Oh, no, not the EZProp!

Oh, no, not the EZProp!

Kevbert, That was Great!!
GT

I love you guys

A simple prop tip speed calculator would suffice for the prop aspect. Guys have spoken about that on this forum and eslewhere for many years.

The exhaust would require more work... the Europeans are doing it already. Yes it would be an ugly muffler hanging down under the airplane.

Balance that against thousands of anti-aviation voters.

EZ
We had a 88" 3 bladed big foot on a turboed 185 to do mountain work.
Also used it a sea level on wheels, had to pull it back to 2150 to get max performance down low, sure did work well at 12,000' take offs though??
GT

EZFlap wrote:I love you guys

A simple prop tip speed calculator would suffice for the prop aspect. Guys have spoken about that on this forum and eslewhere for many years.

The exhaust would require more work... the Europeans are doing it already. Yes it would be an ugly muffler hanging down under the airplane.

Balance that against thousands of anti-aviation voters.

Beauty is in the eye (and the ear) of the beholder You are correct EZ, it does look a bit odd, and ugly to some I'm sure (but obviously I don't care) but at least while at near 100 mph cruise speeds no big drag hit. This is as compared to other similar aircraft.

EZFlap wrote:I'm absolutely sure some of the neurosurgeons on this board will brand me as a Kalifornia psyko-eco-wacko for this... but if we made our airplanes quieter a LOT of GA's problems would go away... from back country hikers trying to close remote strips to city neighbors trying to close down a municipal airport.

A +1 for forced induction.

'soyAnarchisto

Courier Guy

Your exhaust looks like a miniature version of what GOOGLE runs on a Turbo 206 in southern San Jose. I used to wonder why that particular plane got such heavy use till someone told me who it allegedly really belongs to. Makes sense that they would prefer to be sneaky quiet.

So, that would be invovled in tbat google mapping thing? Interesting as that is of course a cert plane. After 700 hrs+, mine seems to be working fine with 0 maintenance and apparently no loss of power, go figure. I call it the Sneaky. Bastard Muffler System.

courierguy wrote:
Beauty is in the eye (and the ear) of the beholder You are correct EZ, it does look a bit odd, and ugly to some I'm sure (but obviously I don't care) but at least while at near 100 mph cruise speeds no big drag hit. This is as compared to other similar aircraft.

It looks fine to me.

As a bonus, I figure it's also less noisy in the cockpit?

Hear hear, re long noisy props EZ, X 10. It is even painful for other pilots.
And, mufflers can be augmented into the belly, and or cowling as is done on some Maules in Finland. Headers, no loss of power and meeting stringent noise regs.
It is up to us not they........

hell James flies a M4 , how can he be anything but a great guy.... and I'm a kalifornian!

Courierguy,

Is that the "swiss muffler" described in the Tony Bingelis books?

Thanks,
Greg

Exactly it, Tony was a great writer. So much info, so simply put. I have couple details that make it work long term.