lotacarnage1
Well-known member
Ngq vs jw on a stock 220?any input is welcomed.
-
If you log in, the ads disappear in the forum and gallery. If you need help logging in or getting registered, send request to: webmaster@southernairboat.com
72" jw prop on stock 220(too much?)
- Thread starter lotacarnage1
- Start date
Slidin Gator
Well-known member
I think both of those options are a bit much for a stock set up, you will be at the low end of pitch to spin them. Keep the diameter, go with a narrower blade.
Slidin Gator
Well-known member
Carnage,
Define stock? Is this a single mag, PE-150? Those engines were designed to run generators at 1,800 RPM where they made 150 Hp in stock form. The 220 rating does not seem to have much more backing to it other than airboaters assuming the torque (437 ft-lbf) holds relatively constant upwards of 3,000 RPM, where the "estimated" 220 Hp would be produced.
It seems reasonable to me that the cam shafts would have been optimized for 1,800 RPM and I have seen some posts on SA stating that users got maximum performance tuning for 2,400 RPM or less max on GPU setups. I am interested to know if the cams are different between AV and GPU versions and what the "Real" power rating is.
If tuning for 2,400 RPM, the NGQ or JW would be good options. If tuning for 2,800-3,000, a bit narrower blade would be preferred.
Define stock? Is this a single mag, PE-150? Those engines were designed to run generators at 1,800 RPM where they made 150 Hp in stock form. The 220 rating does not seem to have much more backing to it other than airboaters assuming the torque (437 ft-lbf) holds relatively constant upwards of 3,000 RPM, where the "estimated" 220 Hp would be produced.
It seems reasonable to me that the cam shafts would have been optimized for 1,800 RPM and I have seen some posts on SA stating that users got maximum performance tuning for 2,400 RPM or less max on GPU setups. I am interested to know if the cams are different between AV and GPU versions and what the "Real" power rating is.
If tuning for 2,400 RPM, the NGQ or JW would be good options. If tuning for 2,800-3,000, a bit narrower blade would be preferred.
lotacarnage1
Well-known member
Single mag with 500 holley carb.I'm looking for more low end push.I have a 5 blade 68" warp tuned to 2900 top rpm.
Slidin Gator
Well-known member
A wide blade 72" will be night and day vs. that Warp drive. The NGQ and JW seem to be pretty similar in performance, the NGQ perhaps a bit more on the low end. I run a 72" NGQ with the winglets cut off, tuned to 2,800 on #2 mark. Relative to the Q blade the NGQ is great on dry, it gives better speed control. With the winglets removed it makes a lower frequency pounding sound that you can feel in the chest.
You will definitely loose top end vs. that Warp and you will probably find it works best around 2,400 RPM on that engine??
As for JW vs. NGQ, I'd say a bit of a nod to the NGQ for low end, but basically make the choice based on hub and cost. The NGQ has a larger, stronger shank vs. the JW. JW is cheaper, but they work great too.
You will definitely loose top end vs. that Warp and you will probably find it works best around 2,400 RPM on that engine??
As for JW vs. NGQ, I'd say a bit of a nod to the NGQ for low end, but basically make the choice based on hub and cost. The NGQ has a larger, stronger shank vs. the JW. JW is cheaper, but they work great too.
lotacarnage1
Well-known member
Thanks for the really great advice.I'll let you know how i like the change.my boat does pretty good running dry now,if it gets better I'll be happy.