Just wanted to add that I got to fly my MT for the second time today and WOW, still impressed with the smoothness and quietness of this prop

The MT performed well on last weekends trip to CO. I was in a hurry and ran WOT (21-22" at altitude) and 2400 rpm. She purred right along.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Glad you're enjoying your new prop! Do you notice much difference in climb and takeoff performance over your previous prop? What did you have before?

BlindPilot wrote:Glad you're enjoying your new prop! Do you notice much difference in climb and takeoff performance over your previous prop? What did you have before?

Had a 2 blade C203 McCauley previously. If anything, the MT performs slightly better. For sure it is way smoother and quieter. On initial power up down the runway, there is a more noticeable wallup of air pulses against the sides of the doors. The pulses on the windows are pretty hard for a couple seconds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My new MT propeller arrived from the assembly shop just today:


I'm a little ways from mounting it still. I need to get off the couch and go finish installing the IO-550. I could be turning into a La-Z-Boy aviator.

How could anyone with that sitting in their hangar be sitting on the couch?!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pinecone wrote:My new MT propeller arrived from the assembly shop just today:


I'm a little ways from mounting it still. I need to get off the couch and go finish installing the IO-550. I could be turning into a La-Z-Boy aviator.

That's the way I feel--still waiting for my new exhaust system.

Cary

OK-OK! I'm leaving for the hangar!

It was requested on the 170 site that I report on the MT propeller I have mounted on my O360 powered 170B so thought I'd post it here as well for anyone interested.
I've been lucky enough have experienced both the 2 & 3 blade MT back to back on the same airplane so can make a fairly accurate comparison.
The airplane had a 2 blade MT when I purchased it last July and flew it down from Anchorage to Washington state.
Soon after getting back home, after an epic 3 day journey through Alaska and down the Trench through the Yukon and B.C., I removed the 2 blade and installed a 3 blade MT I had already purchased for a DelAir conversion of my 170A.
DelAir could not produce the kit they had promised for my conversion so I ended up purchasing this already converted B model and selling the A. That left me with a brand new O360 I had built and an still trying to sell, the 3 blade MT prop and several other items I had acquired in anticipation of converting my 170A.
Enough about that - back to the props...
In comparison between the 2 & 3 blade MT: the 2 blade is about 5 mph faster but the 3 is a little better on take off and climb - exactly like John Nielsen at Flight Resources said it would be.
The first thing that is very noticeable is when you apply throttle the propeller responds immediately.
Takes a little getting used to when bumping the throttle to arrest last minute sink on landing meaning it's very easy to add too much power, but very user friendly once you get familiar.
The second thing that really gets your attention is how super smooth it is - even makes the big 4 cylinder Lycoming feel turbine smooth. They say the composite material absorbs the vibration rather than transmit or amplify it like a metal prop can.
Next thing that got my attention was the huge braking effect when you pull the power back to idle during approach to landing - nearly slides you forward in your seat - another user friendly tool for steep approaches once you anticipate it and learn to use it to your advantage. My first landing approach I found myself low far from the runway not expecting this braking effect. I had heard of this but to experience it first hand was amazing.
Then there is the much lighter weight on the nose, no rpm restriction and the fact the MT is happy running at lower rpm. If you're not in a hurry, cruising at 23 mp and 19-21 rpm still gets me 100 - 110 mph at 6.5 to 7.5 gph.
I am sporting 31" Bushwheels so your results may vary...
All the good things I've heard about these props are true. Also true is that they are expensive. That is the only thing I can think of that may be anything but positive to say - but you get what you pay for and these are a state of the art top quality product.
If you are trying to achieve the best possible performance from your aircraft I think the composite MT propellers, both the 2 and 3 blade, are an excellent choice.
IMHO

Excellent write up, thank you very much. Always good (and rare) to have direct experience do a before and after. I've been looking for a similar comparison on a 185 (2 blade vs. 3 blade).

Bill

fiftynineSC wrote:Excellent write up, thank you very much. Always good (and rare) to have direct experience do a before and after. I've been looking for a similar comparison on a 185 (2 blade vs. 3 blade).

Bill

Bill,
I believe Larry, one of the guys that imports MT, has experience with both the 2 and 3 blade props on his 185. He says he has a 3 blade on there now, but I don't know what led him that way.

I spoke to him a few times during my prop search. He is trying to sell props, and that is apparent in the conversation, but I found him to be mostly fair and balanced.

I did end up buying a 2 blade MT and they were very good to work with.

Allan

albravo wrote:

fiftynineSC wrote:Excellent write up, thank you very much. Always good (and rare) to have direct experience do a before and after. I've been looking for a similar comparison on a 185 (2 blade vs. 3 blade).

Bill

Bill,
I believe Larry, one of the guys that imports MT, has experience with both the 2 and 3 blade props on his 185. He says he has a 3 blade on there now, but I don't know what led him that way.

I spoke to him a few times during my prop search. He is trying to sell props, and that is apparent in the conversation, but I found him to be mostly fair and balanced.

I did end up buying a 2 blade MT and they were very good to work with.

Allan

Thanks Allan, appreciate the comments. I did talk to MT a while back, the switch from 2 blade to 3 blade sounded like it was simply to continue the evaluation of the 3 blade on the 185. I know the MT guys are on here, if incorrect I stand corrected. He categorically denied any limitations on the 2 blade, it's the "speed" prop for the 185 to paraphrase and can handle the HP of the IO-520 at 2700. Like you pointed out though, they are there to sell and it would be interesting to get a similar pirep like above. The only thing i'd really like to see is the cruise numbers verified as well as any impressions on performance from being limited to 2700 vs. 2850.

Bill

There are certainly a lot of benefits with MT, and all the promises come true. I have recently been reminded of the added risks with running a composite blade prop off airport. They are not as tough and durable as an aluminium blade. Yes they are said to be more repairable, but that isn't always the case with every kind of damage.

I am aware of one particular example, where an MT three blade prop has left the owner stranded without his aircraft for months, not weeks.
A stone chip on the aft face of the blade proved unrepairable according to the MT qualified service centre. Apparently either the prop was going back to Germany or a whole new set of blades will be required. I don't have the latest update on the repair, but it was not an ideal situation during the busy summer flying season.

What is the weight difference between the 2- and 3- blade MT? And compared to say the 88" mac seaplane prop?

Sorry I haven't read this entire thread.

A plane next to my hanger a pa-14 exp with a aero sport 0-375 195 hp had a p-235 84 -44 Mac got a 3 blade mt . Prop and gov. Wt. more then Mac. C of g forward plane landing short field worse. Performance mt climbed and cruised a bit better takeoff was worse for short field. Back to the Mac . He may want to sell.

We've put just over 200 hours on the new nickel leading edge 3-blade on a 520 powered 185. All on floats, mostly saltwater. It has held up great, still looks brand new. The old stainless leading edge prop had some delamination issues in the moist environment within 100hrs, but MT was great and helped us upgrade. Its nice now that we have a local dealer in state who can assemble props (Seaplanes North at Lake Hood). Much better than having to send off a 3-blade crate to America or Germany.

Prop is very smooth, much better than the 2 blade Mac C58 it replaced. Of course, that was an old prop and old technology. Strictly anecdotal, but it seems to pull a little harder than the C58 out of the hole. I do not think it pulls as hard as a 3-blade Black Mac, but again don't have any hard data, nor have I flown one on the same aircraft same day. I would imagine a large part of the performance loss by the MT to the Black Mac is that the MT is only rated to 2700 RPM. I know the theory of pulling harder at less RPM but you are still leaving 15hp unused with an IO-520.

All-in-all a great prop and great to have the options to chose from.

Stunning photo - that is living, right there

Just pulled this off Mooneyspace. Looking good



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks North River, excellent feedback. Great looking airplane too.

It may seem small, but that 2700 vs 2850 rpm asterisk is a big deal for me; thank you for addressing it. Just bothers me to add an STC that "de-rates" a factory engine installation. I'd love to have the speed, weight and smoothness advantage but I'll have to wait till when the 520 is timed out and I put a 550 in it.

Thanks again,
Bill

soyAnarchisto wrote: What is the weight difference ..... compared to say the 88" mac seaplane prop?
....

FWIW the 88" C201 Mac I installed on my 180 in 2015 weighed 52 pounds, not including spinner assembly.