3 blade prop in a Pponk 182, I love how it pulled, definitely a lot more than a regular O 470 R, I do want that on my plane.

Vibration, rally bad, I am used to the smoothness of my plane with the MT prop, you cant feel any vibration when you have your hand on the yoke, this plane lots of vibration , not only at climb , but at cruise too, I do not want that.

So far the owner of the plane has balanced the prop, put new engine mounts, overhauled carburator and havent solved the vibration.
What it surprises me is that the PPonk is a balanced engine, and should actually be smoother than a stock O 470R I just wish when I get mine , the MT prop will help with vibration.

Anyone with a PPonk with an MT prop ? How is the vibration?

How about prop indexing? Is the prop indexed properly? Did he try different positions?

I truly believe that your MT prop on your Pponk engine will be every bit as smooth as your current engine.

It has to have something to do wth how light the blades are. My IO-550 was a factory reman. The cylinders were removed when it was new for flow matching and polishing. Then it was torn down due to sudden stoppage and submerging. It got bored and new pistons installed. It has never been balanced any finer than Continental factory specs. I didn't do a prop balance when I bolted the MT on either. I just don't know how it could be improved, it's so smooth now.

Everyone I know who has installed an MT comments on how smooth they are. It must go beyond balance alone. Light, flexible blades? I don't know, I just like it! Two or three blade doesn't seem to matter.

I have an IO-520 based Pponk with the MT prop and SPW mount, very smooth, even more smooth than most of the beavers I've flown. I'll be done with my annual in January, be happy to take you for a ride then.

Pinecone wrote:I truly believe that your MT prop on your Pponk engine will be every bit as smooth as your current engine.

It has to have something to do wth how light the blades are. My IO-550 was a factory reman. The cylinders were removed when it was new for flow matching and polishing. Then it was torn down due to sudden stoppage and submerging. It got bored and new pistons installed. It has never been balanced any finer than Continental factory specs. I didn't do a prop balance when I bolted the MT on either. I just don't know how it could be improved, it's so smooth now.

Everyone I know who has installed an MT comments on how smooth they are. It must go beyond balance alone. Light, flexible blades? I don't know, I just like it! Two or three blade doesn't seem to matter.

I think the biggest factor is the natural damping characteristics of wood. The flexibility helps too.

The vibration might not be direct result of engine smoothness.

Is it possible that baffling or,something else is touching the cowling and sending vibration through the airframe?

twflyer wrote:The vibration might not be direct result of engine smoothness.

Is it possible that baffling or,something else is touching the cowling and sending vibration through the airframe?

This. Anything touching will induce vibration. In my discussions with Steve Knopp, he is meticulous in this regard as even a clamp hitting the cowling can do it. He also noted that sometimes the bolts on the mounts make contact with the engine (bottom out during torquing) instead of being isolated, and that's a common source of the shakes. I'd start by running it with the cowl off to isolate that piece, and then work through anything else that could be creating a hard contact between engine and airframe.

I have a 182F with a two blade MT on a PPonk. Very smooth to my way of thinking. No vibration, though it does like to bounce down the runway at times;-)

Halestorm wrote:I have an IO-520 based Pponk with the MT prop and SPW mount, very smooth, even more smooth than most of the beavers I've flown. I'll be done with my annual in January, be happy to take you for a ride then.

Thanks Halestorm definitely would like to go for a ride once your plane is out of annual, thanks for offering.

I have heard of an occasional Hartzell propeller with balance issues on the P Ponk engine. The owner of an aircraft pulled his off and sent it to the prop shop. We couldn't actually find anything wrong with it, angle, track, static balance, etc but ended up installing it on the shop owners P ponk, same story. For some reason, the thing would rattle your teeth out. In fairness to Hartzell, there are lots of them out there with no issues.

Flying Hawkes here in the Bitterroot installed a McCauley Big Foot (C401) on his Backcountry Buster 182 when he PPonked it. It was the cats meow, and from a McCauley lover's perspective, what could be better?

I have to admit, I was disappointed when he later switched it out for the 3 blade MT. I thought for sure the lick and stick coating over the wood core would peel off and the lag screws would pull out of the rotting wood. It's held up very nicely, is turbine smooth. The nickel rub leading edge as I call it is amazing. It helped that I read through the literature provided by the MT salesman. I guess I'm a work in progress.

Performance wise, his aircraft is amazing. It will go for the most part anywhere a Cessna 150 will airstrip wise in the backcountry, but with passengers and a greater margin of safety. Haven't heard from the Flying Hawkes for a few days, must have used up his KP's for the year already.

motoadve wrote:

Halestorm wrote:I have an IO-520 based Pponk with the MT prop and SPW mount, very smooth, even more smooth than most of the beavers I've flown. I'll be done with my annual in January, be happy to take you for a ride then.

Thanks Halestorm definitely would like to go for a ride once your plane is out of annual, thanks for offering.

You are also welcome to come up here and go for a rip, although it does feel like the rain will never let up to make that possible.

Squamish is between Vancouver and Whistler. Awesome little airport.

albravo wrote:

motoadve wrote:

Halestorm wrote:I have an IO-520 based Pponk with the MT prop and SPW mount, very smooth, even more smooth than most of the beavers I've flown. I'll be done with my annual in January, be happy to take you for a ride then.

Thanks Halestorm definitely would like to go for a ride once your plane is out of annual, thanks for offering.

You are also welcome to come up here and go for a rip, although it does feel like the rain will never let up to make that possible.

Squamish is between Vancouver and Whistler. Awesome little airport.

Thanks for the offer, would love to go there.

Performance wise, his aircraft is amazing. It will go for the most part anywhere a Cessna 150 will airstrip wise in the backcountry, but with passengers and a greater margin of safety. Haven't heard from the Flying Hawkes for a few days, must have used up his KP's for the year already.

I guess it was me that didn't have a Kitchen Pass today, or this week for that matter. It turns out the Flying Hawkes had his airplane in the Bob Marshall and the Selway this morning!

To make matters worse, he sent this picture from Shearer.

colopilot wrote:

twflyer wrote:The vibration might not be direct result of engine smoothness.

Is it possible that baffling or,something else is touching the cowling and sending vibration through the airframe?

This. Anything touching will induce vibration. In my discussions with Steve Knopp, he is meticulous in this regard as even a clamp hitting the cowling can do it. He also noted that sometimes the bolts on the mounts make contact with the engine (bottom out during torquing) instead of being isolated, and that's a common source of the shakes. I'd start by running it with the cowl off to isolate that piece, and then work through anything else that could be creating a hard contact between engine and airframe.

Agree,

I've had several different MT's on a Steve Knopp built Pponk, All have been exceptionally smooth. Flew a Lycon built Pponk for 'a few' hours... it had a C66 Mac, and was smooth as well, but not as smooth. If nothing is touching I'd be curious who the builder was.

Take care, Rob

richpiney wrote:......Performance wise, his aircraft is amazing. It will go for the most part anywhere a Cessna 150 will airstrip wise in the backcountry........

Anywhere a 150 will go. Wow!!!

hotrod180 wrote:

richpiney wrote:......Performance wise, his aircraft is amazing. It will go for the most part anywhere a Cessna 150 will airstrip wise in the backcountry........

Anywhere a 150 will go. Wow!!!

Yep, like Mile Hi and Simonds

Darinh wrote:Posting this for a friend:

I think this one has 210 hp less than the 185. C150 with Bush STOL kit and 6's all around... not quite as prestigious as an Ercoupe but none the less....



This was not me that landed this fine specimen of an aircraft at these locations but rather one of the Legends of the Bitterroot who, for now, shall remain nameless. I don't recommend trying this in your 150... I know I never would.