Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:20 AM - Re: JPI vs EI (teamgrumman@aol.com)
2. 01:35 AM - Re: JPI vs EI (teamgrumman@AOL.COM)
3. 06:13 AM - Re: JPI vs EI (flyv35b)
4. 06:36 AM - Re: JPI vs EI (cloudvalley@comcast.net)
5. 07:38 AM - Re: JPI vs EI (flyv35b)
6. 11:02 AM - Re: JPI vs EI (923te)
7. 12:52 PM - Re: JPI vs EI (teamgrumman@AOL.COM)
8. 02:50 PM - Re: JPI vs EI (linn)
9. 03:13 PM - Re: JPI vs EI (flyv35b)
10. 03:35 PM - Re: JPI vs EI (flyv35b)
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 |
|
Dave doesn't know what he's doing. =C2-I always add the ground and it's st
ill a lot higher.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te@att.net>
Sent: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 9:12 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Gary,
I thought this an interesting thread on the
GG.
I understand that the JPI probes are grounded
while the EI are not.
Is it possible that this accounts for th
edifferences in your thorough comparison tests?
ned
=C2-
=C2-
----- Original Message -----
From: David Fletcher
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:41 AM
Subject: RE: Tiger outlet ramps - More Info Req.
> But, of course, I am sure we can all comment on the EI vs
JPI question
> accuracy. If the metallurgical properties of aluminum
degrade at temps
> higher than 450*, isn't the JPI more accurately
reflecting the true
> temperature of the aluminum cylinder
head?
Customer just had the same problem with a newly installed JPI.
cruise temps
were in the 425 range.=C2- Went back and added a new ground
directly to the
engine as the manual says in bold print, and his temps
dropped about 25
degrees. The EI doesn't seem to need it's own special
ground.
David Fletcher
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 |
|
I flew with both the EI and JPI installed in my plane for over a year and ov
er 25 flights. =C2-I had the EI in #3. =C2-Based on over 300 hours on pr
evious flights over the previous 3 years, I know the #3 should be within 10
degrees of #4. =C2-
I tried to explain this the best I could in a write-up in the Star. =C2-
=9CFor those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't b
elieve, no proof is possible.=9D=C2-=C2-- Stuart Chase
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
Sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 1:13 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Dave doesn't know what he's doing. =C2-I always add the ground and it's st
ill a lot higher.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te@att.net>
Sent: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 9:12 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Gary,
I thought this an interesting thread on the
GG.
I understand that the JPI probes are grounded
while the EI are not.
Is it possible that this accounts for th
edifferences in your thorough comparison tests?
ned
=C2-
=C2-
----- Original Message -----
From: David Fletcher
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:41 AM
Subject: RE: Tiger outlet ramps - More Info Req.
> But, of course, I am sure we can=2
0all comment on the EI vs
JPI question
> accuracy. If the metallurgical properties of aluminum
degrade at temps
> higher than 450*, isn't the
JPI more accurately
reflecting the true
> temperature of the aluminum cylinder
head?
Customer just had the same problem with a newly installed JPI.
cruise temps
were in the 425 range.=C2- Went back and added a new ground
directly to the
engine as the manual says in bold print, and his temps
dropped about 25
degrees. The EI doesn't seem to need it's own special
ground.
David Fletcher
or?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
======================3
D=============
ution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
_
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
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 |
|
So if there is the large variation that you say between EI and JPI, which o
ne is accurate or the most accurate=3F And why=3F Apparently you don't feel th
at grounding problems are or can be an issue. Which system did you use for
your cowling cooling tests=3F
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 1:34 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
I flew with both the EI and JPI installed in my plane for over a year and
over 25 flights. I had the EI in #3. Based on over 300 hours on previous
flights over the previous 3 years, I know the #3 should be within 10 degre
es of #4.
I tried to explain this the best I could in a write-up in the Star.
=9CFor those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't beli
eve, no proof is possible.=9D - Stuart Chase
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 1:13 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Dave doesn't know what he's doing. I always add the ground and it's stil
l a lot higher.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te@att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 9:12 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Gary,
I thought this an interesting thread on the GG.
I understand that the JPI probes are grounded while the EI are not.
Is it possible that this accounts for th edifferences in your thorough co
mparison tests=3F
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: David Fletcher
To: grumman-gang@xmission.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:41 AM
Subject: RE: Tiger outlet ramps - More Info Req.
> But, of course, I am sure we can all comment on the EI vs JPI question
> accuracy. If the metallurgical properties of aluminum degrade at temps
> higher than 450*, isn't the JPI more accurately reflecting the true
> temperature of the aluminum cylinder head=3F
Customer just had the same problem with a newly installed JPI. cruise tem
ps
were in the 425 range. Went back and added a new ground directly to the
engine as the manual says in bold print, and his temps dropped about 25
degrees. The EI doesn't seem to need it's own special ground.
David Fletcher
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
======================3
D=============
ution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
NICS WEB FORUMS -
p://forums.matronics.com
ution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - The TeamGrumman-List Email Forum -
=5F-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
=5F-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
=5F-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
=5F-= Photoshare, and much much more:
=5F-
=5F-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
=5F-
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
=5F-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
=5F-
=5F-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
=5F-
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - List Contribution Web Site -
=5F-= Thank you for your generous support!
=5F-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
=5F-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=5F-===========================================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Checked by AVG.
09 7:16 AM
--
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
The Professional version does not have this message
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 |
|
Hi Cliff,
=C2-Do you like JPI better?
Brian
----- Original Message -----
From: "flyv35b" <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 6:12:39 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
=EF=BB
So if there is the large variation that you say between EI and JPI, which o
ne is accurate or the most accurate? And why?=C2- Apparently you don't fe
el that grounding problems are or can be an issue.=C2- Which system did y
ou use for your cowling cooling tests?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 1:34 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
I flew with both the EI and JPI installed in my plane for over a year and o
ver 25 flights. =C2-I had the EI in #3. =C2-Based on over 300 hours on
previous flights over the previous 3 years, I know the #3 should be within
10 degrees of #4. =C2-
I tried to explain this the best I could in a write-up in the Star. =C2-
=9CFor those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't
believe, no proof is possible.=9D =C2-=C2-- Stuart Chase
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
Sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 1:13 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Dave doesn't know what he's doing. =C2-I always add the ground and it's s
till a lot higher.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te < 923te@att.net >
Sent: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 9:12 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Gary,
I thought this an interesting thread on the GG.
I understand that the JPI probes are grounded while the EI are not.
Is it possible that this accounts for th edifferences in your thorough comp
arison tests?
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: David Fletcher
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:41 AM
Subject: RE: Tiger outlet ramps - More Info Req.
> But, of course, I am sure we can all comment on the EI vs JPI question
> accuracy. If the metallurgical properties of aluminum degrade at temps
> higher than 450*, isn't the JPI more accurately reflecting the true
> temperature of the aluminum cylinder head?
Customer just had the same problem with a newly installed JPI. cruise temps
were in the 425 range.=C2- Went back and added a new ground directly to t
he
engine as the manual says in bold print, and his temps dropped about 25
degrees. The EI doesn't seem to need it's own special ground.
David Fletcher
or?TeamGrumman-List"> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List p
://forums.matronics.com
======================3
D=============
ution"> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
or?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List NI
CS WEB FORUMS -
p://forums.matronics.com ution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===
3/25/2009 7:16 AM
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
==
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 |
|
Not really. As a company and from a product support standpoint I think EI
is far superior. EI also makes all of their own probes, transducer and ins
truments. As far as I know JPI doesn't make anything (themselves). Having
said that I have both instruments in my two planes and both have been sati
sfactory.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: cloudvalley@comcast.net
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 6:36 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Hi Cliff,
Do you like JPI better=3F
Brian
----- Original Message -----
From: =22flyv35b=22 <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 6:12:39 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
=EF=BB
So if there is the large variation that you say between EI and JPI, which
one is accurate or the most accurate=3F And why=3F Apparently you don't feel
that grounding problems are or can be an issue. Which system did you use f
or your cowling cooling tests=3F
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 1:34 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
I flew with both the EI and JPI installed in my plane for over a year a
nd over 25 flights. I had the EI in #3. Based on over 300 hours on previo
us flights over the previous 3 years, I know the #3 should be within 10 deg
rees of #4.
I tried to explain this the best I could in a write-up in the Star.
=9CFor those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't be
lieve, no proof is possible.=9D - Stuart Chase
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 1:13 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Dave doesn't know what he's doing. I always add the ground and it's st
ill a lot higher.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te@att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 9:12 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Gary,
I thought this an interesting thread on the GG.
I understand that the JPI probes are grounded while the EI are not.
Is it possible that this accounts for th edifferences in your thorough
comparison tests=3F
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: David Fletcher
To: grumman-gang@xmission.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:41 AM
Subject: RE: Tiger outlet ramps - More Info Req.
> But, of course, I am sure we can all comment on the EI vs JPI questio
n
> accuracy. If the metallurgical properties of aluminum degrade at temp
s
> higher than 450*, isn't the JPI more accurately reflecting the true
> temperature of the aluminum cylinder head=3F
Customer just had the same problem with a newly installed JPI. cruise t
emps
were in the 425 range. Went back and added a new ground directly to th
e
engine as the manual says in bold print, and his temps dropped about 25
degrees. The EI doesn't seem to need it's own special ground.
David Fletcher
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
======================3
D=============
ution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
NICS WEB FORUMS -
p://forums.matronics.com
ution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
st=22 target==5Fblank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
3/25/2009 7:16 AM
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
st=22 target==5Fblank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - The TeamGrumman-List Email Forum -
=5F-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
=5F-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
=5F-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
=5F-= Photoshare, and much much more:
=5F-
=5F-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
=5F-
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
=5F-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
=5F-
=5F-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
=5F-
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - List Contribution Web Site -
=5F-= Thank you for your generous support!
=5F-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
=5F-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=5F-===========================================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Checked by AVG.
09 7:16 AM
--
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
The Professional version does not have this message
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 |
|
Gary,
Good enough for me!
I've read your Star article and thought you did an excellent job writing
it and researching it. I've had an ongoing argument with another GG'er
for over a year defending your work to him. I like your Stuart Chase
quote and think it really does have a lot of merit in all kinds of
situations......unfortionatley, so many people are unable to alter their
beliefs in the face of the facts. Their presuppositions are more
important to them sometimes than reality even with the facts clear
presented.....
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 3:34 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
I flew with both the EI and JPI installed in my plane for over a year
and over 25 flights. I had the EI in #3. Based on over 300 hours on
previous flights over the previous 3 years, I know the #3 should be
within 10 degrees of #4.
I tried to explain this the best I could in a write-up in the Star.
=9CFor those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who
don't believe, no proof is possible.=9D - Stuart Chase
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 1:13 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Dave doesn't know what he's doing. I always add the ground and it's
still a lot higher.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te@att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 9:12 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Gary,
I thought this an interesting thread on the GG.
I understand that the JPI probes are grounded while the EI are not.
Is it possible that this accounts for th edifferences in your thorough
comparison tests?
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: David Fletcher
To: grumman-gang@xmission.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:41 AM
Subject: RE: Tiger outlet ramps - More Info Req.
> But, of course, I am sure we can all comment on the EI vs JPI
question
> accuracy. If the metallurgical properties of aluminum degrade at
temps
> higher than 450*, isn't the JPI more accurately reflecting the true
> temperature of the aluminum cylinder head?
Customer just had the same problem with a newly installed JPI. cruise
temps
were in the 425 range. Went back and added a new ground directly to
the
engine as the manual says in bold print, and his temps dropped about
25
degrees. The EI doesn't seem to need it's own special ground.
David Fletcher
or?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
======================3
D=============
ution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
or?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
NICS WEB FORUMS -
p://forums.matronics.com
ution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
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 |
|
If you turn on a soldering iron and touch the tip with a thermometer (therma
l couple) you'll get one reading. =C2-If you move it away from the solderi
ng iron 1/8 of an inch, you'll get another. =C2-The JPI probes touch the c
ylinder head. =C2-The EI probes sit in the well, heated by the surrounding
aluminum. =C2-They are measuring different things. =C2-
It isn't a question of which one is accurate. =C2-I would bet that both ar
e within 1 degree of being accurate. =C2-Do a little research on thermal c
ouples and you'll find that thermal couples come in all configurations. =C2
-Some require grounding, some don't. =C2-Do I want a system that uses a
floating ground (EI)? =C2-No.
I forget a lot from my engineering classes regarding thermal couples, but, a
s I recall, some=C2-thermal couples are used as a source voltage themselve
s in a circuit and other=C2-thermal couples are used is a powered circuit
requiring a common source ground. =C2-
As for which one is better, personally, the JPI makes for a much cleaner ins
tallation. =C2-I think the JPI looks more professional and the operating l
ogic is more what I would expect; i.e., less of a learning curve. =C2-The
wires are a lot easier to route and you can cut them to length instead of wr
apping up and tying up large bundles of wiring. =C2-Quite often, on EI ins
tallations, the wire gets bundled up under the instrument panel in large wad
s of wiring. =C2-Looks like shit, but, I guess no one but me cares about w
hat20the backside of instrument panel looks like (based on what I see in eve
rything I work on). =C2-[Note: =C2-I wish you all could see behind the p
anel=C2-of 26392. =C2-You'd swear there were no wires at all.] =C2-The
JPI has more features for the same money. =C2-As for customer service, th
ere have been big changes in the last 3 or 4 years regarding service. =C2
-The warranty is actually better than published. =C2-The JPI EDM 800 in
my plane, since 2004, began displaying weird number flashing on occasion las
t year. =C2-I sent it in and they fixed it at no cost. =C2-I did this wi
th another customers plane with a display that was dim (it was also 3 years
out of warrantee). =C2-No cost. =C2-Other than those two, I haven't had
to send a JPI back for service in the 10 years I've been installing them.
The question was: =C2-What system did I use in the FAA portion of the flig
ht testing? =C2- EI of course. =C2-I wanted to get the lowest CHTs possi
ble. =C2-Besides, the DER already had a certified EI system. =C2-Running
all that shielded wiring, 14 of them, through the ADF hole in the floor of
the plane, was interesting. =C2-I could have run twice that number of JPI
wires through the same opening. =C2-
The question should be: =C2-What did I find with the JPI set-up in my plan
e? =C2-and, what did I find with the JPI set up in the flight test airplan
e. =C2-
BY-THE-WAY: =C2-It's trivial to remove a JPI CHT probe. =C2-The wiring i
sn't fix
ed to the nut used to tighten the probe into the cylinder head. =C2-The JP
I uses a separate shell to tighten the probe in place. =C2-THUS: =C2-a J
PI CHT probe can be removed with the cowling in place in about 1/10 the time
it takes to remove an EI probe, WITHOUT REMOVING THE WIRE FROM ITS CONNECTI
ON. =C2-That being said, on the test plane, the JPI CHT probes were left i
n place and tie-wrapped to the bundle in the neighborhood of the air leaving
the cylinder. =C2-I was able to measure the temperature drop, of the air
(OAT) to the exit air, across cylinder #3 with the #3 probe and across #2 wi
th the #2 probe. =C2-The #1 CHT probe was placed in the same proximity to
the EI probe used to measure the temperature of the air near the alternator.
=C2-The #4 CHT probe was placed in the same proximity to the EI probe use
d to measure the temperature of the accessory case. =C2-Both JPI probes sh
owed temps very close to the EI probes used to measure alternator temps and
accessory temps,=C2-respectively.=C2-=C2-
Prior to the FAA climb-cooling tests, I did the same tests with my plane and
the JPI 800. The 800 shows percent power so it's trivial to set conditions
for 75% power. =C2-During a Vy climb from 1000 feet to 17,800 feet on an 8
0 degree day, my CHTs peaked around 470 (roughly 400 on an EI and confirmed
during testing with an EI installed on the test plane) at around 8000 feet.
=C2-Oil temp was stable at 210 before it began to decrease by about the sa
me alti
tude. =C2-I ran this same test with the test airplane, climbing to 12,500
feet, and got about the same results, 465 and 205 but it was a cooler day.
=C2-
About 6 months ago, I was flying at tree tops around Lake Berryessa (spellin
g), a bit northeast of Napa. =C2-I was near full throttle most of the time
. =C2-OAT was in the high 80s. =C2- #3 cylinder began flashing at 465 (t
hat is where I set my limit). =C2-This surprised me. =C2-Lots of fat, co
ol air over a lake and I was still pushing CHTs. =C2-Anyway, had I not flo
wn for a year with an EI installed in my plane, I would have been worried.
=C2-I know that 465 was somewhere around 400 on an EI. =C2-
So, if you're using an EI, will you be wondering what the temperature of the
aluminum is near the combustion chamber really is when you see 400 degrees?
=C2-If you're using a JPI, will you panic if you see 410 in cruise? =C2
-(my typical cruise temp) =C2-Maybe.
=9CFor those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't b
elieve, no proof is possible.=9D=C2-=C2-- Stuart Chase
PS, I wonder why there is so much skepticism=C2-over my results with the E
I vs JPI. =C2-I think someone else needs to go out and duplicate the tests
. =C2-Cliff? =C2-The next time you get a plane in with a JPI, take one o
f the spare EIs (you must have a spare) and temporarily=C2-install it and
go fly. =C2-
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>=0
ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 6:12 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
So if there is the large variation that you say
between EI and JPI, which one is accurate or the most accurate? And why?=C2
-
Apparently you don't feel that grounding problems are or can be an issue.
=C2-
Which system did you use for your cowling cooling tests?
=C2-
=C2-
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From:
teamgrumman@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 1:34
AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs
EI
I flew with both the EI and JPI installed in my plane for over
a year and over 25 flights. =C2-I had the EI in #3. =C2-Based on over
300
hours on previous flights over the previous 3 years, I know the #3 should
be
within 10 degrees of #4. =C2-
I tried to explain this the best I could in a write-up in the Star.
=C2-
=9CFor those
who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof
is
possible.=9D=C2-=C2-- Stuart Chase
-----Original
Message-----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 1:13 am
Subject:
Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Dave doesn't know
what he's doing. =C2-I always add the ground and it's still
a lot
higher.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te@att.net>
Sent:
Wed, 25 Mar 2009 9:12 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Gary,
I thought this an interesting thread on the
GG.
I understand that the JPI probes are
grounded while the EI are not.
Is it possible that this accounts for th
edifferences in your thorough comparison tests?
ned
=C2-
=C2-
----- Original Message -----
From: David Fletcher
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:41 AM
Subject: RE: Tiger outlet ramps - More Info Req.
> But, of course, I am sure we can all comment on the EI vs
JPI question
> accuracy. If the metallurgical properties of aluminum
degrade at temps
> higher than 450*, isn't the JPI more accurately
reflecting the true
> temperature of the aluminum cylinder
head?
Customer just had the same problem with a newly installed
JPI. cruise temps
were in the 425 range.=C2- Went back and added a new
ground directly to the
engine as the manual says in bold print, and his
temps dropped about 25
degrees. The EI doesn't seem to need it's own
special ground.
David Fletcher
or?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
======================3
D==========3D==
ution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
or?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
NICS WEB FORUMS -
p://forums.matronics.com
ution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
======================3
D=============
3/25/2009 7:16 AM
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
=0
A
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 |
|
teamgrumman@aol.com wrote:
> If you turn on a soldering iron and touch the tip with a thermometer
> (thermal couple) you'll get one reading. If you move it away from the
> soldering iron 1/8 of an inch, you'll get another. The JPI probes
> touch the cylinder head. The EI probes sit in the well, heated by the
> surrounding aluminum. They are measuring different things.
One measures the temp of the aluminum head, the other measures the temp
of the air in the well ...... and air isn't the best medium for heat
transfer.
> It isn't a question of which one is accurate. I would bet that both
> are within 1 degree of being accurate. Do a little research on
> thermal couples and you'll find that thermal couples come in all
> configurations. Some require grounding, some don't. Do I want a
> system that uses a floating ground (EI)? No.
>
> I forget a lot from my engineering classes regarding thermal couples,
> but, as I recall, some thermal couples are used as a source voltage
> themselves in a circuit and other thermal couples are used is a
> powered circuit requiring a common source ground.
Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermocouple for far more info than
you really want (Google and Wiki are my friends!). All
thermocouples generate their own little voltage based on the temperature
of the junction. The thermocouple may have a common ground at the
engine, or a floating input at the instrument. I consider the common
ground at the engine poor design. YMMV.
>
> As for which one is better, personally, the JPI makes for a much
> cleaner installation. I think the JPI looks more professional and the
> operating logic is more what I would expect; i.e., less of a learning
> curve. The wires are a lot easier to route and you can cut them to
> length instead of wrapping up and tying up large bundles of wiring.
> Quite often, on EI installations, the wire gets bundled up under the
> instrument panel in large wads of wiring.
If the two thermocouple wires go all the way back to the instrument,
both installations shouldn't suffer from trimming off the 'wads'. Where
errors occur is when the thermocouple wiring goes through multiple
connections going back to the instrument. Each connection introduces
error ..... unless the connecting contacts are the same type material as
the wire .... hence 'real' thermocouple connectors. Depending on the
instrument, the errors can be removed by adjustments. However, I think
for our needs the connector errors are negligible.
snip!!!
Linn
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 |
|
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 12:46 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
If you turn on a soldering iron and touch the tip with a thermometer (the
rmal couple) you'll get one reading. If you move it away from the solderin
g iron 1/8 of an inch, you'll get another. The JPI probes touch the cylind
er head. The EI probes sit in the well, heated by the surrounding aluminum
. They are measuring different things.
It isn't a question of which one is accurate. I would bet that both are
within 1 degree of being accurate. Do a little research on thermal couples
and you'll find that thermal couples come in all configurations. Some req
uire grounding, some don't. Do I want a system that uses a floating ground
(EI)=3F No.
I forget a lot from my engineering classes regarding thermal couples, but
, as I recall, some thermal couples are used as a source voltage themselves
in a circuit and other thermal couples are used is a powered circuit requi
ring a common source ground.
As for which one is better, personally, the JPI makes for a much cleaner
installation. I think the JPI looks more professional and the operating lo
gic is more what I would expect; i.e., less of a learning curve. The wires
are a lot easier to route and you can cut them to length instead of wrappi
ng up and tying up large bundles of wiring. Quite often, on EI installatio
ns, the wire gets bundled up under the instrument panel in large wads of wi
ring. Looks l ike shit, but, I guess no one but me cares about what the ba
ckside of instrument panel looks like (based on what I see in everything I
work on). [Note: I wish you all could see behind the panel of 26392. You
'd swear there were no wires at all.] The JPI has more features for the sa
me money. As for customer service, there have been big changes in the last
3 or 4 years regarding service. The warranty is actually better than publ
ished. The JPI EDM 800 in my plane, since 2004, began displaying weird num
ber flashing on occasion last year. I sent it in and they fixed it at no c
ost. I did this with another customers plane with a display that was dim (
it was also 3 years out of warrantee). No cost. Other than those two, I h
aven't had to send a JPI back for service in the 10 years I've been install
ing them.
The question was: What system did I use in the FAA portion of the flight
testing=3F EI of course. I wanted to get the lowest CHTs possible. Besid
es, the DER already had a certified EI system. Running all that shielded w
iring, 14 of them, through the ADF hole in the floor of the plane, was inte
resting. I could have run twice that number of JPI wires through the same
opening.
The question should be: What did I find with the JPI set-up in my plane=3F
and, what did I find with the JPI set up in the flight test airplane. C2
BY-THE-WAY: It's trivial to remove a JPI CHT probe. The wiring isn't fi
xed to the nut used to tighten the probe into the cylinder head. The JPI u
ses a separate shell to tighten the probe in place. THUS: a JPI CHT probe
can be removed with the cowling in place in about 1/10 the time it takes t
o remove an EI probe, WITHOUT REMOVING THE WIRE FROM ITS CONNECTION. That
being said, on the test plane, the JPI CHT probes were left in place and ti
e-wrapped to the bundle in the neighborhood of the air leaving the cylinder
. I was able to measure the temperature drop, of the air (OAT) to the exit
air, across cylinder #3 with the #3 probe and across #2 with the #2 probe.
The #1 CHT probe was placed in the same proximity to the EI probe used to
measure the temperature of the air near the alternator. The #4 CHT probe
was placed in the same proximity to the EI probe used to measure the temper
ature of the accessory case. Both JPI probes showed temps very close to th
e EI probes used to measure alternator temps and accessory temps, respectiv
ely.
Prior to the FAA climb-cooling tests, I did the same tests with my plane
and the JPI 800. The 800 shows percent power so it's trivial to set conditi
ons for 75% power. During a Vy climb from 1000 feet to 17,800 feet on an 8
0 degree day, my CHTs peaked around 470 (roughly 400 on an EI and confirmed
during testing with an EI installed on the test plane) at around 8000 feet
. Oil temp was stable at 210 before it began to decrease by about the same
altitude. I ran this same test with the test airplane, climbing to 12,500
feet, and got about the same results, 465 and 205 but it was a cooler day.
About 6 months ago, I was flying at tree tops around Lake Berryessa (spel
ling), a bit northeast of Napa. I was near full throttle most of the time.
OAT was in the high 80s. #3 cylinder began flashing at 465 (that is whe
re I set my limit). This surprised me. Lots of fat, cool air over a lake
and I was still pushing CHTs. Anyway, had I not flown for a year with an E
I installed in my plane, I would have been worried. I know that 465 was so
mewhere around 400 on an EI.
So, if you're using an EI, will you be wondering what the temperature of
the aluminum is near the combustion chamber really is when you see 400 degr
ees=3F If you're using a JPI, will you panic if you see 410 in cruise=3F (my
typical cruise temp) Maybe.
=9CFor those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't beli
eve, no proof is possible.=9D - Stuart Chase
PS, I wonder why there is so much skepticism over my results with the EI
vs JPI.=2 0 I think someone else needs to go out and duplicate the tests.
Cliff=3F The next time you get a plane in with a JPI, take one of the spare
EIs (you must have a spare) and temporarily install it and go fly.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 6:12 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
So if there is the large variation that you say between EI and JPI, which
one is accurate or the most accurate=3F And why=3F Apparently you don't feel
that grounding problems are or can be an issue. Which system did you use f
or your cowling cooling tests=3F
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
< div style==22FONT: 10pt arial=22>Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 1:34 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
I flew with both the EI and JPI installed in my plane for over a year and
over 25 flights. I had the EI in #3. Based on over 300 hours on previous
flights over the previous 3 years, I know the #3 should be within 10 degre
es of #4.
I tried to explain this the best I could in a write-up in the Star.
=9CFor those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't beli
eve, no proof is possible.=9D - Stuart Chase
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 1:13 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Dave doesn't know what he's doing. I always add the ground and it's stil
l a lot higher.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te@att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wed, 25 Mar202009 9:12 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Gary,
I thought this an interesting thread on the GG.
I understand that the JPI probes are grounded while the EI are not.
Is it possible that this accounts for th edifferences in your thorough co
mparison tests=3F
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: David Fletcher
To: grumman-gang@xmission.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:41 AM
Subject: RE: Tiger outlet ramps - More Info Req.
> But, of course, I am sure we can all comment on the EI vs JPI question
> accuracy. If the metallurgical properties of aluminum degrade at temps
> higher than 450*, isn't the JPI more accurately reflecting the true
> temperature of the aluminum cylinder head=3F
Customer just had the same problem w ith a newly installed JPI. cruise te
mps
were in the 425 range. Went back and added a new ground directly to the
engine as the manual says in bold print, and his temps dropped about 25
degrees. The EI doesn't seem to need it's own special ground.
David Fletcher
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
======================3
D=============
ution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
NICS WEB FORUMS -
p://forums.matronics.com
ution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
ibution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
3/25/2009 7:16 AM
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
ution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - The TeamGrumman-List Email Forum -
=5F-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
=5F-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
=5F-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
=5F-= Photoshare, and much much more:
=5F-
=5F-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
=5F-
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
=5F-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
=5F-
=5F-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
=5F-
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - List Contribution Web Site -
=5F-= Thank you for your generous support!
=5F-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
=5F-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=5F-===========================================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Checked by AVG.
09 7:12 AM
--
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
The Professional version does not have this message
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 |
|
=22If you turn on a soldering iron and touch the tip with a thermometer (ther
mal couple) you'll get one reading. If you move it away from the soldering
iron 1/8 of an inch, you'll get another. The JPI probes touch the cylinde
r head. The EI probes sit in the well, heated by the surrounding aluminum.
They are measuring different things.=22
Gary, you have obviously done more comparative testing that anyone I know o
f and I can't fault what you have done. Having said that, there still are
a couple of things that have not been explained, to my satisfaction at leas
t. Everyone always brings up the different types of CHT probes as an expla
nation as to why there is such a larger difference between the JPI and EI r
eadings. As I mentioned in an email to the gang recently, EI sells the exa
ct same type of spring loaded bayonet CHT probe as JPI uses (it is an optio
n). And one test I know of with an EI instrument resulted in almost no tem
perature variation between the standard P-100 CHT probe and the P-110 sprin
g loaded probe. That would appear to refute the =22theory=22 that the temperat
ure difference is due to the different probe styles. So what else is there
=3F Different grounding=3F
=22The wires are a lot easier to route and you can cut them to length instead
of wrapping up and tying up large bundles of wiring. Quite often, on EI i
nstallations, the wire gets bundled up under the instrument panel in large
wads of wiring. Looks l ike shit, but, I guess no one but me cares about w
hat the backside of instrument panel looks like (based on what I see in eve
rything I work on).=22
I guess you haven't installed an EI system recently. I agree with you abou
t the older braided EI wires. I hated them as well. EI now uses the same
type of wires as JPI and you can cut them off or get them to not install th
e terminals on the circular connector so you can cut them to the exact leng
th you want the them crimp on the terminals and plug them into the connecto
r.
=22I think someone else needs to go out and duplicate the tests. Cliff=3F The
next time you get a plane in with a JPI, take one of the spare EIs (you mu
st have a spare) and temporarily install it and go fly.=22
I guess you're right, I need to do so further testing as I think there are
still some things that need to be explained. And I don't think that the tw
o different style of probes account for 70 F temperature variation, or at l
east they shouldn't based on my conversations with EI.
At one time you were going to test a spring loaded EI probe. I guess you n
ever got around to doing that=3F
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 12:46 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
If you turn on a soldering iron and touch the tip with a thermometer (the
rmal couple) you'll get one reading. If you move it away from the solderin
g iron 1/8 of an inch, you'll get another. The JPI probes touch the cylind
er head. The EI probes sit in the well, heated by the surrounding aluminum
. They are measuring different things.
It isn't a question of which one is accurate. I would bet that both are
within 1 degree of being accurate. Do a little research on thermal couples
and you'll find that thermal couples come in all configurations. Some req
uire grounding, some don't. Do I want a system that uses a floating ground
(EI)=3F No.
I forget a lot from my engineering classes regarding thermal couples, but
, as I recall, some thermal couples are used as a source voltage themselves
in a circuit and other thermal couples are used is a powered circuit requi
ring a common source ground.
As for which one is better, personally, the JPI makes for a much cleaner
installation. I think the JPI looks more professional and the operating lo
gic is more what I would expect; i.e., less of a learning curve. The wires
are a lot easier to route and you can cut them to length instead of wrappi
ng up and tying up large bundles of wiring. Quite often, on EI installatio
ns, the wire gets bundled up under the instrument panel in large wads of wi
ring. Looks l ike shit, but, I guess no one but me cares about what the ba
ckside of instrument panel looks like (based on what I see in everything I
work on). [Note: I wish you all could see behind the panel of 26392. You
'd swear there were no wires at all.] The JPI has more features for the sa
me money. As for customer service, there have been big changes in the last
3 or 4 years regarding service. The warranty is actually better than publ
ished. The JPI EDM 800 in my plane, since 2004, began displaying weird num
ber flashing on occasion last year. I sent it in and they fixed it at no c
ost. I did this with another customers plane with a display that was dim (
it was also 3 years out of warrantee). No cost. Other than those two, I h
aven't had to send a JPI back for service in the 10 years I've been install
ing them.
The question was: What system did I use in the FAA portion of the flight
testing=3F EI of course. I wanted to get the lowest CHTs possible. Besid
es, the DER already had a certified EI system. Running all that shielded w
iring, 14 of them, through the ADF hole in the floor of the plane, was inte
resting. I could have run twice that number of JPI wires through the same
opening.
The question should be: What did I find with the JPI set-up in my plane=3F
and, what did I find with the JPI set up in the flight test airplane. C2
BY-THE-WAY: It's trivial to remove a JPI CHT probe. The wiring isn't fi
xed to the nut used to tighten the probe into the cylinder head. The JPI u
ses a separate shell to tighten the probe in place. THUS: a JPI CHT probe
can be removed with the cowling in place in about 1/10 the time it takes t
o remove an EI probe, WITHOUT REMOVING THE WIRE FROM ITS CONNECTION. That
being said, on the test plane, the JPI CHT probes were left in place and ti
e-wrapped to the bundle in the neighborhood of the air leaving the cylinder
. I was able to measure the temperature drop, of the air (OAT) to the exit
air, across cylinder #3 with the #3 probe and across #2 with the #2 probe.
The #1 CHT probe was placed in the same proximity to the EI probe used to
measure the temperature of the air near the alternator. The #4 CHT probe
was placed in the same proximity to the EI probe used to measure the temper
ature of the accessory case. Both JPI probes showed temps very close to th
e EI probes used to measure alternator temps and accessory temps, respectiv
ely.
Prior to the FAA climb-cooling tests, I did the same tests with my plane
and the JPI 800. The 800 shows percent power so it's trivial to set conditi
ons for 75% power. During a Vy climb from 1000 feet to 17,800 feet on an 8
0 degree day, my CHTs peaked around 470 (roughly 400 on an EI and confirmed
during testing with an EI installed on the test plane) at around 8000 feet
. Oil temp was stable at 210 before it began to decrease by about the same
altitude. I ran this same test with the test airplane, climbing to 12,500
feet, and got about the same results, 465 and 205 but it was a cooler day.
About 6 months ago, I was flying at tree tops around Lake Berryessa (spel
ling), a bit northeast of Napa. I was near full throttle most of the time.
OAT was in the high 80s. #3 cylinder began flashing at 465 (that is whe
re I set my limit). This surprised me. Lots of fat, cool air over a lake
and I was still pushing CHTs. Anyway, had I not flown for a year with an E
I installed in my plane, I would have been worried. I know that 465 was so
mewhere around 400 on an EI.
So, if you're using an EI, will you be wondering what the temperature of
the aluminum is near the combustion chamber really is when you see 400 degr
ees=3F If you're using a JPI, will you panic if you see 410 in cruise=3F (my
typical cruise temp) Maybe.
=9CFor those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't beli
eve, no proof is possible.=9D - Stuart Chase
PS, I wonder why there is so much skepticism over my results with the EI
vs JPI.=2 0 I think someone else needs to go out and duplicate the tests.
Cliff=3F The next time you get a plane in with a JPI, take one of the spare
EIs (you must have a spare) and temporarily install it and go fly.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 6:12 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
So if there is the large variation that you say between EI and JPI, which
one is accurate or the most accurate=3F And why=3F Apparently you don't feel
that grounding problems are or can be an issue. Which system did you use f
or your cowling cooling tests=3F
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
< div style==22FONT: 10pt arial=22>Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 1:34 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
I flew with both the EI and JPI installed in my plane for over a year and
over 25 flights. I had the EI in #3. Based on over 300 hours on previous
flights over the previous 3 years, I know the #3 should be within 10 degre
es of #4.
I tried to explain this the best I could in a write-up in the Star.
=9CFor those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't beli
eve, no proof is possible.=9D - Stuart Chase
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 1:13 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Dave doesn't know what he's doing. I always add the ground and it's stil
l a lot higher.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te@att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wed, 25 Mar202009 9:12 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: JPI vs EI
Gary,
I thought this an interesting thread on the GG.
I understand that the JPI probes are grounded while the EI are not.
Is it possible that this accounts for th edifferences in your thorough co
mparison tests=3F
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: David Fletcher
To: grumman-gang@xmission.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:41 AM
Subject: RE: Tiger outlet ramps - More Info Req.
> But, of course, I am sure we can all comment on the EI vs JPI question
> accuracy. If the metallurgical properties of aluminum degrade at temps
> higher than 450*, isn't the JPI more accurately reflecting the true
> temperature of the aluminum cylinder head=3F
Customer just had the same problem w ith a newly installed JPI. cruise te
mps
were in the 425 range. Went back and added a new ground directly to the
engine as the manual says in bold print, and his temps dropped about 25
degrees. The EI doesn't seem to need it's own special ground.
David Fletcher
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
======================3
D=============
ution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
NICS WEB FORUMS -
p://forums.matronics.com
ution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
ibution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
3/25/2009 7:16 AM
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
or=3FTeamGrumman-List=22>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
p://forums.matronics.com
ution=22>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - The TeamGrumman-List Email Forum -
=5F-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
=5F-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
=5F-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
=5F-= Photoshare, and much much more:
=5F-
=5F-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator=3FTeamGrumman-List
=5F-
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
=5F-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
=5F-
=5F-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
=5F-
=5F-===========================================================
=5F-= - List Contribution Web Site -
=5F-= Thank you for your generous support!
=5F-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
=5F-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=5F-===========================================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Checked by AVG.
09 7:12 AM
--
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
The Professional version does not have this message
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! --
|