----------------------------------------------------------
                           TeamGrumman-List Digest Archive
                                      ---
                     Total Messages Posted Sun 08/03/03: 2
           ----------------------------------------------------------
 
 
Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 11:24 AM - Re: Tigers -- what's your empty cg?  (Aucountry@aol.com)
     2. 11:38 AM - Re: CHT question for non-CHT equipped Tiger  (Aucountry@aol.com)
 
 
 
________________________________  Message 1  _____________________________________


Time: 11:24:34 AM PST US
From: Aucountry@aol.com
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Tigers -- what's your empty cg?

--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Aucountry@aol.com

In a message dated 08/03/03 06:00:20 AM, AnthonyAFA@aol.com writes:

> > 1417/83.1
> > 1438/82.6
> 
Are these weights the computed weights from the original Weight and Balance?  
 Or are they recently weighed weights?   

Also, what sort of (avionics?, autopilot? etc) equipment is in the plane?
Original interiors?   or ?
Sensenich prop?
Wheel pants?

Thanks






________________________________  Message 2  _____________________________________


Time: 11:38:18 AM PST US
From: Aucountry@aol.com
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: CHT question for non-CHT equipped Tiger

--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Aucountry@aol.com


In a message dated 08/03/03 10:44:22 AM, rad@flightclub.com.au writes:


> I'm looking to get a bit of a sample of Grummans out there with CHT gauges
> to
> assist Grumman owners that aren't yet fortunate enough to have a CHT.=A0 We're
> looking to set a policy to lean to stumbling then slightly enrich at 75% or
> less power (ie best economy).=A0 However, we're worried that some pilots will
> enrich too many clicks in and put us in the CHT danger zone (best power).
> What I'm trying to do below is determine the level of risk in the policy
> above.
>
Before I started using a 4 cylinder CHT/EGT I would have asked that same
question.   Problem is, the peak lean location changes from take-off to crusie,
while at crusie, and then while decending.   In the old days, when fuel had=20less
toluene and more lead, the flame going down the exhaust pipe was a lot sorter
and more burning was taking place in the combustion chamber.   Now,
barometric changes, outside air temps, altitide, and throttle position effects
the
entire combustion process more than is used to.  

In the ideal world, you want to run about 150 degrees rich of peak at sea
level, tapering off to 100 rich of peak at 5000 feet, then at 75% power about 75
rich of peak and at 65% power, you could tolerate 50 rich of peak.  

Yesterday, I had a customer who complained of periodic low mag run-up on the
right mag.   He didn't have a 4 cylinder CHT/EGT.   If he had, he would have
known exactly which cylinder was acting up.   The troubleshooting path is to
start with the two bottom plugs on the right side, then the two top on the left,
then the mag harness, then the mag.   This one had multiple problems.   The
biggest being the harness.  

Given what I know of, and have learned of, fuels, valve and valve guide wear,
I think one of the first expenses I'd swallow is a very good. recording.
CHT/EGT setup similar to the EDM 700.


Gary
www.AuCountry.com

Home of "Team Grumman"
TeamGrumman-List@matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe