I have a stretched Blanton pacer that I am installing a Lycoming iO 360 turbo. I have a friend that has a prop and governor off of a Mooney. I can afford this prop just wondering if there are similarly priced props out there that would have a performance advantage?

Thanks for your time and thoughts

Jamie

I think you will want a longer prop for takeoff performance then a Mooney prop can offer.

Never heard of a Blanton Pacer. Is that a STC like a Bushmaster? Or totally experimental?

If you're experimental and not limited to what's on a STC, look at what the IO-360 guys are running on their 170Bs. The major considerations are: RPM limitations, weight of the prop for overall balance, and application. Long is good but the fancy new props have some cool blade designs that make the formula for length comparison less clear.

Zzz wrote:Never heard of a Blanton Pacer. Is that a STC like a Bushmaster? Or totally experimental?

If you're experimental and not limited to what's on a STC, look at what the IO-360 guys are running on their 170Bs. The major considerations are: RPM limitations, weight of the prop for overall balance, and application. Long is good but the fancy new props have some cool blade designs that make the formula for length comparison less clear.

Experimental only… somewhere in my stuff I have blueprints… the plans have the main gear scratch built to use the Tri Pacer gear attach points on the fuselage with the tubes swept way forward and use a Ford V6 for power.. most guys that have them now remove the V6 and put in a conventional horizontal power plant…

Brian

To the OP: You describe your engine as a "Lycoming IO-360 turbo".

First question: Is this a parallel valve Lycoming engine or an Angle Valve Lycoming engine? And, four cylinder, right?

Second question: Is the "turbo" some sort of aftermarket turbocharger system? If it's a Lycoming system, the engine would be designated an TIO-360. I've never heard of a turbo charged four cylinder Lycoming, but who knows?

MTV

It is a Lycoming 4 cylinder parallel valve engine O360 A1D from PA 23 factory turbo engine

It is going on experimental aircraft

Thank you for your thoughts and time

Jamie

I would be looking for an 83” two-blade MT. We have one on our Husky and one on the 520 powered 180. These props preform incredibly well.

[quote="Scolopax"]I would be looking for an 83” two-blade MT. We have one on our Husky and one on the 520 powered 180. These props preform incredibly well.[/quoteYep, I agree, I would not put a heavy metal prop on it.

G44 wrote:

Scolopax wrote:I would be looking for an 83” two-blade MT. We have one on our Husky and one on the 520 powered 180. These props preform incredibly well.[/quoteYep, I agree, I would not put a heavy metal prop on it.

That can depend a lot on the aircraft. I have a customer with a bushmaster and fly it a fair bit. With a whirlwind prop on it it is very light on the nose. It actually flew nicer with a heavy metal prop on it.
Part of picking a prop should include a W&B calculation to help it find the sweet spot. A plane that is tail heavy empty can't be fixed with loading. Being a bit nose heavy empty can be fixed by loading aft. If the W&B allows it then an MT is an excellent choice, but a metal prop may be more beneficial.

A1 makes a really important point about checking the change in CG when going to a composite prop. I’d love to put an MT on my airplane but it would change my CG to the point that I couldn’t use the plan for my intended mission. When I was Maule shopping several guys gave me the same warning when looking at 4 cylinder Maules equipped with composite props.

Perhaps check which prop Maule used on their turbocharged O360 M5. They seemed to use whatever prop was already approved so it may to kinda short but the guy I know that has one says it’s a rocket with fantastic performance.

From what I can find the turbo O360 M5 used an 82” hartzelll but I haven’t found out what exact model yet. My friend George Thomas has an 88” Mcauley on his experimental M4 220 that pulls like crazy but I’m pretty sure that prop is out of my budget for now.

I'll echo the C of G considerations, as A1 said its easy to load "aft", loading forward is a bit more challenging.

Definitely, it is desirable to dial in the empty CG for the most practical loading envelope. With a turbo, and the additional components associated with that installation mounted up forward of the firewall, it’s not likely to be biased rearward.

I am trying to figure out all my components weight so I can figure out my CG to build my motor mount length. I am assuming I will come up with something close to maule length mount. But I don’t believe that maule builds a dyna focal Lycoming 360 mount. But I could be wrong.

Thanks again

Jamie

THE MACHINIST wrote:I am trying to figure out all my components weight so I can figure out my CG to build my motor mount length. I am assuming I will come up with something close to maule length mount. But I don’t believe that maule builds a dyna focal Lycoming 360 mount. But I could be wrong.

Thanks again

Jamie

At this point it sounds like you are approaching it right and CG is currently not a determining factor on the prop, because you can still manipulate the CG. Pick the right prop for the mission, and then optimize your CG.

It also seems ridiculous to spend money on a certified MT (I like them fine, but why pay the premium for a certified prop?).

If it were me I'd look at a whirlwind and no further. Fixed or CS would be the only decision to make at this point. And with it already set up for CS, that wouldn't even be a tough decision to make

Take care, Rob

I am trying to figure out all my components weight so I can figure out my CG to build my motor mount length. I am assuming I will come up with something close to maule length mount. But I don’t believe that maule builds a dyna focal Lycoming 360 mount. But I could be wrong.

Thanks again

Jamie

And shopping for a WW can be confusing because there are 2 different WW's.....

were it me, I'd go this way;

https://m.whirlwindaviation.com/props/284series.asp

or

https://m.whirlwindaviation.com/props/STOLGCSseries.asp


W&B info is on the pages

Take care, Rob

Those whirlwinds look nice but until I sell my other plane not in the budget. And with the fuselage stretch might want more weight up front anyway.

What’s the biggest club you figure 200 hp could swing? Like I said I was very impressed with George Thomas’s 88” McCauley on his 220 maule

Hopefully Whee will chime in. I think he tried an 88" on his Bearhawk with a IO-360. He was worried about prop clearance and didn't feel he was getting enough thrust and I think he cut it down to 84". I'll try to get him to chime in.
BTW, if a WW is out of budget don't even look at an MT... haha.

A1Skinner wrote:BTW, if a WW is out of budget don't even look at an MT... haha.

For sure!