Best prop for TSC-1

[Nashotah]

What have you guys found to be THE prop for the bubble butt Nautique to establish best slalom wake?

[jhughes]

ACME 422 hands down is the prop for that hull.

[Nashotah]

Thanks jhughes

[TallSkinnyGuy]

A guy in Florida is trying to sell his unused 422 on Ski-It-Again for $380.

http://www.ski-it-again.com/php/skiitagain.php?topic=Search&category=Propeller&postid=27906

 

[Wish]

@jhughes‌ ...why?

[escmanaze]

hmmmm...I guess I will have to go home and check to see if my bubble butt has a 422. Is there some identification on it for me to be able to tell?

[BrennanKMN]

The 422 did not come from the factory on the Ski Nautiques.

 

[skier2788]

Sorry for the thread jack. I have a 2002 nautique that's the tsc2 hull I believe. I run in Colorado around 5000 feet. What prop would you recommend.

[jhughes]

@Wish I've had 4 props on the boat so I've done my homework. It's incredibly smooth, for starters. Noticeably more smooth than the 3-blade ACME equivalent at the time (612, which I also have, now out of production) and the OJ XMP equivalent I tried a couple years ago as well as the factory cast OJ 4-blade. None have had noticeable wake differences FWIW, I guess if the OP is talking wake specific vs. just the best all around prop then my answer has no value.

 

Seems to fit the GT40 power band perfectly, great out of the hole and at WOT has a nice 4800-4900 max RPM at about ~44mph, pretty much matching factory specs. Pulls great times with Zbox on a very short setup, feels very strong from behind the boat. Very popular prop on CCFan as well. If you were to design a prop for this boat, I'm guessing you'd end up with the 422. IIRC the factory prop on the TSC2 boats when they debuted as well, no big surprise there.

[thager]

422 came on my 02 196.

[Xpropman]

I have a new one in the box

Skip 863-605-0340

[jpattigr]

But if you have the 240hp Carb motor then you want the Acme 470 as the base motor struggles to spin the 422. The 470 works great on the lower HP units.

[sunperch]

@Xpropman which prop do you have?

[Nashotah]

What about a TSC one repowered with the EX 343? Still the Acme 422?

[nate93]

422. Call skip!

[Xpropman]

I have a new 422

863-605-0340

[6balls]

Every TSC1 I've skied has a great wake and great performance...not sure what props are under 'em.

[rockdog]

Haven' tried anything else other than 422, can't imagine why you would need anything else as it does the job perfectly.

[greghayes]

I had better luck on my 97 Nautique with zbox and the Acme 668. Something about lower rpm made the ride a little nicer.

[Jody_Seal]

@Nashotah

A ACME 422 will work fine on The GT-40 Equipped bubble butt.

 

Want a more Robust Propeller? With very similar Performance as the 422?

Try a 428 OJ. The Oj products are more robust and every bit as good as anything ACME puts out. Hit a turtle rub it up in the sand and it will not deform as easily as the thin blade ACME. ACME's work great out of the box but they do have very thin blades and are easily knocked out of balance or deformed after minor strikes.

If you would like to try a Oj give us a call 850 215 1996

Florida Inboards Inc.

 

[Booze]

To add to the 422 discussion, has anyone heard of adding some cup to the stock 422 on TSC2 or TSC3 to sweeten or help Z.O. for slalom?

[DanE]

@Jody_Seal What could I expect regarding rpm difference between 422 and 428, smoothness also for that matter?

[greghayes]

@booze - I believe that is exactly what the 668 was designed to do. When I bought mine direct from Acme, they steered me in this direction because it is the same as the 422, except that the additional cup lowers the RPMs (your post spurred my memory).

[BrennanKMN]

I am also curious about the 428. I have had the factory OJ propeller on my TSC1 for a while now and I was looking into getting it reconditioned by OJ. I called them and they said that if I get new one they will recondition my current one at no cost ($100-140 normally).

 

Now I am really considering an upgrade to a CNC propeller and keeping my original as a spare. Seams like a pretty sweet deal to me.

[DanE]

Now I have a few sets with our TSC1 hull and a new 428 (ran a 422 before)

Initial impressions: Not quite as smooth as the 422 but still ok.

Hole shot feels a tad better, power feels more linear with how much throttle I apply (no hard data here, just how it feels).

Rpm @ wot and top speed are identical.

Boat has a GT-40 and PP Zbox V.8.05, baselines @ the slowest slalom speeds were close to the same with the 428 needing 80-90 more rpms @ the fastest slalom speeds

Now comes the interesting part, both my son and I felt the boat virtually unskiable with Zbox set up the same as it was with the 422.

Felt like the speed control was on you before you're ready going into the work zone. To sum it up it felt like going from KX normal to KX++ when you have an already well setup PP in place.

So I had to tweak some background settings to tone it down, previously I had the ZO letter adjust set to 2 (to make C feel like ZO C, B like B and so on).

Had to back that down to 0.

Changed KX from Normal to KX- to tone the agressiveness from the throttle reaction down and finally increased the Zbox value (the amount of throttle Zbox apply from reacting to the accelerometer) from standard 8 to 12 so far and now the boat is starting to feel good.

The great thing that came out of this is the segment times are dead on, no tendency at all to get a slow Ball1 time followed by a fleeing boat. My last pass yesterday had the following segment deviations:

-01,-01,-01,-01,-01,00.

To sum my personal impressions up the 428 is not quite as smooth as the 422, but it makes the boat much stronger at holding set speeds.

In our case a good thing as we try to make the boat perform close to newer ZO boats as we practice for tournaments. If I did not care for tournament skiing and trying to get PP Zbox perfectly dialed I would choose the 422.

Oh, almost forgot the wake felt slightly harder with the 428 but I added 50 lbs in the bow and the hardness went away, tracking also improved (this was something I meant to try earlier, just never got around doing it) and it did not affect baseline rpms at all.

Sorry for the long rant.