Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:05 AM - Fw: Re: RV-10 Down (Tim Lewis)
2. 07:29 AM - Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Kelly McMullen)
3. 08:02 AM - Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Bob Wilson)
4. 08:56 AM - Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Don McDonald)
5. 09:49 AM - Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Robert Brunkenhoefer)
6. 11:17 AM - Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Bob Turner)
7. 11:49 AM - Re: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Bob Leffler)
8. 12:22 PM - Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (JimVillani)
9. 01:19 PM - Re: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Ron Mathia)
10. 01:55 PM - Re: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Gary Bennett)
11. 02:04 PM - Re: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (John Jessen)
12. 02:20 PM - Re: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Jesse Saint)
13. 02:23 PM - Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Bob Turner)
14. 03:39 PM - Re: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Dave Saylor)
15. 06:36 PM - Re: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (John Jessen)
16. 08:59 PM - Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Kelly McMullen)
17. 09:24 PM - Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Les Kearney)
18. 09:30 PM - Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations (Les Kearney)
19. 09:36 PM - 9:1 Compression Pistons (Les Kearney)
20. 10:06 PM - Re: 9:1 Compression Pistons (Kelly McMullen)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
This is a painful loss. Doug was the secretary of EAA 186 here in the
D.C. area for years. He was a friendly, outgoing guy who made a
difference in the lives of those around him. A few years ago he and his
wife moved to Oregon to run a bed and breakfast (while still
telecommuting to his job at NGA).
I'll miss seeing him in RV camping at OSH, and at our annual EAA 186
breakfast there.
--
Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA)
A&P
RV-6A N47TD -- 1104 hrs - sold
RV-10 N31TD -- 500 hrs
Jeff Carpenter said the following on 6/1/2014 6:50 PM:
>
> Here's an update... You're correct. It is Doug Nebert's RV-10.
>
> Child among 2 dead in Toledo, Ore. plane crash | KOIN.com
> <http://koin.com/2014/05/31/plane-crashes-in-toledo-ore-3-on-board/>
>
>
> On Jun 1, 2014, at 1:46 PM, Bob Leffler wrote:
>
>> The news reported that a RV-10 went down in Toledo, OR yesterday
>> about 4pm. Only one of the three occupants survived the accident.
>> Based upon the video from the link below, it appears to be Doug
>> Neberts RV-10. There has been no release of the occupants names
>> as of yet.
>> <image003.jpg>
>> http://koin.com/2014/05/31/plane-crashes-in-toledo-ore-3-on-board/
>> TOLEDO, Ore. (KOIN 6) Two people were pronounced dead on scene
>> after a plane carrying three passengers crashed in Toledo, Ore. at
>> 4:19 p.m. Saturday.
>> The third passenger was taken via Life Flight to Good Samaritan
>> Hospital in Corvallis, Ore. in critical condition.
>> Life Flight crews transport the only survivor of a plane crash in
>> Toledo, Ore. May 31, 2014 (KOIN 6)
>> Toledo Police said the plane crashed inside the Georgia Pacific Mill
>> property.
>> Waitress Josalyn Smith was taking an order outside when she heard her
>> customer gasp.
>> I turned and saw the plane nosediving and heard a crash shortly
>> thereafter, she said.
>> It just was going straight down towards the ground, no sounds, the
>> engine must have cut out, she said.
>> Toledo Police Chief David Enyeart said in a statement the small light
>> plane left from Newport Airport, but the plane lost altitude near
>> Toledo. **
>> He said Toledo Police, Fire and the Lincoln County Sheriffs Office
>> responded to the scene.
>> The National Transportation Safety Board, Toledo Police and the
>> Federal Aviation Administration continue to investigate. Names will
>> be released once next of kin are notified.
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
Now that we are on same page......
I vaguely recall a few early builders doing some prop comparisons, but
don't know if they are in the archives. I know Van's did some comparing
props for 2 seat models, but I don't think there is anything handy for the
RV-10. Seems like Rob of AFS might have compared the MT and Hartzell, or
maybe it was Hartzell 2 blade vs their 3 blade carbon fiber.
I certainly would be interested to see some data as to prop performance
under controlled conditions, i.e. wide open throttle with same or identical
engines and cowlings, perhaps power settings between two planes holding
formation, etc.
Seems like our EFIS panels could collect the data while pilots just held
position on each other. The usual figures I see on other makes with same
question are 0 to 5 kts speed advantage for 2 vs 3 blade props depending on
variety of 3 blade. Usually the aluminum variety give up more because they
cannot optimize prop airfoil for strength/machining limitations, and the
composite come closer to equaling the 2 blade on speed while doing much
better on climb.
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Dave Saylor <
dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com> wrote:
> Figured it was grins/hr, which is approximately equal to knots ;-)
>
> Do not archive
>
> On Sunday, June 1, 2014, Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I assume he meant mph, not gph.
>>
>>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
I'm not sure that I can offer a great deal here as it was on a Cessna 310.
What I noticed was an improved climb and virtually no difference in speed.
The real benefit was that they were infinitely quieter at full throttle o
r cruise. I do plan on using a 3 blade on the RV-10 that I want to build.
Bob Wilson
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
Now that we are on same page......
I vaguely recall a few early builders doing some prop comparisons, but don'
t know if they are in the archives. I know Van's did some comparing props f
or 2 seat models, but I don't think there is anything handy for the RV-10.
Seems like Rob of AFS might have compared the MT and Hartzell, or maybe it
was Hartzell 2 blade vs their 3 blade carbon fiber.
I certainly would be interested to see some data as to prop performance und
er controlled conditions, i.e. wide open throttle with same or identical en
gines and cowlings, perhaps power settings between two planes holding forma
tion, etc.
Seems like our EFIS panels could collect the data while pilots just held po
sition on each other. The usual figures I see on other makes with same ques
tion are 0 to 5 kts speed advantage for 2 vs 3 blade props depending on var
iety of 3 blade. Usually the aluminum variety give up more because they can
not optimize prop airfoil for strength/machining limitations, and the compo
site come closer to equaling the 2 blade on speed while doing much better o
n climb.
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail
.com<mailto:dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>> wrote:
Figured it was grins/hr, which is approximately equal to knots ;-)
Do not archive
On Sunday, June 1, 2014, Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com<mailto:jesse@
saintaviation.com>> wrote:
o:jesse@saintaviation.com>>
I assume he meant mph, not gph.
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
=0AOK, here's my 2 cents.=0AWhen people are comparing the props and give nu
mbers on speed differences, that is wide open throttle and rpm.=0AI've race
d my 3 blade MT against 8 RV10's, 7 with 2 blade hartzell's, one with a 3 b
lade, but not MT, and beat them all.=C2- Ok, so I have more ponies.... bu
t it's smoother, climbs at least as well, and who flies flat out all the ti
me anyway.=C2- I'm able to cruise at roughly the same speed, but am able
to run lower MP (18-19) and RPM settings (2,000 to 2,200), and have found n
o other 10 that gets as good of fuel mileage as I get. (9.5 to 10.3)=0A=0A
=0ALatest test was on a long trip in the 10 with a brand new RV8 with a new
IO-390.... at 10,500', I heard those wonderful words from the 8 "you're pu
lling me".=0AJust remember if it seems smoother to you, it's easier on ever
ything, the engine, the airframe, the avionics, etc.=0A=0A=0ADon McDonald
=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: Robert Brunkenhoefer
<robertbrunk@mac.com>=0ATo: "rv10-list@matronics.com" <rv10-list@matronics.
com> =0ASent: Sunday, June 1, 2014 9:17 PM=0ASubject: Re: RV10-List: Propel
bert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk@mac.com>=0A=0AI meant 5-7kts=0A faster . I
continue to use the MT governor. It works great. Robert=0A=0ASent from my i
Phone=0A=0A> On Jun 1, 2014, at 9:06 PM, Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.co
aviating.com>=0A> =0A> Please explain the 5gph gain????=0A> No question a 3
blade will be more expensive to repair and overhaul.=0A> I would expect vi
bration and noise to be somewhat less with the MT.=0A> Agreed climb is very
good either way.=0A> The MT governor is less money than the PCU-500. Haven
't heard any strong reason to choose one over the other.=0A> =0A>> On 6/1/2
014 2:00 PM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:=0A>> I agree the 2 blade is best.
I have had a MT and now fly w/ the vans 2blade. FOD=0A caused so much damag
e to the MT I had to send it to Florida for O/h. Ins pd for 1blade. Had to
replace all.very $$$. KISS. You'll be glad you did . Lost climb rate of 500
fpm but gained 5gph . I fly out of Ruidoso.6800ft no problem with Vans prop
. N661G kcrp. 750 and loving it. Robert Brunkenhoefer=0A>> =0A>> Sent from
my iPhone=0A>> =0A>>> On Jun 1, 2014, at 12:44 PM, Carl Froehlich <carl.fro
ehlich@verizon.net <mailto:carl.froehlich@verizon.net>> wrote:=0A>>> =0A>>>
The Van=99s two blade Hartzell blended airfoil is, my opinion, the b
- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -=0A_
=C2- =C2-=0A =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2-
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
I went to the Northwest Territories with my MT prop and could not go to kugl
utuk north of the arctic circle because the gravel runways might damage the p
rop and there was no way to file them and fly out of there. They have that l
imitation. IMHO
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 2, 2014, at 10:55 AM, Don McDonald <building_partner@yahoo.com> wro
te:
>
>
> OK, here's my 2 cents.
> When people are comparing the props and give numbers on speed differences,
that is wide open throttle and rpm.
> I've raced my 3 blade MT against 8 RV10's, 7 with 2 blade hartzell's, one w
ith a 3 blade, but not MT, and beat them all. Ok, so I have more ponies....
but it's smoother, climbs at least as well, and who flies flat out all the t
ime anyway. I'm able to cruise at roughly the same speed, but am able to ru
n lower MP (18-19) and RPM settings (2,000 to 2,200), and have found no othe
r 10 that gets as good of fuel mileage as I get. (9.5 to 10.3)
>
> Latest test was on a long trip in the 10 with a brand new RV8 with a new I
O-390.... at 10,500', I heard those wonderful words from the 8 "you're pulli
ng me".
> Just remember if it seems smoother to you, it's easier on everything, the e
ngine, the airframe, the avionics, etc.
>
> Don McDonald
>
> From: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk@mac.com>
> To: "rv10-list@matronics.com" <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Sunday, June 1, 2014 9:17 PM
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
>
>
>
> I meant 5-7kts faster . I continue to use the MT governor. It works great.
Robert
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jun 1, 2014, at 9:06 PM, Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Please explain the 5gph gain????
> > No question a 3 blade will be more expensive to repair and overhaul.
> > I would expect vibration and noise to be somewhat less with the MT.
> > Agreed climb is very good either way.
> > The MT governor is less money than the PCU-500. Haven't heard any strong
reason to choose one over the other.
> >
> >> On 6/1/2014 2:00 PM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
> >> I agree the 2 blade is best. I have had a MT and now fly w/ the vans 2b
lade. FOD caused so much damage to the MT I had to send it to Florida for O/
h. Ins pd for 1blade. Had to replace all.very $$$. KISS. You'll be glad you d
id . Lost climb rate of 500fpm but gained 5gph . I fly out of Ruidoso.6800ft
no problem with Vans prop. N661G kcrp. 750 and loving it. Robert Brunkenhoe
fer
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>> On Jun 1, 2014, at 12:44 PM, Carl Froehlich <carl.froehlich@verizon.ne
t <mailto:carl.froehlich@verizon.net>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The Van=99s two blade Hartzell blended airfoil is, my opinion, t
he best performance value out there.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matr=======
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
So as I see it the answer is.....
All these props are close enough to each other that only a direct A-B test (change
props on the same airplane) can tell the difference. So far as I see only
Robert has actually done that, and he seems to confirm the folklore:
2 blade: least expensive, fastest cruise.
3 blade: best climb performance, quieter and smoother.
Fro the record, I have the 2 blade Hartzell and Hartzell governor straight from
Vans, and am happy with both.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=424219#424219
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
I too have both Hartzell prop and gov from Vans. No complaints from me, but I
only have about sixty hours at the moment.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 2, 2014, at 2:17 PM, "Bob Turner" <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu> wrote:
Fro the record, I have the 2 blade Hartzell and Hartzell governor straight from
Vans, and am happy with both.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=424219#424219
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
Don,
I have standard 2 blade 260hp Lyc. Running at 2300 /17 to 18 inches and
regularly get 8-9 GPH at 10,500, 150 to 160 knts Ground Speed.
What speed and alt are you cruising at with 2200 RPM=99s?
Jim Villani
Cell: (702) 379 5524
Fax: (702) 946-1185
Email: <mailto:Jim@JimVillani.com> Jim@Sold702.com
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don McDonald
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
OK, here's my 2 cents.
When people are comparing the props and give numbers on speed
differences, that is wide open throttle and rpm.
I've raced my 3 blade MT against 8 RV10's, 7 with 2 blade hartzell's,
one with a 3 blade, but not MT, and beat them all. Ok, so I have more
ponies.... but it's smoother, climbs at least as well, and who flies
flat out all the time anyway. I'm able to cruise at roughly the same
speed, but am able to run lower MP (18-19) and RPM settings (2,000 to
2,200), and have found no other 10 that gets as good of fuel mileage as
I get. (9.5 to 10.3)
Latest test was on a long trip in the 10 with a brand new RV8 with a new
IO-390.... at 10,500', I heard those wonderful words from the 8 "you're
pulling me".
Just remember if it seems smoother to you, it's easier on everything,
the engine, the airframe, the avionics, etc.
Don McDonald
_____
From: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk@mac.com
<mailto:robertbrunk@mac.com> >
<rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com> >
Sent: Sunday, June 1, 2014 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
<robertbrunk@mac.com <mailto:robertbrunk@mac.com> >
I meant 5-7kts faster . I continue to use the MT governor. It works
great. Robert
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 1, 2014, at 9:06 PM, Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com
<mailto:kellym@aviating.com> > wrote:
>
<mailto:kellym@aviating.com> >
>
> Please explain the 5gph gain????
> No question a 3 blade will be more expensive to repair and overhaul.
> I would expect vibration and noise to be somewhat less with the MT.
> Agreed climb is very good either way.
> The MT governor is less money than the PCU-500. Haven't heard any
strong reason to choose one over the other.
>
>> On 6/1/2014 2:00 PM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
>> I agree the 2 blade is best. I have had a MT and now fly w/ the vans
2blade. FOD caused so much damage to the MT I had to send it to Florida
for O/h. Ins pd for 1blade. Had to replace all.very $$$. KISS. You'll be
glad you did . Lost climb rate of 500fpm but gained 5gph . I fly out of
Ruidoso.6800ft no problem with Vans prop. N661G kcrp. 750 and loving it.
Robert Brunkenhoefer
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Jun 1, 2014, at 12:44 PM, Carl Froehlich
<carl.froehlich@verizon.net <mailto:carl.froehlich@verizon.net>
<mailto:carl.froehlich@verizon.net <mailto:carl.froehlich@verizon.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The Van=99s two blade Hartzell blended airfoil is, my opinion,
the best performance value out there.
>
>
>
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matr========
<http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
<http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
<http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
<http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
Email Forum -
Features Navigator to browse
such as List Un/Subscription,
Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
Hi All,
On one of my tech calls to Vans I asked if they saw/measure much difference
between the two bladed and three bladed prop on a RV10 with the 540 engine.
The person I spoke with said they had done a test run with two RV10s, flying
next to each other, one with 2-blades and one with 3-blades (same 540
engines).
Their option was that the overall performs was better with the 2-blades over
the 3-blades.
As I remember they said the top speed, rate of climb and fuel economy were
all slightly better with the 2-blades. The 3-blades was a little quieter
than 2-blades.
They blamed the added air friction from the 3-blades lowered the overall
performance for the RV10.
I'm starting to install the finishing kit, then on to the prop and engine.
Regards, Ron Mathia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Leffler
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
I too have both Hartzell prop and gov from Vans. No complaints from me, but
I only have about sixty hours at the moment.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 2, 2014, at 2:17 PM, "Bob Turner" <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu> wrote:
Fro the record, I have the 2 blade Hartzell and Hartzell governor straight
from Vans, and am happy with both.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=424219#424219
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
I recall reading (eons ago) study results, that showed the most efficient
propeller would be very long, single blade, turning very slowly. Not
terribly practical, but using the same reasoning, 2-blades will be more
efficient than 3.
Gary Bennett
http://bendun.net/
http://photos.bendun.net/
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Mathia
Sent: June-02-14 4:19 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
Hi All,
On one of my tech calls to Vans I asked if they saw/measure much difference
between the two bladed and three bladed prop on a RV10 with the 540 engine.
The person I spoke with said they had done a test run with two RV10s, flying
next to each other, one with 2-blades and one with 3-blades (same 540
engines).
Their option was that the overall performs was better with the 2-blades over
the 3-blades.
As I remember they said the top speed, rate of climb and fuel economy were
all slightly better with the 2-blades. The 3-blades was a little quieter
than 2-blades.
They blamed the added air friction from the 3-blades lowered the overall
performance for the RV10.
I'm starting to install the finishing kit, then on to the prop and engine.
Regards, Ron Mathia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Leffler
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
I too have both Hartzell prop and gov from Vans. No complaints from me, but
I only have about sixty hours at the moment.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 2, 2014, at 2:17 PM, "Bob Turner" <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu> wrote:
Fro the record, I have the 2 blade Hartzell and Hartzell governor straight
from Vans, and am happy with both.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=424219#424219
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
You might send a note asking about this to Rob Hickman, who I believe is
using a 3-blade. He might have some data to share.
John J
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Mathia
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 1:19 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
Hi All,
On one of my tech calls to Vans I asked if they saw/measure much difference
between the two bladed and three bladed prop on a RV10 with the 540 engine.
The person I spoke with said they had done a test run with two RV10s, flying
next to each other, one with 2-blades and one with 3-blades (same 540
engines).
Their option was that the overall performs was better with the 2-blades over
the 3-blades.
As I remember they said the top speed, rate of climb and fuel economy were
all slightly better with the 2-blades. The 3-blades was a little quieter
than 2-blades.
They blamed the added air friction from the 3-blades lowered the overall
performance for the RV10.
I'm starting to install the finishing kit, then on to the prop and engine.
Regards, Ron Mathia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Leffler
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
I too have both Hartzell prop and gov from Vans. No complaints from me, but
I only have about sixty hours at the moment.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 2, 2014, at 2:17 PM, "Bob Turner" <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu> wrote:
Fro the record, I have the 2 blade Hartzell and Hartzell governor straight
from Vans, and am happy with both.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=424219#424219
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
I flew with Rob a few years ago. I asked him then and he said he was about 7 kts
slower with that prop, IIRC.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
www.mavericklsa.com
C: 352-427-0285
O: 352-465-4545
F: 815-377-3694
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 2, 2014, at 4:03 PM, "John Jessen" <n212pj@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> You might send a note asking about this to Rob Hickman, who I believe is
> using a 3-blade. He might have some data to share.
>
> John J
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Mathia
> Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 1:19 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> On one of my tech calls to Vans I asked if they saw/measure much difference
> between the two bladed and three bladed prop on a RV10 with the 540 engine..
> The person I spoke with said they had done a test run with two RV10s, flying
> next to each other, one with 2-blades and one with 3-blades (same 540
> engines).
> Their option was that the overall performs was better with the 2-blades over
> the 3-blades.
> As I remember they said the top speed, rate of climb and fuel economy were
> all slightly better with the 2-blades. The 3-blades was a little quieter
> than 2-blades.
> They blamed the added air friction from the 3-blades lowered the overall
> performance for the RV10.
>
> I'm starting to install the finishing kit, then on to the prop and engine.
>
> Regards, Ron Mathia
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Leffler
> Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 2:49 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
>
>
>
> I too have both Hartzell prop and gov from Vans. No complaints from me, but
> I only have about sixty hours at the moment.
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 2, 2014, at 2:17 PM, "Bob Turner" <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu> wrote:
>
> Fro the record, I have the 2 blade Hartzell and Hartzell governor straight
> from Vans, and am happy with both.
>
> --------
> Bob Turner
> RV-10 QB
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=424219#424219
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
gary(at)bendun.net wrote:
> I recall reading (eons ago) study results, that showed the most efficient
> propeller would be very long, single blade, turning very slowly. Not
> terribly practical, but using the same reasoning, 2-blades will be more
> efficient than 3.
>
> Gary Bennett
>
> http://bendun.net/
> http://photos.bendun.net/
>
>
> --
Yes. It's the tip losses. Same reason you build mono-planes instead of bi-planes
for speed, in general. I recall at least one prop manufacturer tried to put
"winglets" at the prop tips. ("Q prop" I think it was called).
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=424234#424234
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
I have a two-blade, and I fly a friend's -10 with an MT three-blade from
time to time. We agree with the herd on the benefits of each. I will say
that his -10 is eerily smooth. At speed it feels like a jet, no kidding.
No sensation of rotating prop or engine whatsoever. It's kind of weird,
but I could defiantly get used to it...if I could only reproduce it on
another plane. He has a balanced Barrett engine, so between that and the
MT, and a good prop balance, the result is stunning.
Other three-blades I've flown don't seem any smoother than a two.
--Dave
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Bob Turner <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu> wrote:
>
> So as I see it the answer is.....
> All these props are close enough to each other that only a direct A-B test
> (change props on the same airplane) can tell the difference. So far as I
> see only Robert has actually done that, and he seems to confirm the
> folklore:
> 2 blade: least expensive, fastest cruise.
> 3 blade: best climb performance, quieter and smoother.
>
> Fro the record, I have the 2 blade Hartzell and Hartzell governor straight
> from Vans, and am happy with both.
>
> --------
> Bob Turner
> RV-10 QB
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=424219#424219
>
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
That=99s what I=99ve heard, that the smoothness is the
ultimate benefit of the 3-blad. I=99m thinking of that for my
Star. Plus, it=99s just looks great.
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 3:38 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
I have a two-blade, and I fly a friend's -10 with an MT three-blade from
time to time. We agree with the herd on the benefits of each. I will
say that his -10 is eerily smooth. At speed it feels like a jet, no
kidding. No sensation of rotating prop or engine whatsoever. It's kind
of weird, but I could defiantly get used to it...if I could only
reproduce it on another plane. He has a balanced Barrett engine, so
between that and the MT, and a good prop balance, the result is
stunning.
Other three-blades I've flown don't seem any smoother than a two.
--Dave
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Bob Turner <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu
<mailto:bobturner@alum.rpi.edu> > wrote:
<mailto:bobturner@alum.rpi.edu> >
So as I see it the answer is.....
All these props are close enough to each other that only a direct A-B
test (change props on the same airplane) can tell the difference. So far
as I see only Robert has actually done that, and he seems to confirm the
folklore:
2 blade: least expensive, fastest cruise.
3 blade: best climb performance, quieter and smoother.
Fro the record, I have the 2 blade Hartzell and Hartzell governor
straight from Vans, and am happy with both.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=424219#424219
" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
Why would a composite prop with a hard metal leading edge be at any more
risk on a gravel runway than an aluminum prop? While a nick in an aluminum
prop creates risk of a stress riser and cracking, that generally is not the
case for a small dent in metal edge of composite prop.
Any one that operates on gravel knows to ease in power and not to go to
full power until well above taxi speed. Ground clearance is an issue with
gravel runways, but the RV-10 has better than average prop clearance IIRC.
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk@mac.com>
wrote:
> I went to the Northwest Territories with my MT prop and could not go to
> kuglutuk north of the arctic circle because the gravel runways might damage
> the prop and there was no way to file them and fly out of there. They have
> that limitation. IMHO
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 2, 2014, at 10:55 AM, Don McDonald <building_partner@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> OK, here's my 2 cents.
> When people are comparing the props and give numbers on speed differences,
> that is wide open throttle and rpm.
> I've raced my 3 blade MT against 8 RV10's, 7 with 2 blade hartzell's, one
> with a 3 blade, but not MT, and beat them all. Ok, so I have more
> ponies.... but it's smoother, climbs at least as well, and who flies flat
> out all the time anyway. I'm able to cruise at roughly the same speed, but
> am able to run lower MP (18-19) and RPM settings (2,000 to 2,200), and have
> found no other 10 that gets as good of fuel mileage as I get. (9.5 to 10.3)
>
> Latest test was on a long trip in the 10 with a brand new RV8 with a new
> IO-390.... at 10,500', I heard those wonderful words from the 8 "you're
> pulling me".
> Just remember if it seems smoother to you, it's easier on everything, the
> engine, the airframe, the avionics, etc.
>
> Don McDonald
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk@mac.com>
> *To:* "rv10-list@matronics.com" <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 1, 2014 9:17 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
>
> >
>
> I meant 5-7kts faster . I continue to use the MT governor. It works great.
> Robert
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> > On Jun 1, 2014, at 9:06 PM, Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Please explain the 5gph gain????
> > No question a 3 blade will be more expensive to repair and overhaul.
> > I would expect vibration and noise to be somewhat less with the MT.
> > Agreed climb is very good either way.
> > The MT governor is less money than the PCU-500. Haven't heard any strong
> reason to choose one over the other.
> >
> >> On 6/1/2014 2:00 PM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
> >> I agree the 2 blade is best. I have had a MT and now fly w/ the vans
> 2blade. FOD caused so much damage to the MT I had to send it to Florida for
> O/h. Ins pd for 1blade. Had to replace all.very $$$. KISS. You'll be glad
> you did . Lost climb rate of 500fpm but gained 5gph . I fly out of
> Ruidoso.6800ft no problem with Vans prop. N661G kcrp. 750 and loving it.
> Robert Brunkenhoefer
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>> On Jun 1, 2014, at 12:44 PM, Carl Froehlich <
> carl.froehlich@verizon.net <mailto:carl.froehlich@verizon.net>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The Van's two blade Hartzell blended airfoil is, my opinion, the best
> performance value out there.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matr=======
>
>
> *
>
> D============================================
> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
> D============================================
> //forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
> D============================================
> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
> D============================================
>
> *
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
Robert
I did that trip two years ago in my now sold PA28/180. If the four a/c on th
e trip, one took a nasty ding from a stone. Fortunately we had a file to dre
ss it out.
By the way, we made it to Inuvik / Tutayaktuk (so?) over Victoria Island to C
ambridge Bay while stafing the DEW Line sites. South from there to Yellowkn
ife and home to Edmonton. It was a great trip.
I wouldn't take a composite prop out of concern, real or imagined, that ston
es could do.
Cheers
Les
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 2, 2014, at 10:48 AM, Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk@mac.com> wr
ote:
>
> I went to the Northwest Territories with my MT prop and could not go to ku
glutuk north of the arctic circle because the gravel runways might damage th
e prop and there was no way to file them and fly out of there. They have tha
t limitation. IMHO
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jun 2, 2014, at 10:55 AM, Don McDonald <building_partner@yahoo.com> wr
ote:
>>
>>
>> OK, here's my 2 cents.
>> When people are comparing the props and give numbers on speed differences
, that is wide open throttle and rpm.
>> I've raced my 3 blade MT against 8 RV10's, 7 with 2 blade hartzell's, one
with a 3 blade, but not MT, and beat them all. Ok, so I have more ponies..
.. but it's smoother, climbs at least as well, and who flies flat out all th
e time anyway. I'm able to cruise at roughly the same speed, but am able to
run lower MP (18-19) and RPM settings (2,000 to 2,200), and have found no o
ther 10 that gets as good of fuel mileage as I get. (9.5 to 10.3)
>>
>> Latest test was on a long trip in the 10 with a brand new RV8 with a new I
O-390.... at 10,500', I heard those wonderful words from the 8 "you're pulli
ng me".
>> Just remember if it seems smoother to you, it's easier on everything, the
engine, the airframe, the avionics, etc.
>>
>> Don McDonald
>>
>> From: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk@mac.com>
>> To: "rv10-list@matronics.com" <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, June 1, 2014 9:17 PM
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Propeller / Governor Recommendations
>>
m>
>>
>> I meant 5-7kts faster . I continue to use the MT governor. It works great
. Robert
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On Jun 1, 2014, at 9:06 PM, Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Please explain the 5gph gain????
>> > No question a 3 blade will be more expensive to repair and overhaul.
>> > I would expect vibration and noise to be somewhat less with the MT.
>> > Agreed climb is very good either way.
>> > The MT governor is less money than the PCU-500. Haven't heard any stron
g reason to choose one over the other.
>> >
>> >> On 6/1/2014 2:00 PM, Robert Brunkenhoefer wrote:
>> >> I agree the 2 blade is best. I have had a MT and now fly w/ the vans 2
blade. FOD caused so much damage to the MT I had to send it to Florida for O
/h. Ins pd for 1blade. Had to replace all.very $$$. KISS. You'll be glad you
did . Lost climb rate of 500fpm but gained 5gph . I fly out of Ruidoso.6800
ft no problem with Vans prop. N661G kcrp. 750 and loving it. Robert Brunkenh
oefer
>> >>
>> >> Sent from my iPhone
>> >>
>> >>> On Jun 1, 2014, at 12:44 PM, Carl Froehlich <carl.froehlich@verizon.n
et <mailto:carl.froehlich@verizon.net>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> The Van=99s two blade Hartzell blended airfoil is, my opinion, t
he best performance value out there.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
>> http://www.matr=======
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> //forums.matronics.com
>> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Propeller / Governor Recommendations |
Hi
Thanks for all the great info. I think I will go with the PCU5000x and Hartzell
two blade prop
I'll hold off ordering the prop until after KOSH in case there is something new
there but I suspect there won't be.
Cheers
Les
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 9:1 Compression Pistons |
Hi
One of the engine options I have is using 9:1 positions rather than 8:1. I understand
that there is a small HP gain with the 9:1 pistons.
For those with the 9:1 pistons, is there a significant performance bump. Has anyone
had problems with detonation?
Cheers
Les
Sent from my iPhone
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 9:1 Compression Pistons |
Les,
The standard compression is 8:5 to 1. All Lycoming engines at that
compression were certified on 91/96 octane avgas.
Most will run fine on 91-92 octane mogas. All of the angle valve higher
horsepower engines have 8.7 to 1 compression and require 100 octane
avgas. So you can pretty much be assured that 9 to 1 compression will
require 100 octane. Given that Van's does not recommend 260 hp on the
airframe, the only really benefit to more horses is climb capability.
Top speed with the 260 hp is around 210-212 mph TAS. Design flutter is
230 true air speed. How close do you want to shave that margin?
On 6/2/2014 9:36 PM, Les Kearney wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> One of the engine options I have is using 9:1 positions rather than 8:1. I understand
that there is a small HP gain with the 9:1 pistons.
>
> For those with the 9:1 pistons, is there a significant performance bump. Has
anyone had problems with detonation?
>
> Cheers
>
> Les
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|