rapidly left him far behind us

[ditch paddler]

I am quite bemused by this thread.

 

Someone clearly has tried to improve on something that affects nearly all of our boats. I'm not going to judge whether or not those improvements have actually been made, but why do people, with absolutely no knowledge of the research and trials that have been undertaken, start attacking the promoters and supporters of this new design? Let alone the ones with no practical experience that still spout with great authority on a subject they have little knowledge of.

 

The WW article I am sure will be interesting and I would expect it to be reasonably impartial (unless of course, lots of advertyising for the new design starts appearing....). Then time will tell, and if the claims are true the word will soon get around. If of course it is just another bright idea that doesn't quite meet up to expectations, the results will also be widely talked about I am sure.

 

But in the meantime let's keep it open and not damn it before we know what is going on. You never know - it might just be true!

Thankyou well said

 

And no doubt you would be happy living alongside your relatives in a cave somewhere.

 

I'm as cynical as anyone, but I find it amusing, and disappointing, that so many posts in this thread are immediately dismissive without any knowledge of the subject.

 

At least the human race has advanced a bit because not everyone is so dismissive of everything that seems to go against their (primitive?) understanding of the subject.

 

I suppose I will now be accused of being another alias of Mr Axiom.

You are spot on, I have been lucky enough to be involved in these trials and i am trying to inform you of my findings but i feel i just being attacked with negativity like you say some people seem they would be happier if we still lived with the victorians or such like.

[Guest axiom propellers]

I have a British Seagull outboard in the shed from the 1960's. The prop is of a similar design to the "new" one in the picture, except the Seagull is a 5 bladed affair. Does it work well in reverse? I have no idea because Seagulls didn't have a reversing gearbox. Loads of torque though for a tiny two stroke engine.

 

 

 

Great little engine '' The British Seagull'' everyone in the dingy take cover i'm going to start the engine !!! . Catwease if you turn the engine 180 deg's you will get reverse. The blades of a seagull prop are very simple, but they have twist or pitch in the blades AXIOM props DO not

[carlt]

'I saw a magic box the other day, anyone know anything about it ?'

 

'Why yes, its the Spangle Box - available soon from a retailer near you from £199.99'

 

Hopefully, our concerns are entirely misplaced.....

Could you tell me where you saw the "spangle box" for sale. I have a patent on this technology and this is a clear infringement.

[saltysplash]

Could you tell me where you saw the "spangle box" for sale. I have a patent on this technology and this is a clear infringement.

 

 

Is it similar to "Picture Box" that we used to watch at primary skool wiv that bloke wiv the weird hair do?

[US Marines]

Could you tell me where you saw the "spangle box" for sale. I have a patent on this technology and this is a clear infringement.

 

Actually, we were taken in by the pitch and bought one.

 

Turns out it was just a little bald bloke in the box muttering something like "You'll like this...not a lot"....

 

As we pointed out to the seller afterwards - far from being magic, it was all just illusion....

 

And asked for our money back

 

[RLWP]

Could you tell me where you saw the "spangle box" for sale. I have a patent on this technology and this is a clear infringement.

 

 

Richard

[duztee]

Back to the actual topic,

My area of concern is not so much with the actual prop, but if as is claimed it has the ability to stop a boat in a much shorter distance then this must surely indicate a far greater thrust force being imparted to the shaft and bearings.

Am I right or not?

duztee.

[Timleech]

Back to the actual topic,

My area of concern is not so much with the actual prop, but if as is claimed it has the ability to stop a boat in a much shorter distance then this must surely indicate a far greater thrust force being imparted to the shaft and bearings.

Am I right or not?

duztee.

 

I don't think that would be a real concern, as the thrust ultimately comes from the engine power, and it can't magically produce more of that. It might have benefits in some situations, such as going astern, but I would think any overall increase in thrust would have to be fairly minimal because it can't change the rules of physics.

 

Tim

[carlt]

I can't help feeling that the reason narrow boat propulsion made the giant technological leap from horse to diesel powered standard prop (with a brief flirtation with steam) and not much since, is because the needs of a boat, plodding along at 4mph, in a trough, are pretty much met by the traditional set up.

 

I cannot recall an occasion, in all my years boating, where a swift switch from forward to full reverse, with conventional running gear, hasn't been enough to avert disaster.

 

From a salty point of view, however, the greater control this type of prop may provide is very interesting indeed.

[alan_fincher]

Great little engine '' The British Seagull'' everyone in the dingy take cover i'm going to start the engine !!! . Catwease if you turn the engine 180 deg's you will get reverse. The blades of a seagull prop are very simple, but they have twist or pitch in the blades AXIOM props DO not

Whilst I accept that some British Seagulls could be turned 180 degrees for reverse, we had one remarkably like the one in Catweasel's picture, and that certainly could not.

 

We thought it's low down "grunt" would be good for canal use, but actually it is one of the least satisfactory purchases my family ever made.

 

The problem was the "shear spring" incorporated in the propeller drive, (you can just see one in the picture), and which unwrapped itself if the prop hit anything substantial.

 

They were expendable - one the hook was bent straight they were useless - and we were consuming several a day at considerable expense.

 

Fortunately British Seagull took pity on us, and refunded the cost of the engine, much to our amazement.

 

The replacement 4HP Evinrude was an infinitely better canal engine, and had the luxury of reverse.

[carlt]

Whilst I accept that some British Seagulls could be turned 180 degrees for reverse, we had one remarkably like the one in Catweasel's picture, and that certainly could not.

Not a million miles off-topic. It is extensive use of Seagulls with no reverse and, in most cases, no clutch, that has meant I won't ever need a boat that "can stop on a sixpence".

 

It's amazing how much your helmsmanship improves, when you have no mechanical means of stopping.

[alan_fincher]

Not a million miles off-topic. It is extensive use of Seagulls with no reverse and, in most cases, no clutch, that has meant I won't ever need a boat that "can stop on a sixpence".

 

It's amazing how much your helmsmanship improves, when you have no mechanical means of stopping.

Ah, you have reminded me, our Seagull being one of the more upmarket models did have a clutch.

 

However it was very much a "I prefer to stay engaged" arrangement, and could unlatch itself, and jump back into gear when not intended. (I once had a very severe gash in my finger to demonstrate the wisdom of not going near the prop when protected only by that "clutch".

[ditch paddler]

I suppose this will depend on the hull type but it would seem to me that too much power was being used when passing moored boats and I can't see how the hull profile might change that much to make a difference. However, I'm still not clear on how it would do this or the claims and how it works, what are the selling points and how are they justified?

I not here to give selling points like i keep saying i just telling you what i have found whilst trialing. Your comment about to much power being used when passing moored boats tells me you don't really understand what it is i am trying to explain, hull types will have an effect i agree but on the whole the same effects will take place with all hull types i feel.

 

Hi Liam,

 

Can we please ask that you have a look at Mike Lewis in terms of IP address etc and compare it to, say, axiom propellors....? Thanks !

 

JO and ourselves were/are a little suspicious that this thread was started as a bit of a marketing ploy...

 

Please note that (1) we've asked this here in open forum (rather than PM etc) so that Mike Lewis and Axiom aren't being kept in the dark about us asking, and (2) we note that Axiom have denied knowledge of Mike Lewis but hope they will understand that it is important for all business activities on the forum to be demonstrably 'above board' etc....

 

Apologies to everyone for us being so untrusting about these things but it can only be good news for Axiom (and Mike) if it is demonstrated that there is no link between them. Thanks all.

I suggest not started as a marketing ploy more to get people talking and thinking about the Axiom

[blackrose]

And no doubt you would be happy living alongside your relatives in a cave somewhere.

 

I'm as cynical as anyone, but I find it amusing, and disappointing, that so many posts in this thread are immediately dismissive without any knowledge of the subject.

 

At least the human race has advanced a bit because not everyone is so dismissive of everything that seems to go against their (primitive?) understanding of the subject.

 

I suppose I will now be accused of being another alias of Mr Axiom.

 

I agree - if something is reported to be beneficial then why do so many people feel the need to shoot it down without giving it a chance? Of course, by the same token, if this new prop really does confer so many benefits over standard props and at a comparable cost, then within a certain period of time irrespective of these discussions it will become standard equipment itself. If not, then we can dismiss it. Time and market forces will tell...

Edited October 15, 2008 by blackrose