Comments by "" (@Wingnut353) on "Two Bit da Vinci" channel.

  1.  @anthonywilliams7052  Probably several hundred to a several grand per watt... stuff gets expensive when being bought by military contracts.
    4
  2. You can't make a cost effective casting of this prop due to the complexity of the shape. And it require CNC finishing... even now the cost of the prop is over $5000, it will have to drop to around $1000 before it makes any sense in recreational boating, it may make some sense in commercial operations now. Also the benefits are overblown, it dose perform better but the claims are fantastical... when in reality testing has shown it improves midrange efficiency moderately for the most part with low end and high end not being much affected. Also you can get similar results from a conventional prop... when selecting the correct prop for your intended running speed, so for many commercial boats there may not be many benefits if they are already tuned for the speed they operate at 90% of th time.
    3
  3. LOL... the prop costs $5000 to make currently... so it wouldn't save you anything in a recreational vessel seeing only occasional use (for that market you need to cost $500-1000 ), it might save you some in a commercial one used daily. Assuming it lasts at least several years of constant use without getting damaged.
    2
  4. The problem is the performance gains aren't that big compared to a correctly selected conventional prop... the only way to get the huge numbers they are claiming are to select a very wrong prop.
    2
  5. An electric car i more like 15-80% efficient you don't know where you are getting your electricity from. In fact that are no more efficient than gasoline cars in most cases due to the wasted power getting the power to the car to begin with as well as the 20% loss in efficient in the car itself.
    1
  6. Sorry to break it to you but there are loads of internal combustion engines on the road to day that are above 40% efficiency from Mazda and Toyota. Why downplay that... efficiency gains in ICE vehicles is frankly going to have a much quicker impact that any gains we have in the latest wiz bang technology that can't be bought by everyone tomorrow.
    1
  7. Wouldn't make any sense... turbos are already have super efficient blade designs.
    1
  8. The main benefit of those is increased thrust... not efficiency they are similar in efficiency. Also they have twin prop versions of this prop also. Also the efficiency numbers on these are wildly exaggerated. the only way to get the numbers they are throwing around are to spec the WRONG prop for a boat and compare against that not the best conventional prop.
    1
  9. Similar design has been tried on drones ... the results were not conclusive compared to conventional blade shrouds and quiet blades. They were mainly looking to eliminate noise due to the wing tip vortex etc.... So yes they can be used, but may not make sense without significant effort in tuning the blade to the application same as with a conventional blade.
    1