Hello,

I read on an older forum that Hartzell is testing a composite version for the Voyager prop. Anyone has information on timeline/ progress of this project and if it would be available for C185?

Rgs,

Patrick.

Interesting, the 2 STC I could find spell out the 82". Does Hartzell even make a 86" version of the carbon fiber Voyager? What airplane is it approved on if it exists?

I asked at the Hartzell pavilion at OSH. He was not at liberty to say much but indicated testing was promising so far, the skywagon was a priority, it would be more expensive than Al, and did not have an estimate on timing. Despite the buyout, the reps were cool guys that liked their jobs and excited about the products. Alternatively, McCauley barely had representation with a small desk in the corner of the Textron and looked like an afterthought. Got the standard "year, make, model?" like it was AutoZone. They have nothing but the 403 and 401. MT had some engaging enough engineer types and now they have in print, "max RPM 2500."

Unless, something has changed, Flight Resource has the MT prop STC for max RPM of 2700. If you buy the prop from them, it comes with that STC. If you buy it elsewhere, you don’t. My understanding is that Flight Resource undertook the testing to receive the approval so as not to be limited by the lower RPM restriction directed by the European agency. That restriction is for noise compliance, not operational limits.

Did some digging, this is from the flight supplement for MT propellers installed on 520/550 equipped 185’s per Flight Resource’s STC, 2700 max RPM:

Guawagon wrote:...Hartzell is testing a composite version for the Voyager prop

Patrick,

Yes, Hartz is indeed in the processing of brining the comp prop to market. I just checked in yesterday to get an update (I have a couple of customers eagerly awaiting the approval)

What they are saying is that the prop is ready for testing, which should begin sometime in late Aug. If that goes well, I was told they were hoping to begin selling at the end of Q4... which means realistically Q1 2025?

The prop "should' have the exact same performance of the metal prop, but with a 20 lb weight savings. I sold a handful of Voyagers now and it really is hands down the best prop for the Skywagon w/ the -50, 520, or 550. If the performance stays the same, the lighter composite will be a game changer for sure.

The downside... bring your checkbook. No MSRP yet, but expect the "high" twenties.

Bigrenna wrote:...The downside... bring your checkbook. No MSRP yet, but expect the "high" twenties.

High twenties.....wow!
How much does the aluminum Voyager go for?
And by comparison, how much for a 3 blade MT?

hotrod180 wrote:.....wow!

Fur sure! It's bonker town.

3B Voyager alum is $18.7k. 2B MT is $19k. I haven't sold a 3B MT in a long time, but if I remember correctly, it's just about $25k?

There will be more to the story.

MW

Thanks for the great information! I sounds like an awesome prop, for sure. I am in an engine swap project right now, and I have basically decided on the 86" Voyager. I would love the composite version, but Q1 25 start of sales probably means Q2 after initial orders. I guess I will let some other lucky pilots try out the composite version and see what happens in the future.

Rgs,

Patrick.

Final testing is scheduled for mid August. This should be the FAA approval testing to finalize the STC and certification of the composite Voyager.

The prop is awesome and very close to the performance of the Aluminum Voyager. At this point it's really up to the FAA paperwork process.

I don't know how much the prop will cost as I just fly the profiles. I do like the what I see from a numbers standpoint. The weight savings and durability are compelling.

MW

I am excited about this prop. It was also interesting to read the other thread about the comparison between an MT 2 blade and the Aluminum Voyager. I was really surprised to hear how much faster the 3 bladed Voyager was in cruise. Sort opposite what convention dogma has taught most of us.

I suspect the Composite Voyager will have all of the advantages of the lighter weight/CG improvements and still produce more thrust in cruise - especially for the 520/550s. I currently have a 78 inch Hartzell which performs remarkably well but I think it is not ideal for my O520. It is 30 years old this year and has been overhauled twice and recently IRAN'd. I suspect it will need replacement at some point. It is a quiet prop and gives me excellent prop clearance. I think the Voyager will be faster and give it more pull.

I am concerned about the same starter adapter problems with the composite Voyager and would like to see it guinea pigged for a couple of years. The Aluminum Voyager weighs 77 lbs - so a composite version at 57 lbs might be just heavy enough to prevent the starter adapter issues. I also think there have been less starter adapter issues with the 3 bladed MTs due to the heavier weight compared to the 2 blade version.

Prop design has really improved over the years and it really is some complex physics turning the engine power into max performance.



Josh

High 20s?

Metal prop on my 185 plus a C120
or
Composite prop

Hmm

Also how do these things wear when not operated from a manicured paved field?

Price point it’s like the Ti gear legs, cool kit but I can’t make the numbers work in my head, I’d wager most pilots would be better served just losing the 25lbs off their pant line, cost less and better ROI too

Unless it gets me like +20kts in cruise or something

Starter adapter and kickback--

I owned a 3 blade MT prior to all the test. I did get kickback occasionally and yes my timing was set correctly. Period.

I tested Aluminum Voyager to baseline my aircraft. No kickback.

I did most all of the test on many variations of the final composite prop that is 20 pounds or so lighter than the aluminum voyager with no kickback. The final version is weighted a bit at the tips to help the inertia of the starter to avoid kickback.

I have the SBS J-16 batter with the Atlee Dodge Firewall mount and a new starter on a factory new IO-550. Lots for the little battery to do. No issues thus far.

MW

Curious if there’s any more gossip on this? I’m one of the many interested pilots willing to stand in line for this product. The timeline discussed here is only a quarter or so behind the timeline I heard from them in February, which is honestly pretty impressive.

We are hoping to have the STC in in the net month or so. It's up to the Feds at this point. All testing is complete.

MW

I saw someone mention online something about a "two blade Voyager"--
I assume the same blades as a 3-blade Voyager but with one less blade.
Didn't sound likely to me, but is something like that in the works?

No such prop. Probably confused with Trailblazer as a guess.

MW