Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:47 AM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Rob Kermanj)
2. 02:19 AM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Bob Leffler)
3. 03:50 AM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Don McDonald)
4. 04:07 AM - PC680 vs PC925 (Curt's Groote)
5. 05:14 AM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (johngoodman)
6. 05:54 AM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (rvdave)
7. 06:32 AM - Re: Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Linn Walters)
8. 06:46 AM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (taganster@gmail.com)
9. 07:05 AM - Re: Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Phillip Perry)
10. 07:46 AM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Miller John)
11. 08:05 AM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (David Clifford)
12. 11:11 AM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Carl Froehlich)
13. 02:33 PM - Re: Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Bill Watson)
14. 04:38 PM - Re: Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Phillip Perry)
15. 05:09 PM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (nukeflyboy)
16. 05:31 PM - Re: Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Phillip Perry)
17. 07:23 PM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (nukeflyboy)
18. 07:28 PM - Re: Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Bill Watson)
19. 07:38 PM - Re: Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Phillip Perry)
20. 07:49 PM - Re: Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Phillip Perry)
21. 07:51 PM - Re: Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Bill Watson)
22. 10:15 PM - Re: PC680 vs PC925 (Lenny Iszak)
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: PC680 vs PC925 |
I have a single 680 and it actually cranks better in the cold weather due to less
resistance in the wiring (I guess). I crank faster at temp of 20 deg in New
Mexico than in Florida at 80 deg.
do not archive.
> On Feb 24, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Phillip Perry <philperry9@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> There are folks running both successfully. My system is dual batt with dual
alts and have a 680 on both. However I have a contractor that will allow me to
bind them together in parallel if needed. With that setup I can get redundancy,
1360 for cold starting if required, and a backup starting battery in the
event I show up to the hangar and have a dead primary battery.
>
> My first engine start hasn't occurred yet, but I'm not worried about the 680
doing it based on other people's success with it in the -10.
>
> I only point this out in case you happen to be running a dual-dual system. If
I were single battery though and in a cold climate I'd have a hard time turning
my back on the 925 with all the lifting power the -10 provides.
>
> Phil
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Feb 23, 2015, at 11:19 PM, rvdave <rv610dave@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I know theses are both good batteries that some are using. Obviously the 925
is much better for starting but wondering if anyone has experience using the
680 for starting? I've been using one on a 4 cyl Lycoming with no problem but
wondering about the 6 cyl? I just did some testing on a Chevy van 6 cyl I have
that needed a new battery, I have an older 10 year old 680 battery I had on
the bench for shop projects I decided to try. It does start my van in the winter
cold but marginally because although it will turn over the engine adequately
the clock will also reset to 12 o'clock sometimes, so I know this is marginal
but may be attributed to the 10 year plus life. So I ordered a 925 from
amazon got a great deal, free freight and put in in my van to check it. What
a noticeable cranking difference--with authority! Recently with this cold snap
in Mi had a minus 27 deg morning and there was no hesitation with the 925 starting
the van. Sold on the 925 as very capable, bu!
> t !
>> interested in the weight savings and I may have to get another new 680 to do
the same test but thought I'd check others' experience with the 680 for starting.
Anyone with experience?
>>
>> --------
>> Dave Ford
>> RV6 for sale
>> RV10 building
>> Cadillac, MI
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438635#438635
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
I have gone through two winters with a pair of 680s. They work like a champ.
Most of the time, I just start off a single battery. I do have the capability,
like Phil described, to put the batteries in parallel for more cranking
power.
With winter starts, I've found that the battery isn't the most critical item.
For me, it's been oil temperature. I've got a Reiff cylinders and a sump
heater. If I preheat the engine long enough to get to 60+ degrees, the engine
starts right away. The colder the oil has been, the more blades it takes
to start, which in turn requires more current to run the starter. I don't leave
the heater on all the time and I can control it remotely via cell phone.
Bob
Sent from my iPad
> On Feb 24, 2015, at 12:19 AM, rvdave <rv610dave@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I know theses are both good batteries that some are using. Obviously the 925
is much better for starting but wondering if anyone has experience using the
680 for starting? I've been using one on a 4 cyl Lycoming with no problem but
wondering about the 6 cyl? I just did some testing on a Chevy van 6 cyl I have
that needed a new battery, I have an older 10 year old 680 battery I had on
the bench for shop projects I decided to try. It does start my van in the winter
cold but marginally because although it will turn over the engine adequately
the clock will also reset to 12 o'clock sometimes, so I know this is marginal
but may be attributed to the 10 year plus life. So I ordered a 925 from amazon
got a great deal, free freight and put in in my van to check it. What a
noticeable cranking difference--with authority! Recently with this cold snap
in Mi had a minus 27 deg morning and there was no hesitation with the 925 starting
the van. Sold on the 925 as very capable, but !
> interested in the weight savings and I may have to get another new 680 to do
the same test but thought I'd check others' experience with the 680 for starting.
Anyone with experience?
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 for sale
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438635#438635
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Re: PC680 vs PC925 |
Plane flies better with wt in the back anyway.=C2- I started out 700+ hou
rs ago with 2 680's, but now have one 680 and one 925.=C2- A lot depends
on the compression of your engine, and where you live.=C2- Since it does
get cold here, and I have 9.5:1 compression, the change was a good one.Don
McDonald
From: rvdave <rv610dave@gmail.com>
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:19 PM
Subject: RV10-List: PC680 vs PC925
I know theses are both good batteries that some are using.=C2- Obviously
the 925 is much better for starting but wondering if anyone has experience
using the 680 for starting?=C2- I've been using one on a 4 cyl Lycoming w
ith no problem but wondering about the 6 cyl?=C2- I just did some testing
on a Chevy van 6 cyl I have that needed a new battery, I have an older 10
year old 680 battery I had on the bench for shop projects I decided to try.
=C2- It does start my van in the winter cold but marginally because altho
ugh it will turn over the engine adequately the clock will also reset to 12
o'clock sometimes, so I know this is marginal but may be attributed to the
10 year plus life.=C2- So I ordered a 925 from amazon got a great deal,
free freight and put in in my van to check it.=C2- What a noticeable cran
king difference--with authority!=C2- Recently with this cold snap in Mi h
ad a minus 27 deg morning and there was no hesitation with the 925 starting
the van.=C2- Sold on the 925 as very capable, but !
interested in the weight savings and I may have to get another new 680 to
do the same test but thought I'd check others' experience with the 680 for
starting.=C2- Anyone with experience?
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 for sale
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438635#438635
S -
-
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
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 |
|
I replaced the 680 (never failed, but on occasion marginal) with a 925. If you
want no worries, go the 925 route.
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
I have a 925 and a 680 in the back. Of course, neither work very well if you leave
the battery switch on.................
John
--------
#40572 Phase One complete in 2011
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438646#438646
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
> However I have a contractor that will allow me to bind them together in parallel
if needed.
> I do have the capability, like Phil described, to put the batteries in parallel
for more cranking power.
>
Am considering a second contactor to connect the batteries for start if necessary.
What is being used for the contactor switch? Using a start or master contactor?
Are you connecting the second contactor via #2, 4, 6 wire(?) from battery,
contactor to the primary buss or the primary starter contactor?
> Plane flies better with wt in the back anyway
I can foresee the way my wife packs vs me is about a 4:1 ratio on other trips so
I'll have no problem with weight in the back, hence the firewall battery for
cg and loading issues. :)
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 for sale
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438648#438648
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
On 2/24/2015 8:50 AM, rvdave wrote:
snip
Am considering a second contactor to connect the batteries for start if necessary.
What is being used for the contactor switch? Using a start or master contactor?
Are you connecting the second contactor via #2, 4, 6 wire(?) from battery,
contactor to the primary buss or the primary starter contactor?
*The master contactor is a long term 'on' device. The start contactor is a short
term 'on' device. So, no matter where in your installation you put a contactor,
use this guideline for choosing the proper one.
IMHO, unless you plan on leaving the two batteries connected in parallel for any
length of time, the start contactor is better, and #2 wire is best for any start
application.
Linn
*
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: | Re: PC680 vs PC925 |
Dave,
We have been flying our 10 for almost 2 years equipped with two 680's out of
CLI in northern WI. The IO540 will start fine on one battery but during the colder
months I start on two because things are a bit stiff at -10 below. We never
have a problem with the EFIS dropping out. Unfortunately we will be heading
home from Tuscon on Thursday back to below zero weather.
Tom & Dawn Ganster
N104TD CLI
Sent from my iPad
> On Feb 23, 2015, at 10:19 PM, rvdave <rv610dave@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I know theses are both good batteries that some are using. Obviously the 925
is much better for starting but wondering if anyone has experience using the
680 for starting? I've been using one on a 4 cyl Lycoming with no problem but
wondering about the 6 cyl? I just did some testing on a Chevy van 6 cyl I have
that needed a new battery, I have an older 10 year old 680 battery I had on
the bench for shop projects I decided to try. It does start my van in the winter
cold but marginally because although it will turn over the engine adequately
the clock will also reset to 12 o'clock sometimes, so I know this is marginal
but may be attributed to the 10 year plus life. So I ordered a 925 from amazon
got a great deal, free freight and put in in my van to check it. What a
noticeable cranking difference--with authority! Recently with this cold snap
in Mi had a minus 27 deg morning and there was no hesitation with the 925 starting
the van. Sold on the 925 as very capable, but !
> interested in the weight savings and I may have to get another new 680 to do
the same test but thought I'd check others' experience with the 680 for starting.
Anyone with experience?
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 for sale
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438635#438635
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
Dave,
B & C sells a pre-wired cross-feed contactor; meaning that it already has
the diodes installed across the terminals. That is the contactor I used in
my airplane.
http://www.bandc.biz/prewiredcross-feedcontactor.aspx
It was designed around the AeroElectric Z-14 basic architecture. If you
don't have a copy of his book, it's worth the few dollars to purchase
primarily for the diagrams. However those architecture diagrams are also
available online. Z14 has two links because it spans a couple of .pdf
pages.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/
All of my connections between the batteries and between the batteries and
the starter are #2. To clarify, my primary starting battery is #2 from the
battery to the starter. My secondary battery is #2 across the cross-feed
to my primary battery. And, because there is less load (no starting load)
directly off my second buss, I run #8 forward from the secondary battery to
the components it powers in the panel. Does that make sense?
I thought I had a better photo of the battery area, but apparently I
don't. Next time I'm out at the hangar I'll have to try and grab them.
But here's what I have showing some of the finished wiring and also another
showing the battery mount modifications. Both of the master contactors and
the cross-feed contactors are in the back. The starter contactor is still
on the firewall.
Phil
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 7:50 AM, rvdave <rv610dave@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > However I have a contractor that will allow me to bind them together in
> parallel if needed.
>
>
> > I do have the capability, like Phil described, to put the batteries
> in parallel for more cranking power.
> >
>
> Am considering a second contactor to connect the batteries for start if
> necessary. What is being used for the contactor switch? Using a start or
> master contactor? Are you connecting the second contactor via #2, 4, 6
> wire(?) from battery, contactor to the primary buss or the primary starter
> contactor?
>
> > Plane flies better with wt in the back anyway
>
>
> I can foresee the way my wife packs vs me is about a 4:1 ratio on other
> trips so I'll have no problem with weight in the back, hence the firewall
> battery for cg and loading issues. :)
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 for sale
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438648#438648
>
>
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
I have 2x680s in my plane. Starting on just one of them is almost impossible due
to the high compression of the engine, so I tie both of mine together for the
start.
I would look to using the 925 if I were doing it all over again.
grumpy
N184jm
> On Feb 23, 2015, at 11:19 PM, rvdave <rv610dave@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I know theses are both good batteries that some are using. Obviously the 925
is much better for starting but wondering if anyone has experience using the
680 for starting? I've been using one on a 4 cyl Lycoming with no problem but
wondering about the 6 cyl? I just did some testing on a Chevy van 6 cyl I have
that needed a new battery, I have an older 10 year old 680 battery I had on
the bench for shop projects I decided to try. It does start my van in the winter
cold but marginally because although it will turn over the engine adequately
the clock will also reset to 12 o'clock sometimes, so I know this is marginal
but may be attributed to the 10 year plus life. So I ordered a 925 from amazon
got a great deal, free freight and put in in my van to check it. What a
noticeable cranking difference--with authority! Recently with this cold snap
in Mi had a minus 27 deg morning and there was no hesitation with the 925 starting
the van. Sold on the 925 as very capable, but !
> interested in the weight savings and I may have to get another new 680 to do
the same test but thought I'd check others' experience with the 680 for starting.
Anyone with experience?
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 for sale
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438635#438635
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
I have two 680's in my RV-10 with independent master switch's. One single 6
80 will turn the IO-540 over just fine. I usually use both though for start
ing, then switch one Off after it starts. Charging both batteries hooked up
together is not a good idea without using a battery isolator which I do no
t have. It can lead to early battery failure. After I am airborne a few min
utes, I swap to the battery off line to charge it back up. Both batteries a
re mounted in the plans location and the added weight of the second battery
helps out for the CG on my plane.
David Clifford
Howell, MI
RV-10
N959RV
----- Original Message -----
From: "rvdave" <rv610dave@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 12:19:17 AM
Subject: RV10-List: PC680 vs PC925
I know theses are both good batteries that some are using. Obviously the 92
5 is much better for starting but wondering if anyone has experience using
the 680 for starting? I've been using one on a 4 cyl Lycoming with no probl
em but wondering about the 6 cyl? I just did some testing on a Chevy van 6
cyl I have that needed a new battery, I have an older 10 year old 680 batte
ry I had on the bench for shop projects I decided to try. It does start my
van in the winter cold but marginally because although it will turn over th
e engine adequately the clock will also reset to 12 o'clock sometimes, so I
know this is marginal but may be attributed to the 10 year plus life. So I
ordered a 925 from amazon got a great deal, free freight and put in in my
van to check it. What a noticeable cranking difference--with authority! Rec
ently with this cold snap in Mi had a minus 27 deg morning and there was no
hesitation with the 925 starting the van. Sold on the 925 as very capable,
but !
interested in the weight savings and I may have to get another new 680 to d
o the same test but thought I'd check others' experience with the 680 for s
tarting. Anyone with experience?
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 for sale
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438635#438635
===========
===========
===========
===========
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
I'll have to disagree with any downside of having two batteries in parallel w
ith a single alternator as a normal mode of operation. Side note - this is a
common set up for some trucks.
As all batteries have some internal resistance, charge rate is dependent on t
erminal voltage (for typical alternator configuration). If more than one ba
ttery is in parallel with the alternator, the resistance seen by the alterna
tor is that of parallel resistors. For identical batteries this will be one
half of a single battery internal resistance. As resistance seen by the al
ternator drops, alternator current increases. As alternator current increas
es, charge voltage will drop (alternator output voltage drops as alternator o
utput current increases). For you engineers out there you might remember th
e "house curve" to model load on machines operating in parallel.
The only caveat I'll add is that the batteries should have similar chemistry
.
I've run two PC-625 in parallel with single alternator in an RV-8A for 13 ye
ars and in the RV-10 for 3 years. Other than me killing one battery by leav
ing that side master on, I've experience no battery degrade issues. I do ho
wever change out one battery every two years - thus neither battery is older
than four years. I have a pulled battery from 2004 that got a second life i
n my lawn tractor and is still going strong.
I prefer the PC-625 over the PC-680 for the following reasons:
- 200 cold cranking amps versus 170 amps
- 18 amp/hour rating versus 16 amp/hour
- 13.2 pounds versus 15.4 pounds
- I find the form factor easier to work with
The true value of having two batteries for outweighs the increased battery c
apacity aspect. If that is all you want then just get a bigger battery. If
however you are looking for power distribution redundancy and "graceful deg
rade" if a single component fails, then I recommend you look at the various s
chemes out there that meet that objective. For those interested in what I d
id please email me direct.
Carl
RV-10
N7ZK
> On Feb 24, 2015, at 11:01 AM, David Clifford <davidsoutpost@comcast.net> w
rote:
>
> I have two 680's in my RV-10 with independent master switch's. One single
680 will turn the IO-540 over just fine. I usually use both though for sta
rting, then switch one Off after it starts. Charging both batteries hooked u
p together is not a good idea without using a battery isolator which I do no
t have. ( It can lead to early battery failure. After I am airborne a few m
inutes, I swap to the battery off line to charge it back up. Both batteries
are mounted in the plans location and the added weight of the second batter
y helps out for the CG on my plane.
>
> David Clifford
> Howell, MI
>
> RV-10
> N959RV
>
>
> From: "rvdave" <rv610dave@gmail.com>
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 12:19:17 AM
> Subject: RV10-List: PC680 vs PC925
>
>
> I know theses are both good batteries that some are using. Obviously the 9
25 is much better for starting but wondering if anyone has experience using t
he 680 for starting? I've been using one on a 4 cyl Lycoming with no proble
m but wondering about the 6 cyl? I just did some testing on a Chevy van 6 c
yl I have that needed a new battery, I have an older 10 year old 680 battery
I had on the bench for shop projects I decided to try. It does start my va
n in the winter cold but marginally because although it will turn over the e
ngine adequately the clock will also reset to 12 o'clock sometimes, so I kno
w this is marginal but may be attributed to the 10 year plus life. So I ord
ered a 925 from amazon got a great deal, free freight and put in in my van t
o check it. What a noticeable cranking difference--with authority! Recent
ly with this cold snap in Mi had a minus 27 deg morning and there was no hes
itation with the 925 starting the van. Sold on the 925 as very capable, but
!
> interested in the weight savings and I may have to get another new 680 to
do the same test but thought I'd check others' experience with the 680 for s
tarting. Anyone with experience?
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 for sale
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438635#438635
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 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: PC680 vs PC925 |
I too have a Bob Nuckolls Z-14 configured exactly as Phil describes
below right down to cable sizes. Works great and I highly recommend
this approach.
Single battery starts with the 680 are okay but not confidence
inspiring. It's not something I'd be comfortable depending on if there
was a chance that I had to draw down the 680 for some reason before the
start. I do have the light weight starter which others have pointed out
is not the best for crisp starts of the IO540. However, with (2) 680s, I
am totally confident that the engine will start independent of any
pre-start activities. That's what I was after with the Z-14 and I got it.
I initially operated by doing the engine start on one battery then cross
linking the two batteries, alternators and buses once underway. My
reasons were 1) avoiding rebooting of the (3) EFISes which ran on the
other battery/bus and 2) having everything cross connected so that any
electrical failure would occur without an immediate impact on my panel.
After much back and forth with Nuckolls, he pointed out that this was
bass ackwards. Instead I should start using both batteries to minimize
the impact on the batteries (starting is probably the most stressful
moments for the battery). And then after the start I should run with
the two buses unlinked so that any failures would be made apparent when
they occur. Linking the 2 buses would be part of the recovery from such
a failure. Makes sense and I've been running that way ever since.
Bill "watching the white stuff fall in NC!!??" Watson
On 2/24/2015 10:01 AM, Phillip Perry wrote:
> Dave,
>
> B & C sells a pre-wired cross-feed contactor; meaning that it already
> has the diodes installed across the terminals. That is the contactor
> I used in my airplane.
> http://www.bandc.biz/prewiredcross-feedcontactor.aspx
>
> It was designed around the AeroElectric Z-14 basic architecture. If
> you don't have a copy of his book, it's worth the few dollars to
> purchase primarily for the diagrams. However those architecture
> diagrams are also available online. Z14 has two links because it
> spans a couple of .pdf pages.
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/
>
> All of my connections between the batteries and between the batteries
> and the starter are #2. To clarify, my primary starting battery is #2
> from the battery to the starter. My secondary battery is #2 across
> the cross-feed to my primary battery. And, because there is less load
> (no starting load) directly off my second buss, I run #8 forward from
> the secondary battery to the components it powers in the panel. Does
> that make sense?
>
> I thought I had a better photo of the battery area, but apparently I
> don't. Next time I'm out at the hangar I'll have to try and grab
> them. But here's what I have showing some of the finished wiring and
> also another showing the battery mount modifications. Both of the
> master contactors and the cross-feed contactors are in the back. The
> starter contactor is still on the firewall.
>
> Phil
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 7:50 AM, rvdave <rv610dave@gmail.com
> <mailto:rv610dave@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> <mailto:rv610dave@gmail.com>>
>
>
> > However I have a contractor that will allow me to bind them
> together in parallel if needed.
>
>
> > I do have the capability, like Phil described, to put the
> batteries in parallel for more cranking power.
> >
>
> Am considering a second contactor to connect the batteries for
> start if necessary. What is being used for the contactor switch?
> Using a start or master contactor? Are you connecting the second
> contactor via #2, 4, 6 wire(?) from battery, contactor to the
> primary buss or the primary starter contactor?
>
> > Plane flies better with wt in the back anyway
>
>
> I can foresee the way my wife packs vs me is about a 4:1 ratio on
> other trips so I'll have no problem with weight in the back, hence
> the firewall battery for cg and loading issues. :)
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 for sale
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438648#438648
>
>
> ==========
> -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ==========
> FORUMS -
> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> b Site -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
>
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
Bill brings up a point worth a bit of discussion. In the Z14 model, I can'
t really see any situation where I would throw my cross-feed contractor in f
light. I would always use it at start and then shut it off and likely never
touch it under any circumstance.
The theory is that if a component on one of the busses shorts I t should tri
p a circuit breaker, but the buss should stay up and running. However if th
e buss itself shorts and goes down, the last thing I want to do is throw the
cross-feed and short the unaffected buss too. If that occurred I'd be flyi
ng blind while I figured out what happened and once I figured it out I'd be d
ealing with the time required for reboots to complete and possible calibrati
on issues of rebooting inflight while in an unusual attitude (remember I'm f
lying blind).
The secret is to pay close attention to what equipment goes on which buss so
you can handle a buss failure gracefully. Some of my equipment has dual 12v
inputs and that equipment has one input from buss 1 and the other from buss
2. Other equipment with a single 12v input (that could be deemed critical o
r really convenient to have) can be connected to each buss through a pair of
diodes pointing in opposite directions. This will allow the electrons to fl
ow off one of the busses and into the equipment without cross-feeding onto t
he other buss.
With some planning you can really build a very redundant electrical system a
nd panel with very very little added complexity.
Phil
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 24, 2015, at 4:30 PM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> I too have a Bob Nuckolls Z-14 configured exactly as Phil describes below r
ight down to cable sizes. Works great and I highly recommend this approach.
>
> Single battery starts with the 680 are okay but not confidence inspiring. I
t's not something I'd be comfortable depending on if there was a chance that
I had to draw down the 680 for some reason before the start. I do have the
light weight starter which others have pointed out is not the best for cris
p starts of the IO540. However, with (2) 680s, I am totally confident that t
he engine will start independent of any pre-start activities. That's what I
was after with the Z-14 and I got it.
>
> I initially operated by doing the engine start on one battery then cross l
inking the two batteries, alternators and buses once underway. My reasons w
ere 1) avoiding rebooting of the (3) EFISes which ran on the other battery/b
us and 2) having everything cross connected so that any electrical failure w
ould occur without an immediate impact on my panel.
>
> After much back and forth with Nuckolls, he pointed out that this was bass
ackwards. Instead I should start using both batteries to minimize the impa
ct on the batteries (starting is probably the most stressful moments for the
battery). And then after the start I should run with the two buses unlinke
d so that any failures would be made apparent when they occur. Linking the 2
buses would be part of the recovery from such a failure. Makes sense and I
've been running that way ever since.
>
> Bill "watching the white stuff fall in NC!!??" Watson
>
>> On 2/24/2015 10:01 AM, Phillip Perry wrote:
>> Dave,
>>
>> B & C sells a pre-wired cross-feed contactor; meaning that it already has
the diodes installed across the terminals. That is the contactor I used in
my airplane.
>> http://www.bandc.biz/prewiredcross-feedcontactor.aspx
>>
>> It was designed around the AeroElectric Z-14 basic architecture. If you
don't have a copy of his book, it's worth the few dollars to purchase prima
rily for the diagrams. However those architecture diagrams are also availab
le online. Z14 has two links because it spans a couple of .pdf pages.
>> http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/
>>
>> All of my connections between the batteries and between the batteries and
the starter are #2. To clarify, my primary starting battery is #2 from the
battery to the starter. My secondary battery is #2 across the cross-feed t
o my primary battery. And, because there is less load (no starting load) di
rectly off my second buss, I run #8 forward from the secondary battery to th
e components it powers in the panel. Does that make sense?
>>
>> I thought I had a better photo of the battery area, but apparently I don'
t. Next time I'm out at the hangar I'll have to try and grab them. But he
re's what I have showing some of the finished wiring and also another showin
g the battery mount modifications. Both of the master contactors and the cr
oss-feed contactors are in the back. The starter contactor is still on the f
irewall.
>>
>> Phil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 7:50 AM, rvdave <rv610dave@gmail.com> w
rote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > However I have a contractor that will allow me to bind them together i
n parallel if needed.
>>>
>>>
>>> > I do have the capability, like Phil described, to put the batteries
in parallel for more cranking power.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Am considering a second contactor to connect the batteries for start if n
ecessary. What is being used for the contactor switch? Using a start or mas
ter contactor? Are you connecting the second contactor via #2, 4, 6 wire(?
) from battery, contactor to the primary buss or the primary starter contact
or?
>>>
>>> > Plane flies better with wt in the back anyway
>>>
>>>
>>> I can foresee the way my wife packs vs me is about a 4:1 ratio on other t
rips so I'll have no problem with weight in the back, hence the firewall bat
tery for cg and loading issues. :)
>>>
>>> --------
>>> Dave Ford
>>> RV6 for sale
>>> RV10 building
>>> Cadillac, MI
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438648#438648
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> ==========
>>> FORUMS -
>>> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ==========
>>> b Site -
>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> 02/24/15
>>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
Phil,
You didn't mention if starting with the X-feed closed (both batteries) causes the
EFIS to shut down. This is the main reason I keep the 2 Z-14 busses separated
on startup. Like your experience, a start on one 680 does not impress you,
but usually works. For this reason I am contemplating replacing one with a
925.
I have also had marginal reliability with the Odessey batteries lately, having
to replace them more frequently than expected.
--------
Dave Moore
RV-6 flying
RV-10 QB - flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438684#438684
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
As I mentioned earlier, I haven't performed the first start yet so I can't put
a stake in the ground with a definite claim. However I don't believe there will
be any issues with reboots on the EFIS' at the time of start.
The way the design lays out, the current should never be interrupted during a start.
Phil
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 24, 2015, at 7:06 PM, nukeflyboy <flymoore@charter.net> wrote:
>
>
> Phil,
>
> You didn't mention if starting with the X-feed closed (both batteries) causes
the EFIS to shut down. This is the main reason I keep the 2 Z-14 busses separated
on startup. Like your experience, a start on one 680 does not impress you,
but usually works. For this reason I am contemplating replacing one with
a 925.
>
> I have also had marginal reliability with the Odessey batteries lately, having
to replace them more frequently than expected.
>
> --------
> Dave Moore
> RV-6 flying
> RV-10 QB - flying
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438684#438684
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
While the battery still has amp-hours remaining during cranking, the voltage drops
low enough that the EFIS will crash. On engine start you will want to see
your engine monitor so reboots are a PITA. You will also have to restart your
checklist, or re-enter anything else you have done (navigation, for example).
I am sure it causes no harm to the EFIS (mine a G3X), but it does take 30 seconds
or so to recover. For this reason you do not want to cross tie your batteries
on start unless you have just about killed your starting battery.
Needless to say, your EFIS needs to be on a different battery than the starting
battery.
--------
Dave Moore
RV-6 flying
RV-10 QB - flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438689#438689
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
On 2/24/2015 8:06 PM, nukeflyboy wrote:
>
> You didn't mention if starting with the X-feed closed (both batteries) causes
the EFIS to shut down. This is the main reason I keep the 2 Z-14 busses separated
on startup. Like your experience, a start on one 680 does not impress you,
but usually works. For this reason I am contemplating replacing one with
a 925.
I have (3) GRT HX EFISs that come on with the master. They do not have
a discrete switch or switches. Pre-start flight plan entry requires the
G430 to be powered on as well. Initially, if I took more than 5 minutes
to setup my flight plan and call clearance delivery on a cold day, when
I did a linked start it was likely that my (3) EFISs would re-boot.
It became obvious that having all (3) screens come up involved more of a
load than I anticipated. An obvious solution would be adding individual
switches which would allow only 1 to be brought online until after the
start. But I've become accustomed to the EFISs being in 'always on'
mode and I like the fact that they cannot be switched off inadvertently.
What I did was add TCW's IPS (Intelligent Power Stabilizer) and
connected it to the EFISs and the G430. This solved the problem. I now
do all starts with both batteries linked with no reboots.
> I have also had marginal reliability with the Odessey batteries lately, having
to replace them more frequently than expected.
>
I've had some problems with battery life. One problem was clearly tied
to the need for 'clock power' on the (3) EFISs. This tended to run the
battery down if not flown regularly. When GRT started picking up the
time from the GPS, disconnecting the clock power lines clearly had a
positive effect on battery life.
In my case, I think cold starting my IO-540 with the light wt starter on
one 680 may be considered a bit abusive. That is, it may reduce its
life. Nuckolls suggested as much and my experience so far is consistent
with that. Using both batteries on all starts, I seem to be getting the
performance and life I expect out of the 680s but I don't the data to
confirm that yet.
I've had to make some changes to get things to work the way I've wanted
but at this point I'm very satisfied with 2 680s. Replacing one with a
925 seems like overkill to me.
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: | Re: PC680 vs PC925 |
I look forward to seeing how it behaves. My G3X is backed up my a backup battery
and my Dynon D6 has and integrated backup battery as well. I just don't see
any possible way for them to blink. If they do, and can just keep the contactor
or open during the start. My G3X is wired to both busses so buss 2 would
keep it running.
It will be interesting to see. The first engine start isn't too far away. Should
be this spring or summer.
Phil
Sent from my iPad
> On Feb 24, 2015, at 9:19 PM, nukeflyboy <flymoore@charter.net> wrote:
>
>
> While the battery still has amp-hours remaining during cranking, the voltage
drops low enough that the EFIS will crash. On engine start you will want to see
your engine monitor so reboots are a PITA. You will also have to restart your
checklist, or re-enter anything else you have done (navigation, for example).
I am sure it causes no harm to the EFIS (mine a G3X), but it does take 30
seconds or so to recover. For this reason you do not want to cross tie your
batteries on start unless you have just about killed your starting battery.
>
> Needless to say, your EFIS needs to be on a different battery than the starting
battery.
>
> --------
> Dave Moore
> RV-6 flying
> RV-10 QB - flying
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438689#438689
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: PC680 vs PC925 |
The TCW solutions are very helpful. I have the Battery Backup behind the G3X.
If I deal with reboots, which I don't think will happen, the IPS would be a very
elegant and fairly simple solution to add.
There's some innovative stuff in their portfolio for real problems.
Sent from my iPad
> On Feb 24, 2015, at 9:25 PM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On 2/24/2015 8:06 PM, nukeflyboy wrote:
>>
>> You didn't mention if starting with the X-feed closed (both batteries) causes
the EFIS to shut down. This is the main reason I keep the 2 Z-14 busses separated
on startup. Like your experience, a start on one 680 does not impress
you, but usually works. For this reason I am contemplating replacing one with
a 925.
> I have (3) GRT HX EFISs that come on with the master. They do not have a discrete
switch or switches. Pre-start flight plan entry requires the G430 to be
powered on as well. Initially, if I took more than 5 minutes to setup my flight
plan and call clearance delivery on a cold day, when I did a linked start
it was likely that my (3) EFISs would re-boot.
>
> It became obvious that having all (3) screens come up involved more of a load
than I anticipated. An obvious solution would be adding individual switches
which would allow only 1 to be brought online until after the start. But I've
become accustomed to the EFISs being in 'always on' mode and I like the fact
that they cannot be switched off inadvertently.
>
> What I did was add TCW's IPS (Intelligent Power Stabilizer) and connected it
to the EFISs and the G430. This solved the problem. I now do all starts with
both batteries linked with no reboots.
>> I have also had marginal reliability with the Odessey batteries lately, having
to replace them more frequently than expected.
> I've had some problems with battery life. One problem was clearly tied to the
need for 'clock power' on the (3) EFISs. This tended to run the battery down
if not flown regularly. When GRT started picking up the time from the GPS,
disconnecting the clock power lines clearly had a positive effect on battery life.
>
> In my case, I think cold starting my IO-540 with the light wt starter on one
680 may be considered a bit abusive. That is, it may reduce its life. Nuckolls
suggested as much and my experience so far is consistent with that. Using
both batteries on all starts, I seem to be getting the performance and life I
expect out of the 680s but I don't the data to confirm that yet.
>
> I've had to make some changes to get things to work the way I've wanted but at
this point I'm very satisfied with 2 680s. Replacing one with a 925 seems like
overkill to me.
>
>
>
>
>
Message 21
| 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: PC680 vs PC925 |
On 2/24/2015 7:33 PM, Phillip Perry wrote:
> Bill brings up a point worth a bit of discussion. In the Z14 model,
> I can't really see any situation where I would throw my cross-feed
> contractor in flight. I would always use it at start and then shut it
> off and likely never touch it under any circumstance.
>
You are forgetting about the obvious one - a failed alternator. That's
where the Z14 shines because it turns a battery endurance situation into
a 'hit the switch and carry on'. But you know that.
> The theory is that if a component on one of the busses shorts I t
> should trip a circuit breaker, but the buss should stay up and
> running. However if the buss itself shorts and goes down, the last
> thing I want to do is throw the cross-feed and short the unaffected
> buss too. If that occurred I'd be flying blind while I figured out
> what happened and once I figured it out I'd be dealing with the time
> required for reboots to complete and possible calibration issues of
> rebooting inflight while in an unusual attitude (remember I'm flying
> blind).
I didn't consider a bus short a likely failure scenario... at least no
more likely than shorting a unprotected fat cable. The installation of
the wires and cables that make up my two buses is robust and durable
enough for that not to be a likely type of failure. OTOH, any component
may go belly up for a variety of reasons but they are all protected with
fuses or a breaker. And I agree, there is no reason for bus linking in
the case of a component failure or short. I've gone almost 100% fuses
so a shorted component wouldn't normally even be reset.
Generally speaking just as you suggested, there's no reason to ever link
the buses in flight unless there is some indication of a charging
problem (e.g. alternator failure).
>
> The secret is to pay close attention to what equipment goes on which
> buss so you can handle a buss failure gracefully. Some of my equipment
> has dual 12v inputs and that equipment has one input from buss 1 and
> the other from buss 2. Other equipment with a single 12v input (that
> could be deemed critical or really convenient to have) can be
> connected to each buss through a pair of diodes pointing in opposite
> directions. This will allow the electrons to flow off one of the
> busses and into the equipment without cross-feeding onto the other buss.
I took a slightly different approach with my GRT EFISs; they can have up
to (3) 12v inputs and will automatically get power from the input
producing the most. However, I've only hooked them up to one bus (all 3
inputs are linked to one bus for some physical redundancy and with no
power on/off switch in the circuit to eliminate a point of failure).
The reason I keep them on one bus is so I can control what battery is
drawn down when they are powered on before engine start. I could add
switches but that would add complexity and multiple additional points
of failure.
So I depend on the dual buses and the ability to link them as the way to
provide redundant power to the EFISs.
>
> With some planning you can really build a very redundant electrical
> system and panel with very very little added complexity.
Agreed but it continues to be a learning experience for me.
Message 22
| 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: PC680 vs PC925 |
I have a 925 in the back and I never have to worry about not having enough juice
for starting.
Less worry about additional contactors (and their power consumption) and other
complexities too. The capacity is pretty similar to two 680s in case the alternator
quits.
For backup I have two 6V 12A batteries in series, under one of the flap torque
tube covers. Stole that idea from Tim Olson. Tim has 4 of them though.
I charge them with a marine charge controller: https://www.bluesea.com/products/7601/m-Series__Automatic_Charging_Relay_-_12_24V_DC_65A
Lenny
--------
Lenny
N311LZ
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=438695#438695
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! --
|