Walleye Master

Bravo_1_XC
The Pro Finish Bravo I LT propeller is designed specifically for higher horsepower, single engine outboard powered bay boats and multi-species hulls under heavy loads.

Greetings from the Minneapolis Boat Show! I’m working the show – representing Mercury Racing Propellers in the Mercury booth. I’m showing the Bravo I LT here – a prime market for Walleye Angling where the LT really shines. We recently expanded the LT pitch range with 19″ and 19.5″ pitch offerings.

We moved the engine up by two holes on the mounting plate for enhanced engine rpm.
We moved the engine up by two holes on the mounting plate for enhanced engine rpm.

A while back I wrote a post entitled, FS Miller where I reported performance results of our then new Bravo I FS propeller.   We tested the FS on Steve Miller’s 2014 Lund Pro-V 2075 featuring a 300 Verado Pro FourStroke. The goal was to dial-in Steve’s Lund for maximum performance.

The factory setting had the cavitation plate one inch above the bottom of the boat.
The factory setting had the cavitation plate one inch above the bottom of the boat.

By raising the engine a couple of holes from the factory setting, we found the best prop for Steve’s setup was the 21” pitch Bravo I FS. It was like a new boat. Planing, handling and top speeds were all enhanced. One thing to note: Steve’s rig did not have a kicker motor.

This past November we set out to test two new pitch offerings for the Bravo I LT. We used Steve’s new 2016 Lund Pro-V 2075 300 Verado Pro FourStroke. The engine was set at the same height as his 2014 Lund; The anti ventilation plate is 2.5” above boat bottom. The big difference with the 2016 Lund is the addition of a 9.9 h.p. ProKicker. The added weight of the 9.9 ProKicker did slow things down with planing and top speed compared to his 2014 rig.

MM_ProKicker_LifeStyle_Bago_2016 (10 of 55)-Edit
Planing performance, view of sight while planing, mid-range throttle response, handling in turns and top speed and engine rpm at wide open throttle were all measured.

The goal of the test was to verify the performance of the new 19” and 19.5” pitch LTs. Planing performance, view of sight while planing, mid-range throttle response, handling in turns and top speed and engine rpm at wide open throttle were all measured.

MM_ProKicker_LifeStyle_Bago_2016 (52 of 55) (1)
We were amazed how well the 19.5″ Bravo I LT performed. It planed quicker, offered an enhanced throttle response, great handling and best top-end speed.

Copy-of-Chart-4-(002)-(002)

When the water settled, we were amazed how well the 19.5″ Bravo I LT performed. It planed quicker, offered an enhanced throttle response, great handling and best top-end speed.  Needless to say, I didn’t get the 19.5” pitch Bravo I LT back after the test. 🙂

We are expanding the Bravo I LT line once again in the near future by adding 28″, 28.5″ and 29″ pitch offerings. These exciting new models will bring new life to heavier go fast bass rigs such as Bullet’s 21XRS with Mercury 250 ProXS power.

 

Share Share

10 thoughts on “Walleye Master”

  1. Hi, I have a 2016 Triton 216 with a 300 Mercury Pro Verado and a 9.9 mercury kicker. I am looking at buying a Bravo 1 LT but not sure of what pitch to go with. I currently run a 3 blade Tempest with a 22 pitch. I can get 56 mph at 6150 rpms. I can reach 6300 rpms but the prop starts to slip shortly after 6150. I know several other fisherman with the same set up as me that currently run the Bravo 1 FS in 22 and 23 pitch and they are getting 60 to 63 mph. What pitch should I go with on the Bravo 1 LT? I am kind of leaning towards the 23 but not sure. Thanks

    1. Brad,
      I’m not certain the LT is the way to go for the Triton hull. For example, the Bravo I FS is far better then the LT on the Triton 206 with 250 Pro Verado. The FS settles the stern, offering better boat control and top speed. The LT seems to lift the stern too much (even with the kicker). This lowers the bow, scrubbing boat control and speed; by as much as 1.5 mph! The Triton 216, even as large as it is, offers great top-end speeds. I can’t say without testing that the LT would be the prop of choice. If you were interested in lower speeds and not so much top speeds, then maybe the LT is the prop for your rig. If interested, consider the 22.5” pitch LT and let us know the outcome.
      Scott

    2. Scott. I’m a few days away from picking up my 2017 lund 1875 pro v bass xs, 200 hp verado, 6″ atlas hydraulic jack plate. Do you have a recommendation on the prop I should have the dealer put on ? Thanks

  2. Hi Scott,
    I have a Bass Cat Jaguar with a 350 Verado is the FS the prop of choice for the Verado, could I possibly use the Bravo OC it being lab bed and smaller diameter should let me use a taller pitch.
    Thanks,Mike

    1. Mike,
      I think the Bravo I FS would be the better of the two for planing. The Bravo I OC has a shorter barrel designed for twin Cat hulls. It also has an added tip cup so the rpm would be very close – pitch for pitch.
      Scott

  3. Scott,
    I have a 2013 1975 Pro V IFS/SE with a 225 Pro XS and 9.9 Pro kicker. Current set up is 21p Tempest plus, motor mounted 2″ above cavitation plate I am turning 5550-5600 rpm’s at 55 mph tournament loaded. What prop would you recommend? Looking for better overall performance.
    Doug

    1. Doug,
      Look at the Bravo I XS in 22” pitch and plan to raise your motor so the AV plate is at least 1.75” above boat bottom and as high as 2.5” above. The three blades run better deep in the water and the four blades work better a little higher.
      Scott

  4. I have the same boat running a rev 4 19p. Wot 5800 at 55 mph. Going to raise the motor up 2 holes to the second highest. Love the way the rev 4 runs in rough water but obviously thinking something else would be better. Does the bravo lt allow you to hold the bow down in rough water like the rev 4. Also, what would be best for cruising fuel economy out of the bravos or rev 4? Thank you

    1. Ben,
      The longer barrel with flare on the Bravo I LT can be used keep the bow down. The LT also allows for you to move up 2” of pitch achieving similar rpm; running the 21” pitch LT will offer better fuel economy at cruise.
      Scott

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

two × one =