LOW-DRAG PROPS IN USE
In a survey sent out by the World Cruising Club (worldcruising.com), we asked past rally participants how their low-profile feathering and folding propellers performed, and the response among the 271 who took part was almost universally favorable. Irrespective of type or model, respondents said they experienced very real benefits, both in terms of passage times and boatspeeds—just as advertised.
“It was on the boat when I purchased it, but I wouldn’t change the Autoprop for any other type of propeller,” said Oyster 45 owner Steve Jackson. “It’s expensive, but there is a reason for that. It is exceptionally well made. A proper quality piece of engineering.”
“Very good for both inshore and coastal,” agreed Alerion Express 33 owner Jeff McKinney, adding he’d also had a Gori on his previous boat and liked the performance in that instance as well.
As part of the survey, we also attempted to roughly quantify how participants felt about propellers by asking how significant they found the change in sailing performance. Among those who responded to this part of
the questionnaire, two claimed less boatspeed, 17 claimed “no change” in their sailing speed, and the remaining 252 were about equally split between “slightly more” and “significantly more” speed. Considering the variety among these sailors—not to mention that this informal survey took place mainly among cruisers who don’t spend as much time tweaking their rigs—results like these speak volumes.
“The idea of dragging a fixed three-blade prop through the water is just not an option,” said David Burnett, whose Beneteau Oceanis 50 carries a Flexofold, summing up the general conscensus in terms of the benefits when sailing.
As for respondents’ views on how their foldering or feather props performed when their engines were engaged, the results were also impressive. With respect to power in forward, for example, only four respondents reported “significantly less” boatspeed, while seven respondents reported “slightly less.” Compare this to 64 reporting “slightly more” boatspeed; 29 reporting “significantly more boatspeed” and 75 reporting “no change.” (Not all respondents answered all questions.)
As for power in reverse, three respondents reported “significantly less” power; 32 reported “slightly less” power; 36 reported “slightly more” power; 56 “significantly more” power; and 54 reported “no change.”
Similarly, with regard to maneuverability, three respondents reported “significantly less;” 15 reported “slightly less;” 51 reported “slightly more;” 51 reported “significantly more;” and 74 reported “no change.”
Beyond that, the overall nature of the comments was also positive: some reported slightly more prop walk; some reported slightly less. None expressed any great
disappointment with their feathering or folding propellers, and for many, this was not their first time with these types of props—a good sign.
One thing a number of sailors did note was that feathering and folding propellers do require more attention. Feathering props, in particular, need occassional greasing, and the mechanisms of both types must be kept free of debris or marine growth if they are to function properly. One folding-propeller owner, for example, related how he once had to clear some weeds out of his prop. Another described how the blades on his feathering prop picked up some junk transiting a “not so clean river.” In both cases, cleaning out the mechanisms immediately resolved whatever problems they were experiencing.
Finally, though our sample size was an admittedly limited one, there seemed to be no marked difference in terms of satisfaction with the two basic types: feathering and folding. All the major manufacturers were well represented and no readily discernable trends seemed apparent.—AC