Kevin,

Is the whole plane going to get a new coat of paint or just the wings?

I will more than likely re-paint the plane at some point for certain. Just not anytime soon. I have a lot of trouble to go get myself into first...Hopefully not... but I do intend to fly the paint off it when she is done so...

So....the 86" 401 MAC prop and spinner has arrived! Engine is to be shipped in the next couple days I am told. All of the other projects are done! Wings just need to go back on now.

Here is a new update...
So as of today, about 15 minutes ago, I am getting 2 props. Not certain what I am really thinking...may loose my wife over it....in second thought, she doesn't need to know, today...Still trying to figure this one out...

I have the following:
The 86" 401 MAC with chrome spinner in hand now...

I also just bought the big 3 blade MT MTV -9-D/210-58

See this:
http://www.flight-resource.com/PTD/Cessna185.pdf

After talking with John at Flight Resources numerous times (side note: he seems like a really good no BS type of guy) he will loan me a strain gage to do a test myself on the two.

Any takers on the prop that stays on the plane for good?

Anyone looking for a new prop? (it will be the loser of my own test)

I am anxious to see what happens as I really want the very best for the buck. I certainly cannot afford two!!!

Kevin

aktahoe1 wrote:So as of today, about 15 minutes ago, I am getting 2 props. Not certain what I am really thinking...

Dude. Say it with me "I have a problem".

That said, can't wait to see this beast.

So as of today, about 15 minutes ago, I am getting 2 props. Not certain what I am really thinking...

$ not an issue, then install an Insight G3 graphic engine monitor.

It has a three axis g meter, no need to borrow a strain gauge.

aktahoe1 wrote:So....the 86" 401 MAC prop and spinner has arrived! Engine is to be shipped in the next couple days I am told. All of the other projects are done! Wings just need to go back on now.

Right on schedule. The 26th at ~7PM is beer thirty.

aktahoe1 wrote:Anyone looking for a new prop? (it will be the loser of my own test)

Sorry, but I can't ski on that prop - it's not phat enough for my standards.


'Greg

That 3blade prop would LOOK good,
But looks only go so far.
Good luck,akt
Chuck


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I was making the same decision a few years ago and discovered the following:

I looked at the Flight Resource comparison and it has the 86" 401 at 82 lbs. According to McCauley the 86" 401 with spinner weighs 70 lbs. If so, the 3 blade MT is only 13 lbs lighter than the McCauley. Nothing to sneeze at, but roughly 1/2 the stated 25 lb weight difference.

Since you'll have both props there, would you mind weighing them and putting this to rest? I went with the 86" 401, very strong and smooth on my Pponk 520. It likes 2400-2500 vs. the 2200-2300 I used with the 88" C66.

Thanks, enjoy the rebuilt 180. You'll be happy with the Pponk engine; going on 10 years with ours.

I also would fly both props before you decide static thrust is only one parameter for overall performance. But boy are you lucky to be able to try both on your plane before deciding. I'll bet one cold beer you keep the mt assuming you can get your money back on the Mac. Both good props and I'm sure each will have plus and minus vs the other cant wait to hear your report.

aqua wrote:I was making the same decision a few years ago and discovered the following:

I looked at the Flight Resource comparison and it has the 86" 401 at 82 lbs. According to McCauley the 86" 401 with spinner weighs 70 lbs. If so, the 3 blade MT is only 13 lbs lighter than the McCauley. Nothing to sneeze at, but roughly 1/2 the stated 25 lb weight difference.

Since you'll have both props there, would you mind weighing them and putting this to rest? I went with the 86" 401, very strong and smooth on my Pponk 520. It likes 2400-2500 vs. the 2200-2300 I used with the 88" C66.

Thanks, enjoy the rebuilt 180. You'll be happy with the Pponk engine; going on 10 years with ours.

But wait..... There is even more to this equation...

Lots of people use their 180's like cub's on steroids, right AKT?
And lot's of people like good flying machines, right Glidergeek and others?

Where am I going with this?

I am running into more and more guys running the big Mac, that put lead in their tails, when flying solo or light. Most are running 10-15 pounds. So now how much more weight is that big Mac adding?

Would you like fries with that??.

Rob is right. There is one running around here, very capable pilot/owner. Flew it for years stock, upgraded to the PPonk and the 401 and promptly put her on her nose one day after dropping off a load of pax on a beach. Pretty sure she's got some lead in her ass now. Not saying it happens to all of them, but it is something to think about.

In either case, it should really be a beast, can't wait to hear the report!

Don't most people that put weight aft - do it with something they would be carrying anyway (like a bug-out bag, survival kit, or tiedown/tool kit)? It's not exactly like they are filling it with dead weight for ballast.

soyAnarchisto wrote:Don't most people that put weight aft - do it with something they would be carrying anyway (like a bug-out bag, survival kit, or tiedown/tool kit)? It's not exactly like they are filling it with dead weight for ballast.

I know several that have lead in the back. Never had to with the bird the way she was, and she flew very cub like...

Really anxious to see how much the 2 props will differ. Not interested in carrying lead in the tail at all!!! I am trying to shave weight in every aspect, as long as I dont loose performance. A full report on the two props will come.

Can I have my engine now Steve???... Any day now....

Rob wrote:

aqua wrote:I was making the same decision a few years ago and discovered the following:

I looked at the Flight Resource comparison and it has the 86" 401 at 82 lbs. According to McCauley the 86" 401 with spinner weighs 70 lbs. If so, the 3 blade MT is only 13 lbs lighter than the McCauley. Nothing to sneeze at, but roughly 1/2 the stated 25 lb weight difference.

Since you'll have both props there, would you mind weighing them and putting this to rest? I went with the 86" 401, very strong and smooth on my Pponk 520. It likes 2400-2500 vs. the 2200-2300 I used with the 88" C66.

Thanks, enjoy the rebuilt 180. You'll be happy with the Pponk engine; going on 10 years with ours.

But wait..... There is even more to this equation...

Lots of people use their 180's like cub's on steroids, right AKT?
And lot's of people like good flying machines, right Glidergeek and others?

Where am I going with this?

I am running into more and more guys running the big Mac, that put lead in their tails, when flying solo or light. Most are running 10-15 pounds. So now how much more weight is that big Mac adding?

Would you like fries with that??.

Rob, I haven't hit the lotto yet So I'm gonna have to suffer with the 86" 3 blade that I've got $7k into and the 20 lbs of lead in the tail unless you're in a giving mood That airframe/engine doesn't know it's pullin 60-70 extra lbs but my trim wheel is where it should be now. Now if I could just get the wife to pack lighter I'm really interested in setting up a water ballast in the tail like we use in the gliders that can be filled and drained easily that can double as a drinking option.

Glidergeek wrote: I'm really interested in setting up a water ballast in the tail like we use in the gliders that can be filled and drained easily that can double as a drinking option.

That's a really coll idea.

Engine is inbound! Should be here today!!!

FIRED UP!!! We are now getting very close...

AKT

Awesome!

aktahoe1 wrote:Engine is inbound! Should be here today!!!

FIRED UP!!! We are now getting very close...

AKT

coloradokevbot wrote:July 14,15 @6:00PM, July 26,27 @4:40PM, August 2 @11:25AM.

How close is close? Kevbot has tomorrow at 4 and I have 7!

How's she doin'?