Axis Wakeboard Boat Forum

Metal. Only reason I havent tested the 2315 is because I have no access to it. I personally own the OJ Core and OJ Cinco, and a friend is letting me play with the Acme 1235. I will do the exact test with any prop I can get my hands on, so if I ever get my hands on the 2315 or 2079, or 1615 (either one) I will definately test it and post my results.

UPDATE:

Still have the 1235 on my boat, and today I took it out to test it with more ballast.

4800 lbs ballast, no wedge, 2 adults and 1 toddler in boat, and one adult rider. The 1235 got us up on plane, not easily, but very adequate. I did not time it, but it took approx as long as the cinco takes with 4000 lbs. The cinco could not get this same 4800 lbs set up on plane without us dumping ballast when picking up the rider. I never had to dump water to plane... it was great. It held speed very well, even around tight tight turn arounds, prop wash looked fine.

I am very pleased with the outcome. The rpms were a couple hundred higher than the cinco, and the cab noise was a little bit noticably louder, other than that, the 1235 wins.

When dumping ballast to load the boat, I spent a little time driving around with little to no ballast, I did notice that the 1235 is more noisy at all rpm's/ speeds.

I will be riding soon and add another sac, 250-400 more, to see at what weight this prop fails.

Loving this prop... gotta get me one of these

Johnny, thanks for the testing you've done thus far. From other places I've read, the 2315 will pull even harder than the 1235! I've narrowed my focus to just these two props and will decide probably within the next month or so.

get sum, that 2315 is a monster I hear, also a prop that is recommended by wakeprops.com is the 2079. I have been told that the 2079 won because price is a little less and it performs almost identical to the 2315 (same pitch just 1/2" diameter difference).

Either of those two (2079 or 2315) will get more weight up on plane than the 1235 but will be considerably less on top end speed and higher running rpm's.

I am trying to get my hands on both these props, I think if I could test both of them with this format, it would give us a really good group of props to choose from.

Call the guys at wakeprops, I do not know the main guys name, but I hear he is very knowledgeable and will point you into the right prop (i think he will tell you the 2079).. or if you can wait a bit, someone on here mentioned that he is going to test the 2079 for us... forget who.

Johny can you confirm what prop the axis come with standard and if this is any different on Australian models? I have trouble getting mine on the plain with wedge down and all pnp full and a few people. I think I read somewhere that it has a 537?? So bottom line without going too big and loosing too much top end you think the 1235 is the go? You said up top before in your review the 1235 does 39mph that's is what my current prop in Australia does? Surly it wouldn't have the 1235 on it already

My 2011 A22 came with the 1235 and top speed is 42mph and that speed is consistent with other 1235 users. The model number of the prop is stamped on the hub of the prop right against the prop nut...you can't miss it.

Yeah I'm not at home ATM and yea I just found out rang my dealer all Australian axis boats come standard with the 1235 prop which is decent but if ya wanna get serious you need a bigger prop! I had

All standard tanks
All pnp sacks
Wedge down
2 80kg men in the bow and 3 men in the centre

Wouldn't plain!

Just ordered the 2079 see how that goes

The US standard prop, (I.e. not the high altitude) is the Acme 537

I dunno how u could plain with that prob with no ballast and a full boat! The floating wedge creates soo much drag! Does any one think the wedge actually makes much difference apart from to your fuel bill? I got the 2079 on now and boat will only do 50kms per hour now instead of 65kmph as it did with the 1235 but she's like a tug boat! Pulls so well and a lot better on fuel!

Interesting with the 2079. That's a 25% loss of top speed which usually means much more RPM's. That's what's confusing me on the fuel savings with high RPM's. Maybe it's less work on the motor when pulling with such an aggressive prop?