We are looking at putting an engine monitor in the 185. So far the JPI EDM 700 looks like it will fit the bill. The EDM 730 has the nice colors and such, but not sure the benefits are worth the extra cost. Any thoughts on these, or recommendations for other units to consider?

When I went thru this debate, my research pushed me towards E.I. What sealed the deal was meeting the folks at OSH. E.I. folks were way more friendly and accessible. Turns out this continued thru the install and operation. Any questions issues or concerns were addressed immediately with great support.

I ended up installing the MVP-50 and have been overly impressed.

I've flown with EDM 700 installations in three different airplanes.....a total of around 4 or 5 thousand hours. One fuel flow transducer failed after over 1000 hours. Received a new one in two days. Good service and support in my experience. At airshows, look up their booth, and Ottis Cameron, he's their airshow guy, and very knowledgeable.

I've also used EI stuff, and have had no complaints about them either. All these devices from these two companies are top quality stuff. I prefer the JPI instruments because I like the displays better.

MTV

JPI's probes are much quicker response. JPI has better warranty, EDM 700 much easier/quicker to install, Data logging is built into the EDM-No extra boxes to wire. I think the EDM 730 is worth the extra $$. You can add features to the EDM 730 and make it an EDM 830 as your budget allows. Make sure and mount the unit where you can see it. Leave extra wire behind the unit so you can move it in the future .

RP

If you're going to spend the extra on a 730, why not spend a bit more and get the 900? That ways it's certified primary and you can dump a bunch of weight in old guages and clean the panel up a bit.

My vote is for the MVP-50. Looked them both over extensively before I purchased and liked the additional features E.I. offered. The install was straight forward (I'm sure the JPI is also) and E.I. has fast response probes, but I believe that you have to specify them when ordering. Not sure why that is. Either unit is an excellent upgrade to get rid of lots of clutter. I'm sure you will be very happy with your choice. And it is all about 'choice'. It's just so darn hard making that choice sometimes.

2 things

1 - I have only flown with the JPI 700. No problems ever. Only complaint would be that the crowded panel on my 170-B only had a "small" hole available. My friends 180 had the larger one.

The instructions say to keep the measurements as close to the same as possible. I Shot fo +/- 1/64th from exhaust flange.

Might want to read the accuracy / specs? paragraph in the JPI page.

2 - I would not throw out the old steam RPM/MP guages. Reason is that IF any portion of the analyzer goes down, The plane essentially goes down. Ya can fly without the analyzer functions but I would not want to fly a constant speed prop / engine without the MP/RPM. Only if I had enough years on the specific plane to know about where the knobs and sounds should be at given airspeed.

My 2c

Trim

Trimtab wrote: - I would not throw out the old steam RPM/MP guages. Reason is that IF any portion of the analyzer goes down, The plane essentially goes down. Ya can fly without the analyzer functions but I would not want to fly a constant speed prop / engine without the MP/RPM. Only if I had enough years on the specific plane to know about where the knobs and sounds should be at given airspeed.

My 2c

Trim

This is definitely something to consider, but I've spent a lot of time with electronic engine instruments as primary, and never had a tach failure or MP failure. I did have an oil pressure sender fail once, but that was a sender failure, and would have killed a steam gauge as well. I've had one Horizon unit (early one) go a little flaky on me, but turned out to be a loose connector and was fixed at next stop.

These things are just plain reliable, and have become the norm in virtually all current production airplanes. No reason to fear failure any more than failure in mechanical gauges.....I've had mechanical tachs fail, a MP gauge fail, an oil pressure line fail, etc.

FWIW.

MTV

If you decide on the EDM 7 series go with the EDM 711. It will allow you to toss the Cessna CHT gauge.

Great feedback guys....Just the kind of advice I was looking for. I like the idea of cleaning up the panel a bit, but will probably stay with simple and reliable and keep the round gages for redundancy. Budget will be a consideration for this project, but it is easy (and fun) to get carried away on these projects. Hard to justify spending a bunch of money to get rid of a few pounds in the panel when we are carrying cast iron frying pans and Dutch ovens around in that thing.

Used a JPI 700 for years and then upgraded to 730.
Worth every penny, as I think the display is a lot easier to read.
You can select items to display on the screen (I don't currently have RPM/Manifold Press displayed on JPI).
Customer Service has been great (1 EGT probe replaced in 10 years use).

One consideration might be mounting depth...
The 700 has just over 7" required, the 730 depth is 2.5"

Great thread and advice guys. I have been considering an analyzer upgrade as well. My new to me bird has an old GEM 602 in it, and is somewhat hard to read the CHT with the lcd screen. I have been considering upgrading to the Insight G1 simply because it is a plug and play upgrade with more information and a color screen that changes for alarm condition.

I know that the JPI stuff offers a lot more that this, but for me I am thinking the simple yet adequate information is good enough. I have flown for years with just a single point CHT/EGT so this is much better than I am accustomed to. Still considering the options though. No doubt it would be super nice to have all that information that the JPI 730 offers. More money too I can upgrade to the Insight for just a hair past 1K

I was kind of wondering if the 730 would be harder to read at a glance because there is so much info in one little spot, or easier with the nice colors. Good point about the required depth.

I had the JPI 700 installed in a Debonair for 5 years and it worked very well. I am looking for a Cessna 180 now and will install one if it doesn't already have one. Don't let anyone tell you a single probe cht/egt is all you need. It is obvious why but there are some that insist its all you need. Guess they never had an intake leak on a bran new factory motor like we had.

E.I. Has great technical support.

a3holerman wrote:I had the JPI 700 installed in a Debonair for 5 years and it worked very well. I am looking for a Cessna 180 now and will install one if it doesn't already have one. Don't let anyone tell you a single probe cht/egt is all you need. It is obvious why but there are some that insist its all you need. Guess they never had an intake leak on a bran new factory motor like we had.

I known what your saying...

Lycoming doesn't tighten the induction hose clamps very good on new engines. I have had to cinch the clamps up on occasion. Good to check induction fittings at 100 hours too.

A logical response I've seen to this in the past is to select the unit that you or your mechanic are most familiar with installing. The functionality of both EI and JP are close enough that you can save some money on the instal with a mechanic that is familiar with that model.

I have an EDM 700 that has met all my needs. My fuel flow is a model from EI that doesn't support data transfer to the EDM. that's really the only function that I don't have and wish I did.

Brett

There's a similar thread right now on the supercub site in which the EI CGR-30 is discussed. I'm not much of a digital display guy but I do like the looks of that one-- everything I need on a 3" screen, yet not too cluttered a display like some I've seen (for example, their MVP-50). EI's website says there's three more screens, with more info, but being of the "keep it simple" school of thought I'd prefer just this one.

The secondary pages have tach times and on mine oat. The top two read outs stay, and you will get a flashing bar if the oil press drops and the e button will bring you back to the above pictured page. The other ones are fuel pages, time remaining, gallons range etc. most of the time I am on the above page. I mainly change between

Cht readout and the ROP bar graph readout. I really like this instrument, super easy to use. I was flying a 180 with a jpi and had to download the friggen manual so I didn't hit the wrong button and fill it. I hate the jpi fuel flow, I always seem to hit the wrong button. The CGR is very simple and easy to use (as long as you can read what the screen says) when you fill up.