I'd like to install a Electronics International FL-2 dual fuel level gauge in my C-180A.... the only trouble is that they don't have an STC. They sell it for experimental. I have found a 337 for an install into a C-182.... but would love to find one for a C-180 installation as well. Just incase the Feds don't recognize the airframe similarities.

Anyone know of a FL-2 Field Approval in a C-180 out there?

thanks,
gunny

I'm interested in this as well. Somebody on the Skywagons.org site said they knew of a couple field approvals for those, but I never really followed up. Been meaning to call EI for a few days to ask about it, among other things...they might know of successful FA's for a 180. To be honest, I don't want the hassle of a field approval unless it's a slam dunk...I didn't plan far enough ahead for the time it will take to go the through the process

I ended up buying the Aerospace logic FL2 something dual fuel indicator and it looks like a pretty nice unit, but everything else in my panel will be EI, so I'd like to have the same brand for everything. EI said they have no intention for an STC for that particular unit because of the new CGR-30P.

I guess the one nice thing about having a different brand fuel indicator, is that at a quick glance, I won't be trying to figure out which EI gauge is the fuel gauge...the fuel gauge looks very similar to the OPT gauge.

Bart-

The 337 FA for the 182 I have is from EI. They have heard of installations in 180's but don't know the tail numbers. I'll share my experience with you and if it is approved at my FSDO it will likely be approved at yours.

I tried the Aerospace Logic route first (I installed one in a Bonanza years ago) and it was a total disaster in my 180 (i.e. it didn't work and the company didn't stand behind it after telling me it was the unit I needed). I am not thrilled by Aerospace Logic.

gunny

I have pulled out an Aerospace Logic unit as well on a customer's aircraft. Didn't impress me with its build quality.

I put in the MVP-50 and wanted to use EI's senders over the stock Cessna ones, which are anything but linear and smooth. EI seemed to have some issues with the senders, and where not available when I put mine in 18 months ago. I haven't checked for availability since, but if I was going to go to aftermarket fuel gauges, I would prefer not to re-use the senders. The senders, not the gauges are the weak point. I just spent a day re-calibrating my system while I did the annual. On the 185, you have to jack up the tail to near level for accurate readings, put the fuel in in (my case 10 gallon increments) get the count from the A-D converter and plug that value into the fuel system. Even after all that, the system is not repeatable with stock senders. Always has a 5% variance, no matter what.

On an interesting aside, after putting in the fuel from empty, it seems my tanks each hold 7 gallons more than the TC stated value, even taking into account the unusable fuel and header tank. I naturally left the values stock, but there is this little extra fuel there, just in case. Does make my calcs for W&B a bit off however.

Did find this innovative gizmo to make jacking the tail up a lot easier and safer:

Interesting that you had problems, was that the older 100 series gauge? I emailed the company to make sure it would work and the guy said yes...our 180's use resistive senders right?


Please keep me informed of your progress with the EI Fuel gauge, I'd still rather have that one...and save $300 in the process. I'll ask my mech if he thinks our FSDO will approve this based on the 182 info.

dogpilot wrote:
...On an interesting aside, after putting in the fuel from empty, it seems my tanks each hold 7 gallons more than the TC stated value, even taking into account the unusable fuel and header tank. I naturally left the values stock, but there is this little extra fuel there, just in case. Does make my calcs for W&B a bit off however...

I thought about this, was the extra fuel taking up what would normally be airspace in the tank in a 3-point position???

Hard to say, mine is a 1976 A185F with bags. The Cessna senders are float/resistance units, regular POS's. EI had offered a really nicely made resistance sender. It resembled the late model Cessna Caravan units, made from decent components, rather than stamped metal.

The why more fuel is a mystery to me, but I didn't rely on the fuel truck totalizer. I actually calibrated a 5 gallon plastic fuel can, and I don't think I spilled 7 gallons on the floor of the hanger. When I first did a quick and dirty fuel calibration it was in the normal sit on its tailwheel position, I thought the difference was on my less than scientific method. This time I took my time and did one tank twice to see if it was just me. Draining the 185 is a real exercise in patience. I take it from the engine compartment strainer drain. I made a small clip to hold it open, attached a PVC tube to the outflow then to my calibrated can. I fill one tank to the brim, then drained it, 10 gallons at a time and added it to the other side. That way I got each point twice, once going up and once going down.

EI's will use the normal senders, yet they don't recommend them in the install manual. Like I said, the alternative was not available when I did mine.

I'll keep everyone posted on the success of the FA attempt. Dogpilot, I've been trying t figure out how I'm going to get the tail higher than my floor jack... excellent idea! I also appreciate the comments about the old fuel senders.

Thanks.

gunny

I too wanted to install an EI gauge to match the others I was installing, but decided I'd rather fly my plane instead of trying to get a field approval. So I went with AL and after flying with it for more than 200 hours I can say I'm totally pleased. Accuracy is dead on at all fuel levels, but I did replace the horrible Cessna senders with McFarlane's at the same time. Once we got the old senders out we connected an ohm meter to them and at full they were full, and empty they were full and anywhere in between the resistance level could be anywhere. Oh and Gunny, you will need something taller then a floor jack.

The gizmo to jack the tail is called a "jacking table," I found it on Craigslist for $50 used. Subsequently to jacking the tail, I have found dozens of uses for it. My constant favorite is using it as an adjustable tool platform to hold the tools at just the right hight when I'm working on something. Now, if I could only put the tools I actually needed on it then work would progress smoothly.

Which of McFarlane's senders did you use?

Phil--

And which of the AL fuel level gauges did you install? They told me what I needed was the FL-252, so I bought it and it didn't work. When I called the tech rep to figure out what I was doing wrong, he told me what are you thinking that unit won't work with Cessna senders.... now they won't take the unit back.

gunny

The AL gauge is FL202.

The FL252 uses voltage senders, the FL202 uses resistive senders.

The McFarlane senders we used are:
http://www.mcfarlaneaviation.com/Products/?CategoryID=162&ID=8485916&PartNumber=MC0726110-1&

Gunny,

I just want to add that when you go to calibrate your fuel gauges be sure the airplane is level as the book requires. In my case the level went against the upper door sill, which required the tail to go a lot higher then wing level.

An interesting side note, I drained the fuel initially with the tail on the ground, then we took her to the pumps and set her as the photo shows. I then drained her again and was surprised that almost no additional fuel came out. I give Cessna kudos here for ensuring that level or climbing complete use of the fuel is possible.

All-

A quick update on this issue. I've been trying to call the FSDO for over a week... and they won't even answer the phone. We did have a little weather event, ice pellets, etc that almost closed the roads... so I'll give 'em that.

But the good news, for me, is that Aerospace Logic called me and are going to replace the 252 with the correct part, the FL-202. I will say that this is outstanding customer service. I bought from a distributor that shall remain nameless.... and AL didn't have to do that. I sure do appreciate their attitude (and in the interest of full disclosure have installed their product in a Bonanza in the past and really liked it!).

So, I'm not going to follow up on the FA route since my problem is solved. If anyone is interested in the 182 337 I'll send it to you.

Thanks,
gunny