erased

Bigrenna wrote:No. The STC doesn't require a new gov. The bird is getting a new 550 this Sept, so it a new one will be installed at that time.

Thanks. I put the MT on my plane and have 40 hours on it now. I was noticing some issues with the governor, but talking with some more experienced folks, my governors on its way out.

erased

flylow wrote:

Bigrenna wrote:No. The STC doesn't require a new gov. The bird is getting a new 550 this Sept, so it a new one will be installed at that time.

Thanks. I put the MT on my plane and have 40 hours on it now. I was noticing some issues with the governor, but talking with some more experienced folks, my governors on its way out.

Are you sure its the governor? What is it doing? What airplane and engine?

Kurt

As far as CG, in my experience, you have to get used to every different setup and take some time to figure how to maximize the performance. There are many different missions and applications etc., mine is to haul alot of stuff and have good performance at higher altitudes. Going from a 2 to 3-blade, required a fair amount of adjustment to my technique. I decided sustained ROC was most important, and the 3-blade is the winner out of the 5 different props that have been on the wagon hands down.

When I hung the 3-blade Hartzell Scimitar, it was noticeably different from the pilots seat CG wise, wasn't sure what to think at first. Now that I've got a couple hundred hours on it, absolutely the best climbing prop I've ever run, similar in noise profile to the 2-blade MT, but sounds amazing instead of bizarre IMO. It's as smooth as any other prop, if not more so, but took a good 50 hours to get it to run as smooth as it does now.

So point is, there are many aspects to consider in what prop works best for your mission. If it is all about super lightweight everything to win a STOL comp by a few feet (which is very cool IMO), then go for a 2-blade variety. The 2-blade MT was all together only 8 pounds lighter than the 2-blade C204 It replaced, no noticeable CG change from the pilot seat FWIW. If you want to use all that HP and climb with authority, 3-blade or seaplane 2-blades are hard to beat IMO, just depends how much HP you have to utilize, and what your primary mission objective is. The point I'm trying to make, is that for what I do, lighter was not better.

Also, 3-blade props just look cool [emoji12]

I am very happy with the 3 Blade Hartzell Scimitar on my C- 180 H. Regarding noise, I would say if you haven't already, take a look at the tip speed calculator on PPonk's website. Louder may sound cool, but is not necessarily better in terms of power. Tip speed in Mach depends on RPM, temperature, and altitude. Too fast tip speed is a lose/lose situation - you lose performance and piss off the neighbors.

Also, re: CG - the prop is a little heavier than my two blade, as is my heavy duty engine mount for the O-520. Also have the Atlee Dodge battery up front. So when it's just one or two up front ( and my dog) I have a 50 lb weight secured in the aft baggage compartment. Stuff or people in the back - no need.

I am very happy with my 83" 2 blade MT and I'd be even happier with it if I could go flying in it right now! Fuel servo leak fix ongoing

Skalywag wrote:Also, 3-blade props just look cool [emoji12]

GORGEOUS!! I wish we had a mouth watering emoji!