 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jesse(at)saintaviation.co
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 6:08 pm Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
 |
|
I saw an RV-10 the other day with an MT prop that looked different than other MT's that I have seen on the -10, but still a 3-blade. I don't know the difference. The owner claimed that this model of prop is as fast as the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop, which I doubt, but wanted to know what other MT prop owners have experienced in cruise performance versus the Hartzell 2-blade. Has anybody ever done the test to remove one prop and install the other to do a side-by-side comparison on the same airframe? Either way, I would like to hear what others "think" they are gaining or losing with different propellers. I flew with Rob Hickman at what was AFS, who has the 3-blade Hartzell with the really fat blades, and he said he thought he was losing about 7 knots in cruise, if I remember correctly.
Any others want to share their thoughts?
Jesse Saint
352-427-0285
jesse(at)saintaviation.com
Sent from my iPad
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
n223rv(at)wolflakeairport
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 6:35 pm Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
I think it depends on what primer was used on the prop..... 
Oh boy, this should be a fun thread...
Do not archive
-Mike Kraus
RV-4 sold 
RV-10 flying
KitFox SS7 Radial building
On Dec 11, 2012, at 9:07 PM, Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
I saw an RV-10 the other day with an MT prop that looked different than other MT's that I have seen on the -10, but still a 3-blade. I don't know the difference. The owner claimed that this model of prop is as fast as the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop, which I doubt, but wanted to know what other MT prop owners have experienced in cruise performance versus the Hartzell 2-blade. Has anybody ever done the test to remove one prop and install the other to do a side-by-side comparison on the same airframe? Either way, I would like to hear what others "think" they are gaining or losing with different propellers. I flew with Rob Hickman at what was AFS, who has the 3-blade Hartzell with the really fat blades, and he said he thought he was losing about 7 knots in cruise, if I remember correctly.
Any others want to share their thoughts?
Jesse Saint
352-427-0285
jesse(at)saintaviation.com
Sent from my iPad
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
robertbrunk(at)mac.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:11 pm Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
I switched out my MT for the 2bladed vans sells when my MT got damaged by fod during taxiing. Rate of climb is noticeably less(300-500fpm) I estimate. Also I am now 5 kts faster than before. The MT has a noticeably greater rate of deceleration on throttle back. Actually had to get adapted to it on first few landings and approaches. I sent the MT to Factory in Florida and had a complete overhaul done. It is back in CRP and it is for sale. It is still in its shipping crate. I can be reached at 361-533-2383 if you are looking for a like new MT at a less than new price. Regards, Robert N661G KCRP 500hours and loving it.
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 11, 2012, at 8:07 PM, Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
I saw an RV-10 the other day with an MT prop that looked different than other MT's that I have seen on the -10, but still a 3-blade. I don't know the difference. The owner claimed that this model of prop is as fast as the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop, which I doubt, but wanted to know what other MT prop owners have experienced in cruise performance versus the Hartzell 2-blade. Has anybody ever done the test to remove one prop and install the other to do a side-by-side comparison on the same airframe? Either way, I would like to hear what others "think" they are gaining or losing with different propellers. I flew with Rob Hickman at what was AFS, who has the 3-blade Hartzell with the really fat blades, and he said he thought he was losing about 7 knots in cruise, if I remember correctly.
Any others want to share their thoughts?
Jesse Saint
352-427-
jesse(at)saintaviation.com
Sent from my iPad
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:22 pm Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
To my knowledge you are the only person that has swapped out different props on the same -10. Just the data point we needed. Wish we had exact numbers but going with BA (~350) FPM and + 5 Knots seems reasonable.
I am not sure I would give up the cruise speed for the climb rate personally. Plus I like the cost savings and the easy of lower cowl removal.
Thanks Robert.
Robin
--
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gordon Anderson
Joined: 16 Apr 2012
Posts: 41
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:41 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
Great information Robert. Did you also notice a difference in take-off distance? In theory that should also be better with the MT.
Gordon Anderson
41014 Switzerland
On Dec 12, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
| Quote: |
I switched out my MT for the 2bladed vans sells when my MT got damaged by fod during taxiing. Rate of climb is noticeably less(300-500fpm) I estimate. Also I am now 5 kts faster than before. The MT has a noticeably greater rate of deceleration on throttle back. Actually had to get adapted to it on first few landings and approaches. I sent the MT to Factory in Florida and had a complete overhaul done. It is back in CRP and it is for sale. It is still in its shipping crate. I can be reached at 361-533-2383 if you are looking for a like new MT at a less than new price. Regards, Robert N661G KCRP 500hours and loving it.
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 11, 2012, at 8:07 PM, Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> wrote:
>
>
> I saw an RV-10 the other day with an MT prop that looked different than other MT's that I have seen on the -10, but still a 3-blade. I don't know the difference. The owner claimed that this model of prop is as fast as the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop, which I doubt, but wanted to know what other MT prop owners have experienced in cruise performance versus the Hartzell 2-blade. Has anybody ever done the test to remove one prop and install the other to do a side-by-side comparison on the same airframe? Either way, I would like to hear what others "think" they are gaining or losing with different propellers. I flew with Rob Hickman at what was AFS, who has the 3-blade Hartzell with the really fat blades, and he said he thought he was losing about 7 knots in cruise, if I remember correctly.
>
> Any others want to share their thoughts?
>
> Jesse Saint
> 352-427-
> jesse(at)saintaviation.com
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
>
>
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
robertbrunk(at)mac.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 6:47 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
Take off distance at RUIDOSO is slightly longer and rate of climb is noticeably less. Robert SRR 6800ft
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 12, 2012, at 2:41 AM, Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch> wrote:
| Quote: |
Great information Robert. Did you also notice a difference in take-off distance? In theory that should also be better with the MT.
Gordon Anderson
41014 Switzerland
On Dec 12, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
>
>
> I switched out my MT for the 2bladed vans sells when my MT got damaged by fod during taxiing. Rate of climb is noticeably less(300-500fpm) I estimate. Also I am now 5 kts faster than before. The MT has a noticeably greater rate of deceleration on throttle back. Actually had to get adapted to it on first few landings and approaches. I sent the MT to Factory in Florida and had a complete overhaul done. It is back in CRP and it is for sale. It is still in its shipping crate. I can be reached at 361-533-2383 if you are looking for a like new MT at a less than new price. Regards, Robert N661G KCRP 500hours and loving it.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Dec 11, 2012, at 8:07 PM, Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I saw an RV-10 the other day with an MT prop that looked different than other MT's that I have seen on the -10, but still a 3-blade. I don't know the difference. The owner claimed that this model of prop is as fast as the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop, which I doubt, but wanted to know what other MT prop owners have experienced in cruise performance versus the Hartzell 2-blade. Has anybody ever done the test to remove one prop and install the other to do a side-by-side comparison on the same airframe? Either way, I would like to hear what others "think" they are gaining or losing with different propellers. I flew with Rob Hickman at what was AFS, who has the 3-blade Hartzell with the really fat blades, and he said he thought he was losing about 7 knots in cruise, if I remember correctly.
>>
>> Any others want to share their thoughts?
>>
>> Jesse Saint
>> 352-427-
>> jesse(at)saintaviation.com
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
partner14
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 540
Location: Granbury Texas
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:41 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
Here's my 3 cents.... A USAF U2 pilot with a F1 Rocket (IO540) replaced his 2 blade hartzel with a 3 blade MT. He said climb rate a little better, and lost about 3-5 knots at top speed (not cruise). That was the info that convinced me to buy an MT. I was not concerned with anything but being smooth. I've riden in quite a few 10's and so far none have had as low of vibration levels. Just lay your hand on the glare shield. Although I've got some extra hp, I have not had another 10 (7 so far) that was as fast. With the extra hp and the 3 blade, I can run the rpm all the way down to 2,000 without any problem.... and usually cruise around 2,100.... and at that rpm can consistently run below 10 gph.
From: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch>
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: MT Prop(s)
--> RV10-List message posted by: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch (mregoan(at)hispeed.ch)>
Great information Robert. Did you also notice a difference in take-off distance? In theory that should also be better with the MT.
Gordon Anderson
41014 Switzerland
On Dec 12, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com (robertbrunk(at)mac.com)>
I switched out my MT for the 2bladed vans sells when my MT got damaged by fod during taxiing. Rate of climb is noticeably less(300-500fpm) I estimate. Also I am now 5 kts faster than before. The MT has a noticeably greater rate of deceleration on throttle back. Actually had to get adapted to it on first few landings and approaches. I sent the MT to Factory in Florida and had a complete overhaul done. It is back in CRP and it is for sale. It is still in its shipping crate. I can be reached at 361-533-2383 if you are looking for a like new MT at a less than new price. Regards, Robert N661G KCRP 500hours and loving it.
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 11, 2012, at 8:07 PM, Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)> wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)>
>
> I saw an RV-10 the other day with an MT prop that looked different than other MT's that I have seen on the -10, but still a 3-blade. I don't know the difference. The owner claimed that this model of prop is as fast as the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop, which I doubt, but wanted to know what other MT prop owners have experienced in cruise performance versus the Hartzell 2-blade. Has anybody ever done the test to remove one prop and install the other to do a side-by-side comparison on the same airframe? Either way, I would like to hear what others "think" they are gaining or losing with different propellers. I flew with Rob Hickman at what was AFS, who has the 3-blade Hartzell with the really fat blades, and he said he thought he was losing about 7 knots in cruise, if I remember correctly.
>
> Any others want to share their thoughts?
>
> Jesse Saint
> 352-427-
> jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> ; * The Builder's Bookstore http://wwnbsp; p://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List" target=_blank>http://www.matro=========
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Don A. McDonald
40636 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
robertbrunk(at)mac.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:55 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
I can confirm what Don says about smoothness, quietness, and low rpm performance. Robert
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 12, 2012, at 9:41 AM, Don McDonald <building_partner(at)yahoo.com (building_partner(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | Here's my 3 cents.... A USAF U2 pilot with a F1 Rocket (IO540) replaced his 2 blade hartzel with a 3 blade MT. He said climb rate a little better, and lost about 3-5 knots at top speed (not cruise). That was the info that convinced me to buy an MT. I was not concerned with anything but being smooth. I've riden in quite a few 10's and so far none have had as low of vibration levels. Just lay your hand on the glare shield. Although I've got some extra hp, I have not had another 10 (7 so far) that was as fast. With the extra hp and the 3 blade, I can run the rpm all the way down to 2,000 without any problem.... and usually cruise around 2,100.... and at that rpm can consistently run below 10 gph.
From: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch (mregoan(at)hispeed.ch)>
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: MT Prop(s)
--> RV10-List message posted by: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch (mregoan(at)hispeed.ch)>
Great information Robert. Did you also notice a difference in take-off distance? In theory that should also be better with the MT.
Gordon Anderson
41014 Switzerland
On Dec 12, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com (robertbrunk(at)mac.com)>
I switched out my MT for the 2bladed vans sells when my MT got damaged by fod during taxiing. Rate of climb is noticeably less(300-500fpm) I estimate. Also I am now 5 kts faster than before. The MT has a noticeably greater rate of deceleration on throttle back. Actually had to get adapted to it on first few landings and approaches. I sent the MT to Factory in Florida and had a complete overhaul done. It is back in CRP and it is for sale. It is still in its shipping crate. I can be reached at 361-533-2383 if you are looking for a like new MT at a less than new price. Regards, Robert N661G KCRP 500hours and loving it.
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 11, 2012, at 8:07 PM, Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)> wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)>
>
> I saw an RV-10 the other day with an MT prop that looked different than other MT's that I have seen on the -10, but still a 3-blade. I don't know the difference. The owner claimed that this model of prop is as fast as the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop, which I doubt, but wanted to know what other MT prop owners have experienced in cruise performance versus the Hartzell 2-blade. Has anybody ever done the test to remove one prop and install the other to do a side-by-side comparison on the same airframe? Either way, I would like to hear what others "think" they are gaining or losing with different propellers. I flew with Rob Hickman at what was AFS, who has the 3-blade Hartzell with the really fat blades, and he said he thought he was losing about 7 knots in cruise, if I remember correctly.
>
> Any others want to share their thoughts?
>
> Jesse Saint
> 352-427-
> jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> ; * The Builder's Bookstore http://wwnbsp; p://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List" target=_blank>http://www.matro=========
|
| Quote: |
===================================
" face="courier new,courier">www.aeroelectric.com
| Quote: | www.buildersbooks.com
uilthelp.com
|
matronics.com/contribution
===================================
://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
===================================
cs.com
===================================
|
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
n223rv(at)wolflakeairport
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:14 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
Me too, and I like the extra ground clearance as I fly exclusively off of a grass strip.
I can say I don't like removing the lower cowl though... With the nose gear and that extra blade.... It's a tight fit. Other than that, I love the prop!!
-Mike KrausRV-4 sold
RV-10 flying
KitFox SS7 Radial building
On Dec 12, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com (robertbrunk(at)mac.com)> wrote:
[quote]I can confirm what Don says about smoothness, quietness, and low rpm performance. Robert
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 12, 2012, at 9:41 AM, Don McDonald <building_partner(at)yahoo.com (building_partner(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | Here's my 3 cents.... A USAF U2 pilot with a F1 Rocket (IO540) replaced his 2 blade hartzel with a 3 blade MT. He said climb rate a little better, and lost about 3-5 knots at top speed (not cruise). That was the info that convinced me to buy an MT. I was not concerned with anything but being smooth. I've riden in quite a few 10's and so far none have had as low of vibration levels. Just lay your hand on the glare shield. Although I've got some extra hp, I have not had another 10 (7 so far) that was as fast. With the extra hp and the 3 blade, I can run the rpm all the way down to 2,000 without any problem.... and usually cruise around 2,100.... and at that rpm can consistently run below 10 gph.
From: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch (mregoan(at)hispeed.ch)>
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: MT Prop(s)
--> RV10-List message posted by: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch (mregoan(at)hispeed.ch)>
Great information Robert. Did you also notice a difference in take-off distance? In theory that should also be better with the MT.
Gordon Anderson
41014 Switzerland
On Dec 12, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com (robertbrunk(at)mac.com)>
I switched out my MT for the 2bladed vans sells when my MT got damaged by fod during taxiing. Rate of climb is noticeably less(300-500fpm) I estimate. Also I am now 5 kts faster than before. The MT has a noticeably greater rate of deceleration on throttle back. Actually had to get adapted to it on first few landings and approaches. I sent the MT to Factory in Florida and had a complete overhaul done. It is back in CRP and it is for sale. It is still in its shipping crate. I can be reached at 361-533-2383 if you are looking for a like new MT at a less than new price. Regards, Robert N661G KCRP 500hours and loving it.
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 11, 2012, at 8:07 PM, Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)> wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)>
>
> I saw an RV-10 the other day with an MT prop that looked different than other MT's that I have seen on the -10, but still a 3-blade. I don't know the difference. The owner claimed that this model of prop is as fast as the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop, which I doubt, but wanted to know what other MT prop owners have experienced in cruise performance versus the Hartzell 2-blade. Has anybody ever done the test to remove one prop and install the other to do a side-by-side comparison on the same airframe? Either way, I would like to hear what others "think" they are gaining or losing with different propellers. I flew with Rob Hickman at what was AFS, who has the 3-blade Hartzell with the really fat blades, and he said he thought he was losing about 7 knots in cruise, if I remember correctly.
>
> Any others want to share their thoughts?
>
> Jesse Saint
> 352-427-
> jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> ; * The Builder's Bookstore http://wwnbsp; p://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List" target=_blank>http://www.matro=========
|
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rv10flyer(at)live.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:19 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
The “general†rule is that a 2 blade is about 2-3kts faster in cruise but a 3 blade is much more smooth.
Deems can comment on this, as I believe he has a Aerocomposite, but if marketing is correct they have a prop that is faster than Don’s and 2 bladed aircraft http://www.aerocomposites.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewPage&page_id=D84B9F8D-5004-D739-A5A07B7031786BA9
Propeller tests conducted have involved aircraft with cruise speeds ranging from 200 to 350-mph. In many flight tests, pilots reported increases in cruise speed ranging from 5 mph to 10 mph. In one test, it was reported  that the two propellers tested had about the same cruise speeds but that the AeroComposites propeller resulted in better aircraft acceleration, especially at the higher power settings. Cruise speed improvements reported are attributable to the thin, low drag AeroComposites blade designs where the blade design is biased toward cruise rather than takeoff/climb performance. In all tests conducted, quieter operation, fast speed control response, and smooth operation (little to no vibration) were reported. Increases in climb rates have been reported in a number of applications on the order of 300 feet/minute. Significant weight savings were also realized in installations where AeroComposites propellers were replacing aluminum propellers (savings ranged from 17 to more than 25 lbs).
If memory serves me, they are more expensive than the MT
From: Don McDonald (building_partner(at)yahoo.com)
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 7:41 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: Re: MT Prop(s)
Here's my 3 cents.... A USAF U2 pilot with a F1 Rocket (IO540) replaced his 2 blade hartzel with a 3 blade MT. He said climb rate a little better, and lost about 3-5 knots at top speed (not cruise). That was the info that convinced me to buy an MT. I was not concerned with anything but being smooth. I've riden in quite a few 10's and so far none have had as low of vibration levels. Just lay your hand on the glare shield. Although I've got some extra hp, I have not had another 10 (7 so far) that was as fast. With the extra hp and the 3 blade, I can run the rpm all the way down to 2,000 without any problem.... and usually cruise around 2,100.... and at that rpm can consistently run below 10 gph.
From: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch>
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: MT Prop(s)
--> RV10-List message posted by: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch (mregoan(at)hispeed.ch)>
Great information Robert. Did you also notice a difference in take-off distance? In theory that should also be better with the MT.
Gordon Anderson
41014 Switzerland
On Dec 12, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com (robertbrunk(at)mac.com)>
I switched out my MT for the 2bladed vans sells when my MT got damaged by fod during taxiing. Rate of climb is noticeably less(300-500fpm) I estimate. Also I am now 5 kts faster than before. The MT has a noticeably greater rate of deceleration on throttle back. Actually had to get adapted to it on first few landings and approaches. I sent the MT to Factory in Florida and had a complete overhaul done. It is back in CRP and it is for sale. It is still in its shipping crate. I can be reached at 361-533-2383 if you are looking for a like new MT at a less than new price. Regards, Robert N661G KCRP 500hours and loving it.
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 11, 2012, at 8:07 PM, Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)> wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)>
>
> I saw an RV-10 the other day with an MT prop that looked different than other MT's that I have seen on the -10, but still a 3-blade. I don't know the difference. The owner claimed that this model of prop is as fast as the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop, which I doubt, but wanted to know what other MT prop owners have experienced in cruise performance versus the Hartzell 2-blade. Has anybody ever done the test to remove one prop and install the other to do a side-by-side comparison on the same airframe? Either way, I would like to hear what others "think" they are gaining or losing with different propellers. I flew with Rob Hickman at what was AFS, who has the 3-blade Hartzell with the really fat blades, and he said he thought he was losing about 7 knots in cruise, if I remember correctly.
>
> Any others want to share their thoughts?
>
> Jesse Saint
> 352-427-
> jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> ; * The Builder's Bookstore http://wwnbsp; p://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List" target=_blank>http://www.matro=========
|
[quote]
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Deems Davis
Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 925
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:42 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
I'm off the ground before an unloaded Maule. And faster than a speeding bullet. In an airborne drag race, I consistently 'walk-away' from All RV10's with either a 2 bld Hartzell or 3bld MT . (the burn-outs are exhilerating!!, but waiting for the christmas tree lights is still a bit problemmatic).
Deems
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Pascal <rv10flyer(at)live.com (rv10flyer(at)live.com)> wrote:
[quote] The “general” rule is that a 2 blade is about 2-3kts faster in cruise but a 3 blade is much more smooth.
Deems can comment on this, as I believe he has a Aerocomposite, but if marketing is correct they have a prop that is faster than Don’s and 2 bladed aircraft http://www.aerocomposites.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewPage&page_id=D84B9F8D-5004-D739-A5A07B7031786BA9
Propeller tests conducted have involved aircraft with cruise speeds ranging from 200 to 350-mph. In many flight tests, pilots reported increases in cruise speed ranging from 5 mph to 10 mph. In one test, it was reported that the two propellers tested had about the same cruise speeds but that the AeroComposites propeller resulted in better aircraft acceleration, especially at the higher power settings. Cruise speed improvements reported are attributable to the thin, low drag AeroComposites blade designs where the blade design is biased toward cruise rather than takeoff/climb performance. In all tests conducted, quieter operation, fast speed control response, and smooth operation (little to no vibration) were reported. Increases in climb rates have been reported in a number of applications on the order of 300 feet/minute. Significant weight savings were also realized in installations where AeroComposites propellers were replacing aluminum propellers (savings ranged from 17 to more than 25 lbs).
If memory serves me, they are more expensive than the MT
From: Don McDonald (building_partner(at)yahoo.com)
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 7:41 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: Re: MT Prop(s)
Here's my 3 cents.... A USAF U2 pilot with a F1 Rocket (IO540) replaced his 2 blade hartzel with a 3 blade MT. He said climb rate a little better, and lost about 3-5 knots at top speed (not cruise). That was the info that convinced me to buy an MT. I was not concerned with anything but being smooth. I've riden in quite a few 10's and so far none have had as low of vibration levels. Just lay your hand on the glare shield. Although I've got some extra hp, I have not had another 10 (7 so far) that was as fast. With the extra hp and the 3 blade, I can run the rpm all the way down to 2,000 without any problem... and usually cruise around 2,100.... and at that rpm can consistently run below 10 gph.
From: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch (mregoan(at)hispeed.ch)>
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: MT Prop(s)
--> RV10-List message posted by: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch (mregoan(at)hispeed.ch)>
Great information Robert. Did you also notice a difference in take-off distance? In theory that should also be better with the MT.
Gordon Anderson
41014 Switzerland
On Dec 12, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com (robertbrunk(at)mac.com)>
I switched out my MT for the 2bladed vans sells when my MT got damaged by fod during taxiing. Rate of climb is noticeably less(300-500fpm) I estimate. Also I am now 5 kts faster than before. The MT has a noticeably greater rate of deceleration on throttle back. Actually had to get adapted to it on first few landings and approaches. I sent the MT to Factory in Florida and had a complete overhaul done. It is back in CRP and it is for sale. It is still in its shipping crate. I can be reached at [url=tel:361-533-2383]361-533-2383[/url] if you are looking for a like new MT at a less than new price. Regards, Robert N661G KCRP 500hours and loving it.
>
|
| Quote: | > I saw an RV-10 the other day with an MT prop that looked different than other MT's that I have seen on the -10, but still a 3-blade. I don't know the difference. The owner claimed that this model of prop is as fast as the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop, which I doubt, but wanted to know what other MT prop owners have experienced in cruise performance versus the Hartzell 2-blade. Has anybody ever done the test to remove one prop and install the other to do a side-by-side comparison on the same airframe? Either way, I would like to hear what others "think" they are gaining or losing with different propellers. I flew with Rob Hickman at what was AFS, who has the 3-blade Hartzell with the really fat blades, and he said he thought he was losing about 7 knots in cruise, if I remember correctly.
>>
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jdriggs49(at)msn.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:07 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
another nice thing about the MT is that it is about 22 pounds lighter (I forget the exact difference) than the two blade metal prop. That makes a lot of difference since the -10 tends to be really nose heavy.
From: rv10flyer(at)live.com
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: MT Prop(s)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 08:18:43 -0800
The “general” rule is that a 2 blade is about 2-3kts faster in cruise but a 3 blade is much more smooth.
Deems can comment on this, as I believe he has a Aerocomposite, but if marketing is correct they have a prop that is faster than Don’s and 2 bladed aircraft http://www.aerocomposites.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewPage&page_id=D84B9F8D-5004-D739-A5A07B7031786BA9
Propeller tests conducted have involved aircraft with cruise speeds ranging from 200 to 350-mph. In many flight tests, pilots reported increases in cruise speed ranging from 5 mph to 10 mph. In one test, it was reported that the two propellers tested had about the same cruise speeds but that the AeroComposites propeller resulted in better aircraft acceleration, especially at the higher power settings. Cruise speed improvements reported are attributable to the thin, low drag AeroComposites blade designs where the blade design is biased toward cruise rather than takeoff/climb performance. In all tests conducted, quieter operation, fast speed control response, and smooth operation (little to no vibration) were reported. Increases in climb rates have been reported in a number of applications on the order of 300 feet/minute. Significant weight savings were also realized in installations where AeroComposites propellers were replacing aluminum propellers (savings ranged from 17 to more than 25 lbs).
If memory serves me, they are more expensive than the MT
From: Don McDonald (building_partner(at)yahoo.com)
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 7:41 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: Re: MT Prop(s)
Here's my 3 cents.... A USAF U2 pilot with a F1 Rocket (IO540) replaced his 2 blade hartzel with a 3 blade MT. He said climb rate a little better, and lost about 3-5 knots at top speed (not cruise). That was the info that convinced me to buy an MT. I was not concerned with anything but being smooth. I've riden in quite a few 10's and so far none have had as low of vibration levels. Just lay your hand on the glare shield. Although I've got some extra hp, I have not had another 10 (7 so far) that was as fast. With the extra hp and the 3 blade, I can run the rpm all the way down to 2,000 without any problem.... and usually cruise around 2,100.... and at that rpm can consistently run below 10 gph.
From: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch>
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: MT Prop(s)
--> RV10-List message posted by: Gordon Anderson <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch (mregoan(at)hispeed.ch)>
Great information Robert. Did you also notice a difference in take-off distance? In theory that should also be better with the MT.
Gordon Anderson
41014 Switzerland
On Dec 12, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com (robertbrunk(at)mac.com)>
I switched out my MT for the 2bladed vans sells when my MT got damaged by fod during taxiing. Rate of climb is noticeably less(300-500fpm) I estimate. Also I am now 5 kts faster than before. The MT has a noticeably greater rate of deceleration on throttle back. Actually had to get adapted to it on first few landings and approaches. I sent the MT to Factory in Florida and had a complete overhaul done. It is back in CRP and it is for sale. It is still in its shipping crate. I can be reached at 361-533-2383 if you are looking for a like new MT at a less than new price. Regards, Robert N661G KCRP 500hours and loving it.
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 11, 2012, at 8:07 PM, Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)> wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)>
>
> I saw an RV-10 the other day with an MT prop that looked different than other MT's that I have seen on the -10, but still a 3-blade. I don't know the difference. The owner claimed that this model of prop is as fast as the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop, which I doubt, but wanted to know what other MT prop owners have experienced in cruise performance versus the Hartzell 2-blade. Has anybody ever done the test to remove one prop and install the other to do a side-by-side comparison on the same airframe? Either way, I would like to hear what others "think" they are gaining or losing with different propellers. I flew with Rob Hickman at what was AFS, who has the 3-blade Hartzell with the really fat blades, and he said he thought he was losing about 7 knots in cruise, if I remember correctly.
>
> Any others want to share their thoughts?
>
> Jesse Saint
> 352-427-
> jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> ; * The Builder's Bookstore [url=http://www.buildersbooks.com/][/url]http://wwnbsp; p://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List" target=_blank>http://www.matro=========
|
[quote]
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rv10flyer
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 364
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:36 am Post subject: Re: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
If you want to fly at gross weight all the time like I do and have an aux pc680 battery/wiring/contactor in back, then the heavier Hartzell 2 blade is much better. Same if you want air conditioning, which I don't have.
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Wayne G. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tim Olson
Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2879
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:51 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
I've said it before, but I'll repeat it now...
The RV-10 is slightly nose heavy, but it is NOT something
that a builder should attempt to solve when building.
It's nose heavy by design, and keeping the plane
as close to FWD CG limits as possible with a lone pilot
will help you maximize your load carrying capacity based
on CG, and give your plane better stall/spin recovery
traits. It's a safety thing. You do have the leeway
to reduce prop weights if you want a different prop, or
add a bigger battery or aux battery if you want to do
things like that, but do not do those types of things
for the purpose of making it less nose heavy...it is
NOT too nose heavy...it is just safely nose heavy.
The people that I know that have A/C in at least
some cases, have also paid the penalty of having reduced
load capacity because of the CG. If you build it
with a metal prop and standard PC680, you'll probably
have a hard time getting it OUT of aft CG without
trying hard. So, just build the plane, and don't look
at the nose-heavy characteristic as something to "solve",
but allow it to give you some leeway in the options
you choose to install. The FWD CG is a gift.
Tim
On 12/13/2012 8:36 AM, rv10flyer wrote:
| Quote: |
<wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com>
If you want to fly at gross weight all the time like I do and have an
aux pc680 battery/wiring/contactor in back, then the heavier Hartzell
2 blade is much better. Same if you want air conditioning, which I
don't have.
-------- Wayne G. 12/01/2011 TT= 95
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kelly McMullen
Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Posts: 1188
Location: Sun Lakes AZ
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:52 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
The 2 blade may help your W&B, CG, but the 3 blade will help you get off the ground and climb better, as well as helping useful load.
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 7:36 AM, rv10flyer <wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com (wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
[quote]--> RV10-List message posted by: "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com (wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com)>
If you want to fly at gross weight all the time like I do and have an aux pc680 battery/wiring/contactor in back, then the heavier Hartzell 2 blade is much better. Same if you want air conditioning, which I don't have.
--------
Wayne G.
12/01/2011
TT= 95
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390386#390386
===========
="_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
ooks.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
et="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
le, List Admin.
===========
arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
===========
http://forums.matronics.com
===========
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor
KCHD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kelly McMullen
Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Posts: 1188
Location: Sun Lakes AZ
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:02 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
Good points. Vans did put W&B where they felt it would perform best.
Not to mention that IF you feel the need for a second battery(or third) you can mount it on the firewall to avoid moving c.g. too far to rear. For me, the PC680 doesn't have enough storage capacity, while it might be fine for cranking. So, planning on RG-25XC that is pretty much what Van's designed for. Don't feel like doing the 2nd bus, 2nd alternator, 2nd battery complexity, but that is why we do OBAM experimental, to make our own choices, hopefully "informed" choices.
Kelly
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com (Tim(at)myrv10.com)> wrote:
[quote] --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com (Tim(at)myrv10.com)>
I've said it before, but I'll repeat it now...
The RV-10 is slightly nose heavy, but it is NOT something
that a builder should attempt to solve when building.
It's nose heavy by design, and keeping the plane
as close to FWD CG limits as possible with a lone pilot
will help you maximize your load carrying capacity based
on CG, and give your plane better stall/spin recovery
traits. It's a safety thing. You do have the leeway
to reduce prop weights if you want a different prop, or
add a bigger battery or aux battery if you want to do
things like that, but do not do those types of things
for the purpose of making it less nose heavy...it is
NOT too nose heavy...it is just safely nose heavy.
The people that I know that have A/C in at least
some cases, have also paid the penalty of having reduced
load capacity because of the CG. If you build it
with a metal prop and standard PC680, you'll probably
have a hard time getting it OUT of aft CG without
trying hard. So, just build the plane, and don't look
at the nose-heavy characteristic as something to "solve",
but allow it to give you some leeway in the options
you choose to install. The FWD CG is a gift.
Tim
On 12/13/2012 8:36 AM, rv10flyer wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: "rv10flyer"
<wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com (wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com)>
If you want to fly at gross weight all the time like I do and have an
aux pc680 battery/wiring/contactor in back, then the heavier Hartzell
2 blade is much better. Same if you want air conditioning, which I
don't have.
-------- Wayne G. 12/01/2011 TT= 95
|
====================================
om" target="_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
ooks.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
et="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
le, List Admin.
====================================
arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
====================================
http://forums.matronics.com
====================================
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor
KCHD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rv10flyer
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 364
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:23 am Post subject: Re: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
I have the 680 aux battery beside the 925 main battery. It reduces the amount of baggage to 75 lbs with family and size of rear passengers, but I like having an hour plus of energy to run the entire IFR panel and the option to start the engine. If I had it to do over I would probably put it on the firewall. Combine that with the lighter weight 3 blade prop. It is good for new builders to see these different points of view and options. Either way, it is a great plane for a couple or a family.
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Wayne G. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jesse(at)saintaviation.co
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 8:11 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
I agree completely!
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse(at)saintaviation.com
C: 352-427-0285
F: 815-377-3694
On Dec 13, 2012, at 9:51 AM, Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
I've said it before, but I'll repeat it now...
The RV-10 is slightly nose heavy, but it is NOT something
that a builder should attempt to solve when building.
It's nose heavy by design, and keeping the plane
as close to FWD CG limits as possible with a lone pilot
will help you maximize your load carrying capacity based
on CG, and give your plane better stall/spin recovery
traits. It's a safety thing. You do have the leeway
to reduce prop weights if you want a different prop, or
add a bigger battery or aux battery if you want to do
things like that, but do not do those types of things
for the purpose of making it less nose heavy...it is
NOT too nose heavy...it is just safely nose heavy.
The people that I know that have A/C in at least
some cases, have also paid the penalty of having reduced
load capacity because of the CG. If you build it
with a metal prop and standard PC680, you'll probably
have a hard time getting it OUT of aft CG without
trying hard. So, just build the plane, and don't look
at the nose-heavy characteristic as something to "solve",
but allow it to give you some leeway in the options
you choose to install. The FWD CG is a gift.
Tim
On 12/13/2012 8:36 AM, rv10flyer wrote:
>
> <wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com>
>
> If you want to fly at gross weight all the time like I do and have an
> aux pc680 battery/wiring/contactor in back, then the heavier Hartzell
> 2 blade is much better. Same if you want air conditioning, which I
> don't have.
>
> -------- Wayne G. 12/01/2011 TT= 95
>
>
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tim Olson
Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2879
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:16 am Post subject: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
Exactly. I used the PC925 for longer run-time if the
alternator failed, and it gives a little better cranking
capacity too. But at least to do that, I didn't have to
panic about the CG issues. A lightweight prop isn't a
bad thing at all. Just don't focus on the nose-heavy
concept and decide you want:
* Lightweight Prop
* PC925 Battery
* An additional aft aux battery
* A/C
* fixed mounted aft bulkhead O2 system
Heck, if you made those choices all together at the
same time, you'd probably have a pretty miserable
RV-10 from a loading perspective.
On 12/13/2012 9:02 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
| Quote: | Good points. Vans did put W&B where they felt it would perform best.
Not to mention that IF you feel the need for a second battery(or third)
you can mount it on the firewall to avoid moving c.g. too far to rear.
For me, the PC680 doesn't have enough storage capacity, while it might
be fine for cranking. So, planning on RG-25XC that is pretty much what
Van's designed for. Don't feel like doing the 2nd bus, 2nd alternator,
2nd battery complexity, but that is why we do OBAM experimental, to make
our own choices, hopefully "informed" choices.
Kelly
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kellym
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1705
Location: Sun Lakes AZ
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:47 pm Post subject: Re: MT Prop(s) |
|
|
[quote="Deems Davis"]I'm off the ground before an unloaded�Maule. And faster than a speeding bullet. In an airborne drag race, I�consistently 'walk-away' from All RV10's with either a 2 bld Hartzell�or 3bld MT . (the burn-outs are exhilarating!!,�but waiting for the christmas tree lights�is still a bit problematic).�
�
Deems
quote]
You won't get any Christmas lights from the DVT tower, but CHD tower has them every holiday season. You get to flash all you frequency changes up there. Only airport I know of that takes 5 frequency changes to taxi from one side of the airport to the other. So you lose all your speed advantage in the taxi tantrums up there.............
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
