No question that the lighter prop is a factor. The paradox is that (IMHO) the MT is such a better prop its worth all the headache trying to hash all this out. I know many love that 401 for solid reasons and that their are potential drawbacks to the MT, but I've flown both a bunch and Im just not a fan. Heavy, stoopid noisy, not as responsive, etc...

RE: Mags... Makes no sense to dump perfectly good mags in favor of Shower of Sparks, but the retarded timing at start will go a long way to helping the problem. If you need mags, or are starting with a fresh motor, might be something to think about. Time will tell!

Curious Greg... Was there another reason your mech didn't like the S.O.Spks?

Bigrenna wrote:No question that the lighter prop is a factor. The paradox is that (IMHO) the MT is such a better prop its worth all the headache trying to hash all this out. I know many love that 401 for solid reasons and that their are potential drawbacks to the MT, but I've flown both a bunch and Im just not a fan. Heavy, stoopid noisy, not as responsive, etc...

RE: Mags... Makes no sense to dump perfectly good mags in favor of Shower of Sparks, but the retarded timing at start will go a long way to helping the problem. If you need mags, or are starting with a fresh motor, might be something to think about. Time will tell!

Curious Greg... Was there another reason your mech didn't like the S.O.Spks?

Agreed 100% MT its an amazing prop and worth doing the proper setup.
Some guys dont recommend the Shower of Sparks because I heard you cannot hand prop it.
I carry this in my plane anyways.

http://themicrostart.com/

motoadve wrote:

Bigrenna wrote:No question that the lighter prop is a factor. The paradox is that (IMHO) the MT is such a better prop its worth all the headache trying to hash all this out. I know many love that 401 for solid reasons and that their are potential drawbacks to the MT, but I've flown both a bunch and Im just not a fan. Heavy, stoopid noisy, not as responsive, etc...

RE: Mags... Makes no sense to dump perfectly good mags in favor of Shower of Sparks, but the retarded timing at start will go a long way to helping the problem. If you need mags, or are starting with a fresh motor, might be something to think about. Time will tell!

Curious Greg... Was there another reason your mech didn't like the S.O.Spks?

Agreed 100% MT its an amazing prop and worth doing the proper setup.
Some guys dont recommend the Shower of Sparks because I heard you cannot hand prop it.
I carry this in my plane anyways.

http://themicrostart.com/

You can handprop an engine with shower of sparks, but it is a little complicated.

You need to remove the cable from the starter and then have someone engage the start switch to energize the starting vibrator while you handprop. As long as there are a few volts left in your battery you’ll get 200volts AC thru the retard points.

Your jumpstart battery does seems easier tho...

Different strokes, the Hartzell Scimitar I've got now out climbs the 2-blade MT by alot. It's heavier, but just moved the tools etc. further aft, problem solved. Its not loud, and looks way cooler IMO [emoji12]

I had really bad luck, n the kickback from my MT, that busted the adaptor, resulted in metal contamination. 90 hours later ultimately had to major overhaul a 600 hour, not quite 2 y/o engine. Kinda sucks any amazing outta the deal. We went through every inch of that engine and electrical system, with many different sets of eyes on it. There was no smoking gun ever found, all the way to a full tear down performed by Custom Airmotive. All for innovation, but think its important folks understand that this is a persistent issue on lightweight props, which is highly uncommon, at least in my experience, with a traditional propellor. I'm no expert by any stretch, though in over 2500 hours behind 0-47O's, not once did I have a kickback with a metal prop from a weak battery, bad timing, low cranking rpm's, or all the little things that are prone to eventually happen on a working aircraft. Food for thought.

Not just a 6 cylinder / MT issue either.
Buddy of mine put a Catto on his O-200 powered Luscombe, now he has trouble with hot starting. Light prop doesnt have enough inertia. Same deal when he ran a standard Sensenich wood prop.

motoadve wrote:I have shower of sparks and also the classic style starter adapter which already tested can take a kickback with no problem.
So might start to re think about a lighter starter.

Which one do you guys recommend?

I think his post is better suited over here? so:

My plan is as soon as the Surefly is approved by OSH, I will install this and go back to my Skytec ST5, which is a great starter.

I feel that the combo of the Shower of Spks, the old style adapter, and the electronic ig will be the cats meow.

https://www.surefly.net/

Hey guys,

Reviving this thread to see if there is any further discussion around the kickback issue? I'm looking to install an MT prop in the next 12 months and this thread has really got me giving that second thoughts.

The surefly electronic ignition appears to be fully certified as of Feb 19th. Do you think that would totally eliminate the kickback issue? I've read every single post on this thread and that appears to be the theme.

CParker wrote:Hey guys,

Reviving this thread to see if there is any further discussion around the kickback issue? I'm looking to install an MT prop in the next 12 months and this thread has really got me giving that second thoughts.

The surefly electronic ignition appears to be fully certified as of Feb 19th. Do you think that would totally eliminate the kickback issue? I've read every single post on this thread and that appears to be the theme.

I have just completed reading this entire thread also as I am in process of Pponking an IO-520 I got my hands on. BTW, for you folks looking to buy that Pponk STC, they have sold it off to another person and purchasing from Steve Knop's shop is no longer possible. Not sure what will happen with pricing but I have heard it will go up soon.

Per the directions from Surefly I have been starting my old O470 on both the Surefly and a new Slick Mag with impulse. Now I think it is time to experiment with starting on the Surefly only. In my case on an old 1957 C-182 it is just a matter of ignition key position to choose which units are in play during start. Engaging the starter is via a good old start button.

I recently taxied to the gas pumps and when I got there shut down via mixture to discover the engine was still turning over via the starter. This kind of freaked me out and I got a new starter button installed thinking it must have stuck in some how, but it felt just fine. I had the idea of installing an indicator light that should always turn off when the starter releases. ( I guess that would not be entirely true but it would indicate the contactor has been de energized). I don't like to think about what would have happened if I had turned right toward the runway for a few touch and goes rather than fuel it up first. Hopefully I did not do any serious damage as I kept RPMs low and only for a short time period. I am sure the starter was seeing some RPMs it was not designed for.

I do believe the Surefly will provide very reliable TDC timing, more so than relying on the impulse coupled Slick. At 400 RPMs the Surefly begins advance to 22 deg. and then beyond on up to a max of 38 degrees and low RPMs and manifold Pres.

I have been very attracted to the MT except for all these reports of kick backs and starter adapter problems. I have a Skytech ST4 for starting. I also have the old boat anchor that came off the thing and maybe it needs to go back on. Oh well, I really did not want to drop 15K on an MT anyway so this thread may have been enough for me to let go of the advantages of the MT...

I've read a few reports of the Surefly causing kickbacks with a mostly dead battery when the prop will barely turn over. I'm not sure how hand propping a very light prop without a lot of inertia would play either.

Here's one, in post #5: https://bearhawkforums.com/forum/bearha ... c-ignition

I'm not sure how hand propping a very light prop without a lot of inertia would play either.

I've hand propped my 2 blade MT on my Cessna 180 with 470K. It is on 29 Bushwheels and I just pull it through compression but not really trying to spin it for all I'm worth. I have two Bendix mags that the impulse couplers are working and I think that is the secret. I want the blade I'm pulling on at about 10 or 11 o'clock when I'm standing in front looking toward the rear of the plane. I am a little over 6 feet tall so that helps too.
Also, when using the starter or hand propping,, I prime and then pull the engine through few blades with mags off, I get in and give it another shot of prime and hit the starter button and some times it is running just going through one compression--- not always but most of the time.

I had a kickback on the third start after installing an MT this past winter with my IO-520 (new style adapter, Tempest starter). I'm experimental, so i've got more flexibility, but the two things I did to fix it after verifying the timing was good was a lithium battery and electronic ignition. Prior to any changes, my engine would start on the first blade, but the rpm was lower than desired. The lithium battery sits at a higher voltage than AGM and the voltage doesn't sag as much during the start. That translates into a prop that spins over much faster on starting with the same starter since it is getting more watts. The electronic ignition will more reliably ensure the starting spark doesn't fire too early (BTDC; mine fires 5 after TDC) as well as some of the electronic ignitions don't fire the plugs until after a complete rotation of the engine, ensuring the rpm is already up to starting speed which also helps protect from the plugs firing too soon. I don't know if the Surefly ignition does that or not. Not to start an EarthX debate, but they do have a TSO'd battery now, so that may be an option to improve starting performance.

I love the MT prop, but the initial experience was frustrating to say the least (needed a prop change while on a trip, ended up having to fly back commercial anyway after the adapter broke). I bought mine through Flight Resources and their response was amazing, given it was Christmas Eve when I decided I needed a new prop, which was in my hands by the 27th.