Backcountry Pilot • MT 3 Blade vs 86" 3 Blade McCauley TEST COMPLETED

MT 3 Blade vs 86" 3 Blade McCauley TEST COMPLETED

Lycoming, Continental, Hartzell, McCauley, or any broad spectrum drive system component used on multiple type.
43 postsPage 3 of 31, 2, 3

Re: MT 3 Blade vs 86" 3 Blade McCauley TEST COMPLETED

So can anyone add their feelings on water opp's with the MT?

I get stuck in some rough water and tall docks, can it withstand the tough conditions as well?
pilotjpw1 offline
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:34 am
Location: usa

Re: MT 3 Blade vs 86" 3 Blade McCauley TEST COMPLETED

Yes, I can address water ops with an MT prop. In fact, water erosion becomes pretty much a non issue with these props....the SS leading edge is hard. So all that happens is you lose a little paint, unlike metal props, where every time they encounter water you have to do some filing and lose some propeller meat.

I've worked two of them on seaplanes a fair bit and I think they really shine in that environment.

MTV
mtv offline
Knowledge Base Author
User avatar
Posts: 10514
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 1:47 am
Location: Bozeman

Re: MT 3 Blade vs 86" 3 Blade McCauley TEST COMPLETED

I run a couple MT's on the airshow circuit; so they run hard and 300-400hrs each a year.

The only issue we have seen is cosmetic. Whenever they encounter rain, the paint would shed off the front face and look bad. The easy fix is too pull it back in rain, around 2100rpm. For long term protection, use fine grit sandpaper and smooth the transition from leading edge to paint. I start with 600g then work my way up to 2000g and polish back to a high gloss. Removing the "lip" of paint doesn't give the rain much chance of doing damage.

nkh
Nathan K. Hammond offline
User avatar
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 6:33 pm
Location: Danville, KY (DVK)

DISPLAY OPTIONS

Previous
43 postsPage 3 of 31, 2, 3

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

Latest Features

Latest Knowledge Base