Quote:
Originally Posted by drtyTshrt
I have been told that the Mirage Plus and props in likeness are to big from the 2.4 Mercs.
These prop were designed for the 2.5 and opitimax motors.
The diameter and weight is the difference.
The Enertia Eco is supposed to be a good choice in a newer style,but these motors need a 13.5 dia. prop.
I have a 1989 200 with a worn out no named prop(I mean razor sharp and less than the original13.5 dia) and on a 1998 20ft SF and I turn 6500-6800 at 48mhp.
I want to try the Eco or find an older 13.75 in a 19p or 21p.
|
I do agree that the smaller diameter props seem a little friendlier on the 20 seacraft.
GOS's 1993 200 is a 2.5L. I've run both a 15P x 15.75" diameter mirage and 15.5" x 17P Mirage Plus on my 2.4L. They do work great even on 30+ year old 2.4L merc's!!
Unless I am mistaken the Mercury Enertia ECO prop is 16" in diameter.
The reason I say 16" is too big for the Mercury 2.4 and 2.5L lower Units is that I originally bought a 13P 16" blackmax prop thinking that would be the prop for a 175hp pushing a 23 seacraft. There was major cavitation/vibration issues no matter what the engine height was set too. The blades from the 16" Blackmax prop barely cleared the cavitation plate on both 2.4L and 2.5L lower units. The 15.75" x 15P Mirage was fine running at the same height where the brand new 16" diameter x 13P blackmax prop had issues.
I am fairly certain the 16" Enertia ECO will give you the same problem on 2.4 and 2.5L mercs (enough that I wouldn't make a $700 gamble), but I could be wrong . . . I can tell you the older 14.5" diameter 17P enertia works great and that's what I run now on my 175 2.4L pushing a 23.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg7cdv1w1vE
07-22-2015, 04:54 PM
Threaded Mode