Does anyone have experience with Voyager prop on stock 470? I’m in the market for a new prop but not a bigger engine.

I don’t believe the STC covers stock motor… I think you at least have to have a Ponk’d 470 etc. etc.

They state right on their website it is.

I'm in the same boat, I'd like to know how it does on a stock 470. Haven't heard anything, not even hearsay.

Tangogawd wrote:They state right on their website it is.

I'm in the same boat, I'd like to know how it does on a stock 470. Haven't heard anything, not even hearsay.

https://hartzellprop.com/hartzell-recei ... 0-engines/

Per their website, it's approved for C180 series with 470A, J, R, & S-- but not for 470K.
Interesting, because I believe it's approved for the 470-50 ponk engine, which uses the same counterweight arrangement as the K.

The MT 2-blade 83" Expedition is perfect for the weight of this plane and the -470 engine. Then if you upgrade engines down the road, regardless of which one you go with, the MT is approved for all of them...
John

Thank you hotrod and John, but the OP and I would like to hear opinions about the voyager prop on the o-470.

There is plenty of opinions floating around about all the other props available. I have my own as well, as I have flown most of them myself.

So, if there happens to be someone that has flown or tested specifically the stock O-470 with the voyager, I'd be happy to hear their opinion.

Don’t buy an MT. The customer service is horrible. John told me I couldn’t sell my 200 hour old 2 blade MT, 1 year old, without getting a $3000-$4000 overhaul first. They wouldn’t issue the STC to the new buyer. He blamed it on insurance and said “its the way we’ve been doing it for years. It’s not our fault, it’s the insurance”. Ok good ploy, John.

Meanwhile I have an email from Larry months early, “buy a three blade from us and I’ll just give you the STC for your old prop and to the new owner”. So obviously the insurance thing is bullshit. I had to go around John, to get to the bottom of it and since they’ve retracted that scam. Hi John! Hope you read this. I love my Voyager and won’t buy another one of your props, ever.

I tried to explain to John that the worst thing he could do for business is tax every existing customer $3-4k with this overhaul mandate. How could you do this to your fans? Then he put on his used car salesman hat and tried to do some weird roundabout math to explain that their policy was helping the MT marketplace still high. John, if my props worth 13k, and you make me pay $4k tax to sell it, then it is only worth 9k. Doesn’t get much more simple than that.

Rant over. To answer the OP, three 86” blades of the Voyager might be a little much for a stock 470 though.

Voyager is available for the following:

180 A-J

All O-470's except K,L,U. Don't ask me why

180 with engine S/N 4100 and higher O-470-A /225 HP/ 2600 RPM- Prop HC-C3yF-1RF/F8429

180 with O-470-J 225 HP/2550 RPM same prop as above

180 C,E,F,G,H O-470-R 230 HP/2600 RPM same prop as above

180-J O-470-R,S 230HP/2600 RPM same prop as above

All above can be in either 84" or 86" diameter.

I don't know about specific PPONK details.

I can say I've done extensive testing on the prop. It is very, very good in all regards.

I'm not an employee of HP but have done extensive testing. I have a Voyager on my 185. I've done lots of testing on a G model 180. I did not think it was too much prop for the plane. My second plane was a '54 180 so I get the difference between the early and later models. You have to be the judge at the end of the day. The Voyager is a great product. It pulls hard, climbs very well and cruises great. If you want a light nose on an early model 180 there are many options out there if that is your mission.

MW

185Midwest wrote:
Voyager is available for the following:
180 A-J
All O-470's except K,L,U. Don't ask me why .......

I'm guessing it's a vibration thing.
The 470K, L & U all have 4-damper crankshafts.
470A, J, R, & S all have 2-damper cranks.
The same issue affects which props are approved for the pponk 470-50, which has a 4-damper crank.

Hotrod,

As a guess I'd wager you are not far off. I never asked for lots of details other than the test plans etc and what I was expecting the aircraft to do.

It was always a strange experience to run a test card then the flight test engineer would take a saw and lop off a an inch or two from the prop and away we would go.

Suffice to say I can tell you all the testing is extremely thorough and the data is pure.

MW

It was always a strange experience to run a test card then the flight test engineer would take a saw and lop off a an inch or two from the prop and away we would go.

Can you elaborate more on that. Is the piece that is sawed off checked at a molecular level or something? I actually observed a spray plane that the owner sawed an inch off a 235 hp Sparrow and told the pilot to go fly it and see if it would wind up now.

It's part of the test plan. The prop has strain gauges all over it. Different lengths are tested at different RPMS and flight regimes for vibration.

MW

ington6 wrote:Don’t buy an MT. The customer service is horrible. John told me I couldn’t sell my 200 hour old 2 blade MT, 1 year old, without getting a $3000-$4000 overhaul first. They wouldn’t issue the STC to the new buyer. He blamed it on insurance and said “its the way we’ve been doing it for years. It’s not our fault, it’s the insurance”. Ok good ploy, John.

Meanwhile I have an email from Larry months early, “buy a three blade from us and I’ll just give you the STC for your old prop and to the new owner”. So obviously the insurance thing is bullshit. I had to go around John, to get to the bottom of it and since they’ve retracted that scam. Hi John! Hope you read this. I love my Voyager and won’t buy another one of your props, ever.

I tried to explain to John that the worst thing he could do for business is tax every existing customer $3-4k with this overhaul mandate. How could you do this to your fans? Then he put on his used car salesman hat and tried to do some weird roundabout math to explain that their policy was helping the MT marketplace still high. John, if my props worth 13k, and you make me pay $4k tax to sell it, then it is only worth 9k. Doesn’t get much more simple than that.

Rant over. To answer the OP, three 86” blades of the Voyager might be a little much for a stock 470 though.

That’s unfortunate to hear as a current MT owner. I sold an MT once (off a O-360) and the STC holder just issued the paperwork to the new buyer at no charge. No mention of mandatory overhauls etc.

MW, Any word on ballpark timelines for a composite voyager? I like my MT, but would be interested in seeing voyager performance and light weight. The only complaint about the MT is the speed hit I took with the 3 blade on the IO-520. Other than that, I really like the prop.

All depends on our friends at the FAA. All the flying and testing is complete other than STC certification.

It’s all up to FAA. I honestly hope this Spring but I really don’t know for sure.

MW

Thanks. I’ll call that great news. Looking forward to details when made public.

Do they put this blade on a 2 blade hub? That would seem to be a sweet spot for the lighter planes and later nonfloat skywagons looking for speed. Price would be good until the new company jacks it up more.

We only tested a 3 blade version. I've not heard of any plans for a two blade version Yes the price increases....