Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:32 AM - Re: LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance (Brock Windsor)
2. 05:33 AM - New Technology (ArjayS@AOL.COM)
3. 05:33 AM - New Technology (ArjayS@AOL.COM)
4. 05:52 AM - Re: New Technology (Tom Quinn)
5. 05:56 AM - Re: New Technology (Linn Walters)
6. 06:28 AM - Re: New Technology (ArjayS@AOL.COM)
7. 06:28 AM - Re: New Technology (ArjayS@AOL.COM)
8. 07:34 AM - New Technology... one more .. (ArjayS@AOL.COM)
9. 07:37 AM - Re: LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance (flyv35b)
10. 11:53 AM - Re: LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance (Gary Vogt)
11. 01:09 PM - Re: LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance (923te)
12. 01:28 PM - Re: New Technology (923te)
13. 01:41 PM - Re: New Technology (Tom Quinn)
14. 03:10 PM - Re: New Technology (ArjayS@AOL.COM)
15. 06:28 PM - Re: New Technology (Brock Windsor)
16. 06:32 PM - Re: LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance (Brock Windsor)
17. 06:41 PM - Re: New Technology (923te)
18. 06:47 PM - Re: LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance (923te)
19. 07:18 PM - Re: New Technology (923te)
20. 09:42 PM - Re: New Technology (Gary Vogt)
21. 09:47 PM - Re: LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance (Gary Vogt)
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: rumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance |
Gary and/or Ned and whomever is flying the Jag cowl, how much did your CHTs
drop during climb and cruise?- I am seriously considering the jag cowl a
s my old stock cowl is cracking.--The-plane is getting its annual(my
first, ouch)-and Fletch squawked it so at some point I either need to fix
or replace and I really like the look of the Jag cowl.
-
Thanks Brock
----
--- On Mon, 7/19/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
The Jaguar cowling was approved a year ago. -There are 4 out there flying
, including mine. -Average speed increase is 5-6 knots.
As for the $1000/knot myth, that was posted here a while back by someone ot
her than myself, that was in pre-1970 dollars (before inflation). -In tod
ay's money, it's about $2000/knot.
From: "ArjayS@aol.com" <ArjayS@aol.com>
Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 6:15:26 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
COOL! As far as publishing the results, I agree, it's a GIGANTIC pain and i
t never ends.
Rj
It isn't published because then I'd have to do a whole bunch of performance
testing to verify the improvements. -Then, I'd have to change the POH.
-Then, I'd have to do a supplement. -Then . . . .-
I just did the cowling for cooling reasons. -
At 1000 MSL, if I push my plane, I can true out at 158 to 160 knots. -It
will comfortably go at 150 knots all day.
=0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
You have, single-handedly, changed my opinion of LSM.
Personally, I appreciated you coming out to Dayton, your non-salesman
style, and your "engineering openness"
Matt Drahzal
Us "cheapskates" who bought XeVision HID lamps instead of Lopresti Boom
Beams are now suffering with constantly breaking lamp cables. Tell your
marketing crew, it might be a good time to consider a summer special on Bo
om Beams.
I can demonstrate, based upon personal experience, that spending a bit mor
e
on the certified Boom Beam will cost less that the XeVision product.
MATT, I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS NOTE. I SAID I WOULD COME TO THE GROUP AND
ASK YOUR COLLECTIVE OPINION SO, YOU HAVE PROMPTED THE FIRST QUESTION. WE
HAVE
JUST COMPLETED AND RECEIVED THE STC'S FOR OUR NEW TECHNOLOGY HID LIGHT.
WE'RE NOW SUPPLYING IT TO THE JET MARKET. HAWKERS AND CITATIONS ARE OUR FI
RST
DELIVERIES. IT IS CALLED OUR "X3" SERIES AND IT PRODUCES 65% MORE LIGHT TH
AN
OUR PREVIOUSLY BRIGHTEST BOOMBEAM=84=A2. THAT'S A GIGANTIC INCREASE.
IT'S MY OPINION THAT EVERYONE "WANTS" MORE LIGHT. NOT EVERYONE CAN AFFORD
IT. I HAVE KERATOCONIS, AND I'M AN AGING PILOT, SO THIS HITS HOME WITH ME
ESPECIALLY.
PERSONALLY I WANT TO ONLY OFFER THE NEW SYSTEM, BUT IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY MOR
E
EXPENSIVE. I'M THINKING OF DROPPING THE STANDARD BOOMBEAM=84=A2 COMPLET
LY.
HOWEVER IF THERE IS STILL A MARKET AT A LOWER PRICE I MAY CONTINUE TO OFFE
R IT.
IT LOOKS LIKE WE CAN HIT ABOUT THE $600-700 MARK (DOWN FROM $1000). BUT I
DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT MARKET. SO WHAT DOES THE GROUP SAY...
DO WE
KEEP IT OR KILL IT?
RJ SIEGEL=C2- CEO/LoPresti Aviation Engineering
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 |
|
You have, single-handedly, changed my opinion of LSM.
Personally, I appreciated you coming out to Dayton, your non-salesman
style, and your "engineering openness"
Matt Drahzal
Us "cheapskates" who bought XeVision HID lamps instead of Lopresti Boom
Beams are now suffering with constantly breaking lamp cables. Tell your
marketing crew, it might be a good time to consider a summer special on Bo
om
Beams. I can demonstrate, based upon personal experience, that spending a
bit
more on the certified Boom Beam will cost less that the XeVision product.
MATT, I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS NOTE. I SAID I WOULD COME TO THE GROUP AND
ASK YOUR COLLECTIVE OPINION SO, YOU HAVE PROMPTED THE FIRST QUESTION. WE
HAVE
JUST COMPLETED AND RECEIVED THE STC'S FOR OUR NEW TECHNOLOGY HID LIGHT.
WE'RE NOW SUPPLYING IT TO THE JET MARKET. HAWKERS AND CITATIONS ARE OUR FI
RST
DELIVERIES. IT IS CALLED OUR "X3" SERIES AND IT PRODUCES 65% MORE LIGHT TH
AN
OUR PREVIOUSLY BRIGHTEST BOOMBEAM=84=A2. THAT'S A GIGANTIC INCREASE.
IT'S MY OPINION THAT EVERYONE "WANTS" MORE LIGHT. NOT EVERYONE CAN AFFORD
IT. I HAVE KERATOCONIS, AND I'M AN AGING PILOT, SO THIS HITS HOME WITH ME
ESPECIALLY.
PERSONALLY I WANT TO ONLY OFFER THE NEW SYSTEM, BUT IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY MOR
E
EXPENSIVE. I'M THINKING OF DROPPING THE STANDARD BOOMBEAM=84=A2 COMPLET
LY.
HOWEVER IF THERE IS STILL A MARKET AT A LOWER PRICE I MAY CONTINUE TO OFFE
R IT.
IT LOOKS LIKE WE CAN HIT ABOUT THE $600-700 MARK (DOWN FROM $1000). BUT I
DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT MARKET. SO WHAT DOES THE GROUP SAY...
DO WE
KEEP IT OR KILL IT?
RJ SIEGEL CEO/LoPresti Aviation Engineering
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=99ve owned my Tiger for 2 years and this is the third time
I=99ve had to send my complete XeVision system back to the company
to have it fixed. I am rapidly running out of patience and was even
considering putting that standard landing light system back into the
plane. If the price of the Lopresti Boom Beams, or the new X3 series,
would come down from what they were I would be very interested. Count me
in.
Tom Quinn
N249RR
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
ArjayS@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 8:32 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: New Technology
You have, single-handedly, changed my opinion of LSM.
Personally, I appreciated you coming out to Dayton, your non-salesman
style, and your "engineering openness"
Matt Drahzal
Us "cheapskates" who bought XeVision HID lamps instead of Lopresti Boom
Beams are now suffering with constantly breaking lamp cables. Tell your
marketing crew, it might be a good time to consider a summer special on
Boom Beams. I can demonstrate, based upon personal experience, that
spending a bit more on the certified Boom Beam will cost less that the
XeVision product.
MATT, I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS NOTE. I SAID I WOULD COME TO THE GROUP
AND ASK YOUR COLLECTIVE OPINION SO, YOU HAVE PROMPTED THE FIRST
QUESTION. WE HAVE JUST COMPLETED AND RECEIVED THE STC'S FOR OUR NEW
TECHNOLOGY HID LIGHT. WE'RE NOW SUPPLYING IT TO THE JET MARKET. HAWKERS
AND CITATIONS ARE OUR FIRST DELIVERIES. IT IS CALLED OUR "X3" SERIES AND
IT PRODUCES 65% MORE LIGHT THAN OUR PREVIOUSLY BRIGHTEST
BOOMBEAM=84=A2. THAT'S A GIGANTIC INCREASE.
IT'S MY OPINION THAT EVERYONE "WANTS" MORE LIGHT. NOT EVERYONE CAN
AFFORD IT. I HAVE KERATOCONIS, AND I'M AN AGING PILOT, SO THIS HITS HOME
WITH ME ESPECIALLY.
PERSONALLY I WANT TO ONLY OFFER THE NEW SYSTEM, BUT IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY
MORE EXPENSIVE. I'M THINKING OF DROPPING THE STANDARD BOOMBEAM=84=A2
COMPLETLY. HOWEVER IF THERE IS STILL A MARKET AT A LOWER PRICE I MAY
CONTINUE TO OFFER IT. IT LOOKS LIKE WE CAN HIT ABOUT THE $600-700 MARK
(DOWN FROM $1000). BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT MARKET. SO
WHAT DOES THE GROUP SAY...DO WE KEEP IT OR KILL IT?
RJ SIEGEL CEO/LoPresti Aviation Engineering
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: New Technology |
Cue the music ..... 'trial balloon' slowly fills the screen ... ;-)
How much is 'significantly more expensive'???
The expenses of keeping a couple in stock should be low and killing the
Boom Beam may disappoint some customer down the road .... so I think
it's a keeper, although I may not get one.
When Brother Dave was playing with the light at the breakfast was that
the new one???
Linn
ArjayS@AOL.COM wrote:
> You have, single-handedly, changed my opinion of LSM.
> Personally, I appreciated you coming out to Dayton, your non-salesman
> style, and your "engineering openness"
> Matt Drahzal
> Us "cheapskates" who bought XeVision HID lamps instead of Lopresti
> Boom Beams are now suffering with constantly breaking lamp cables.
> Tell your marketing crew, it might be a good time to consider a summer
> special on Boom Beams. I can demonstrate, based upon personal
> experience, that spending a bit more on the certified Boom Beam will
> cost less that the XeVision product.
>
> MATT, I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS NOTE. I SAID I WOULD COME TO THE GROUP
> AND ASK YOUR COLLECTIVE OPINION SO, YOU HAVE PROMPTED _THE FIRST
> QUESTION_. WE HAVE JUST COMPLETED AND RECEIVED THE STC'S FOR OUR NEW
> TECHNOLOGY HID LIGHT. WE'RE NOW SUPPLYING IT TO THE JET MARKET.
> HAWKERS AND CITATIONS ARE OUR FIRST DELIVERIES. IT IS CALLED OUR "X3"
> SERIES AND IT PRODUCES 65% MORE LIGHT THAN OUR PREVIOUSLY BRIGHTEST
> BOOMBEAM. THAT'S A GIGANTIC INCREASE.
> IT'S MY OPINION THAT EVERYONE "WANTS" MORE LIGHT. NOT EVERYONE CAN
> AFFORD IT. I HAVE KERATOCONIS, AND I'M AN AGING PILOT, SO THIS HITS
> HOME WITH ME ESPECIALLY.
> PERSONALLY I WANT TO ONLY OFFER THE NEW SYSTEM, BUT IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY
> MORE EXPENSIVE. I'M THINKING OF DROPPING THE STANDARD BOOMBEAM
> COMPLETLY. HOWEVER IF THERE IS STILL A MARKET AT A LOWER PRICE I MAY
> CONTINUE TO OFFER IT. IT LOOKS LIKE WE CAN HIT ABOUT THE $600-700 MARK
> (DOWN FROM $1000). BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT MARKET.
> SO WHAT DOES THE GROUP SAY...DO WE KEEP IT OR KILL IT?
>
> RJ SIEGEL CEO/LoPresti Aviation Engineering
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
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: New Technology |
Hi Tom
OK, I'll start counting the votes and see what it gets us...
>
> I=99ve owned my Tiger for 2 years and this is the third time I
=99ve had to
> send my complete XeVision system back to the company to have it fixed.
I am
> rapidly running out of patience and was even considering putting that
> standard landing light system back into the plane. If the price of the
Lopresti
> Boom Beams, or the new X3 series, would come down from what they were I
> would be very interested. Count me in.
> =C2-
> Tom Quinn
> N249RR
>
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: New Technology |
Hi Linn
No that was the old one, which is still the brightest in it's class.
> Cue the music ..... 'trial balloon' slowly fills the screen ...- ;-)
> How much is 'significantly more expensive'???
>
> The expenses of keeping a couple in stock should be low and killing the
> Boom Beam may disappoint some customer down the road .... so I think it'
s a
> keeper, although I may not get one.
> When Brother Dave was playing with the light at the breakfast was that
the
> new one???
> 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: | New Technology... one more .. |
> Count me in!
>
> frank Sundram
> 200FW
> KDVN
>
OK THAT'S TWO VOTES FOR LIGHTS AND ONE VOTE FOR "I DON'T USE MY LIGHTS"
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: rumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance |
Per Rj:
"I do not believe it's certified yet but he's got to be very close. I
think Cliff may have one of his first units. They are both nice guys."
It is certified. No, I don't have one of Gary's cowls. In fact I don't
have a plane that it would fit on. I have an O-320 powered AA-1C and a
V35B Bonanza I fly when I want to go somewhere distant.
"As far as convincing Cliff of anything, I kinda don't think that's
possible for me. I'm retired from Apple computer, I was one of the
original Mac designers. I mention this because for some reason folks
take the Mac vs. PC as almost a religious issue. (Which makes as much
sense to me as defending your purchase of a GE toaster instead of a
Sears.) It looks like many folks in aviation take the same stance about
their "beliefs". I have four engineering degrees generally because I'm a
nerd but mostly because I'm curious. I have a little bit of both
knowledge and experience when it comes fluid dynamics and thermodynamics
but I do try to keep an open mind. However, when you meet someone who
comes to the table with a set belief, then the only thing you can do is
be polite."
Actually, It's not that difficult to convince me as I have a pretty open
mind I think. It just takes facts and actual test data or side by side
comparisons. I suppose that my engineering background and 45 years
experience in GA require that it pass the smell test as well. I started
out asking a couple of pertinent questions, which really never were
answered, just comments about come down here and we'll show you the
proof or at least wine and dine you. And as far as asking people who
have purchased your products (nose bowl) I have learned that those kinds
of testimonials are not necessarily totally unbiased. After all it's
kind of hard to admit you spent thousands of dollars on a product
doesn't do what it claimed. The best analysis comes from someone who
doesn't have a dog in the fight and truly is totally unbiased. And
independent analysis such as Aviation Consumer does holds more water so
to speak.
BTW, what does Apple vs. PC computers have to do with this conversation?
Cliff A&P/IA
----- Original Message -----
From: ArjayS@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 6:06 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
Hi Brock
The Jaguar cowl is indeed what Gary at AU Country is working on. It's
a very nice looking cowl. He's been at it for ten years now. There are
no final performance figures or prices yet but I think he selling the
first units for about eight thousand. (You would need to check with
him). I do not believe it's certified yet but he's got to be very close.
I think Cliff may have one of his first units. They are both nice guys.
As far as convincing Cliff of anything, I kinda don't think that's
possible for me. I'm retired from Apple computer, I was one of the
original Mac designers. I mention this because for some reason folks
take the Mac vs. PC as almost a religious issue. (Which makes as much
sense to me as defending your purchase of a GE toaster instead of a
Sears.) It looks like many folks in aviation take the same stance about
their "beliefs". I have four engineering degrees generally because I'm a
nerd but mostly because I'm curious. I have a little bit of both
knowledge and experience when it comes fluid dynamics and thermodynamics
but I do try to keep an open mind. However, when you meet someone who
comes to the table with a set belief, then the only thing you can do is
be polite.
Or look at it this way. Maybe, I'm completely full of beans. So
instead of listening to me, let me send you to lots of LoPresti
customers who have our products and feel they work equal or better than
advertised. Probably the most famous is Greg Amy and his gorgeous Tiger.
He says he gets in the low 140+ knots and loves the look and cooling.
http://www.gatm.com/flying/feedback.html
OR maybe a 100% money back guarentee is enough. Dunno...
Either way it takes the look of the Tiger out of the late 1950's and
that alone is a good thing.
Just my 2 cents!
Thanks!
Rj Siegel CEO/LoPresti Aviation Engineering
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: rumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance |
I don't think that either I nor Ned are the right ones to ask. We usually
firewall the throttle and leave it there. On a JPI, I can easily push 470
degrees in a 1000-1500 fpm climb from 2500 feet to 4000 feet turning 2500 rpm.
Straight and level at 2500 feet, leaned to max power, and WAY over redline, I
can do the same.
Jeff and Martin, on-the-other-hand, the other two owners, are typical flyers.
Both (with JPIs) show 360 to 380 in cruise and rarely go over 420 in a climb.
#1 CHT will peak first in a climb; it's designed that way. In cruise, it's
very close to the rest.
________________________________
From: Brock Windsor <n2_narcosis@YAHOO.COM>
Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 2:31:56 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
Gary and/or Ned and whomever is flying the Jag cowl, how much did your CHTs drop
during climb and cruise? I am seriously considering the jag cowl as my old
stock cowl is cracking. The plane is getting its annual(my first, ouch) and
Fletch squawked it so at some point I either need to fix or replace and I really
like the look of the Jag cowl.
Thanks Brock
--- On Mon, 7/19/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
>To: ArjayS@aol.com, "Teamgrumman List" <teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>
>Date: Monday, July 19, 2010, 8:39 PM
>
>
>
>The Jaguar cowling was approved a year ago. There are 4 out there flying,
>including mine. Average speed increase is 5-6 knots.
>
>
>As for the $1000/knot myth, that was posted here a while back by someone other
>than myself, that was in pre-1970 dollars (before inflation). In today's money,
>it's about $2000/knot.
>
>
________________________________
From: "ArjayS@aol.com" <ArjayS@aol.com>
>To: teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM; teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
>Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 6:15:26 PM
>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
>
>COOL! As far as publishing the results, I agree, it's a GIGANTIC pain and it
>never ends.
>Rj
>
>
>
>It isn't published because then I'd have to do a whole bunch of performance
>testing to verify the improvements. Then, I'd have to change the POH. Then,
>I'd have to do a supplement. Then . . . .
>>
>>I just did the cowling for cooling reasons.
>>
>>At 1000 MSL, if I push my plane, I can true out at 158 to 160 knots. It will
>>comfortably go at 150 knots all day.
>>
>>
>
> st" rel=nofollow
>target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listet=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
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: rumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance |
Hi Brock,
I'm still flight testing the Jag cowl but I am getting some data points
that I think are reliable.
As far as cooling performance of the Jag cowl I am finding a gain of 25
to 30degF in cooling of the CHTs. I run LASAR which is known to cause
CHT's to run 30 -35 degF higher than stock. I always run WOT with an MT
constant speed prop and always lean to best power and turn the RPM for
best speed. Last year while racing I typically saw CHT's in the 380
range. Recently, while flight testing the Jag cowl I have been seeing
CHT's in mid 350's. This for a DA of 4500'.
On my flight home from California in April after installing the Jag cowl
I had rather higher than normal CHT temps. I found that the under
cylinder baffle safety ties (normally springs) were broken and I believe
this was why I saw the higher than usual temps. This info for those
that have followed my emails concerning the Jag cowl.
For climb I really cannot give you a good data point from my flights for
comparison as I usually use mixture to keep CHT's below 400 in climb.
Know that Gary uses JPI and I use EI and Gary has determined that JPI
reads 70degF higher than EI. So when Gary says his CHT is 470 that is
the same as my CHT reading 400....
I'm still working and flight testing to determine what speed gains the
Jag may have given my plane. I do think there is a speed gain and will
give those numbers when I have good repeatable flight test data to
share.
If you have a stock cowl there are a number of things that can be done
to increase cooling. But the Jaguar cowl is really an excellent way to
upgrade a Tiger. It looks really good and I think you will find both
cooling and speed benefits in addition to bringing the look of the plane
into the 21st century.
The LoPresti is NOT a cowl. It is a nose bowl and not a cowl. If you
need a new cowl the LoPresti won't replace your old cowl.
Another thing to keep in mind is that with the Jaguar cowl you get ALL
NEW baffles and baffle seals. And Gary did an excellent job designing
these new baffles so that they seal very well. Most old Tigers are in
need of this.
Here are some links to pictures of a completed Jaguar Cowl installation:
http://web.mac.com/jkeesaman/N1976T/N1976T_Returns_Home.html
http://web.mac.com/jkeesaman/N1976T/Cowling_Spy_Photos%21.html
Your Fellow Grumman Enthusiast,
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: Brock Windsor
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:31 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
Gary and/or Ned and whomever is flying the Jag cowl, how much
did your CHTs drop during climb and cruise? I am seriously considering
the jag cowl as my old stock cowl is cracking. The plane is getting its
annual(my first, ouch) and Fletch squawked it so at some point I either
need to fix or replace and I really like the look of the Jag cowl.
Thanks Brock
--- On Mon, 7/19/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
To: ArjayS@aol.com, "Teamgrumman List"
<teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>
Date: Monday, July 19, 2010, 8:39 PM
The Jaguar cowling was approved a year ago. There are 4 out
there flying, including mine. Average speed increase is 5-6 knots.
As for the $1000/knot myth, that was posted here a while back
by someone other than myself, that was in pre-1970 dollars (before
inflation). In today's money, it's about $2000/knot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "ArjayS@aol.com" <ArjayS@aol.com>
To: teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM; teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 6:15:26 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
COOL! As far as publishing the results, I agree, it's a
GIGANTIC pain and it never ends.
Rj
It isn't published because then I'd have to do a whole bunch
of performance testing to verify the improvements. Then, I'd have to
change the POH. Then, I'd have to do a supplement. Then . . . .
I just did the cowling for cooling reasons.
At 1000 MSL, if I push my plane, I can true out at 158 to
160 knots. It will comfortably go at 150 knots all day.
st" rel=nofollow
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: New Technology |
RJ
My vote would be to keep the boom beams and sell them for the $600 you menti
oned. I have had 2 boom beams in the wing tips fir several years whichare wi
gwagging duty minute of flight. They are an excellent see and avoid tool and
are much brighter than the factory lights. I have had no trouble with them a
nd been very happy with their performance
Ned
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 20, 2010, at 7:31 AM, ArjayS@AOL.COM wrote:
> You have, single-handedly, changed my opinion of LSM.
> Personally, I appreciated you coming out to Dayton, your non-salesman styl
e, and your "engineering openness"
> Matt Drahzal
> Us "cheapskates" who bought XeVision HID lamps instead of Lopresti Boom Be
ams are now suffering with constantly breaking lamp cables. Tell your market
ing crew, it might be a good time to consider a summer special on Boom Beams
. I can demonstrate, based upon personal experience, that spending a bit mor
e on the certified Boom Beam will cost less that the XeVision product.
>
> MATT, I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS NOTE. I SAID I WOULD COME TO THE GROUP AND A
SK YOUR COLLECTIVE OPINION SO, YOU HAVE PROMPTED THE FIRST QUESTION. WE HAVE
JUST COMPLETED AND RECEIVED THE STC'S FOR OUR NEW TECHNOLOGY HID LIGHT. WE'
RE NOW SUPPLYING IT TO THE JET MARKET. HAWKERS AND CITATIONS ARE OUR FIRST D
ELIVERIES. IT IS CALLED OUR "X3" SERIES AND IT PRODUCES 65% MORE LIGHT THAN O
UR PREVIOUSLY BRIGHTEST BOOMBEAM=84=A2. THAT'S A GIGANTIC INCREASE.
> IT'S MY OPINION THAT EVERYONE "WANTS" MORE LIGHT. NOT EVERYONE CAN AFFORD I
T. I HAVE KERATOCONIS, AND I'M AN AGING PILOT, SO THIS HITS HOME WITH ME ESP
ECIALLY.
> PERSONALLY I WANT TO ONLY OFFER THE NEW SYSTEM, BUT IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY MOR
E EXPENSIVE. I'M THINKING OF DROPPING THE STANDARD BOOMBEAM=84=A2 COMPLET
LY. HOWEVER IF THERE IS STILL A MARKET AT A LOWER PRICE I MAY CONTINUE TO OFF
ER IT. IT LOOKS LIKE WE CAN HIT ABOUT THE $600-700 MARK (DOWN FROM $1000). B
UT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT MARKET. SO WHAT DOES THE GROUP SAY
...DO WE KEEP IT OR KILL IT?
>
> RJ SIEGEL CEO/LoPresti Aviation Engineering
>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
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 |
|
Ned,
Sounds like an excellent setup. If you don=99t mind me
asking how much does it cost to install the system into a wing?
Tom Quinn
N249RR
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of 923te
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: New Technology
RJ
My vote would be to keep the boom beams and sell them for the $600 you
mentioned. I have had 2 boom beams in the wing tips fir several years
whichare wigwagging duty minute of flight. They are an excellent see and
avoid tool and are much brighter than the factory lights. I have had no
trouble with them and been very happy with their performance
Ned
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 20, 2010, at 7:31 AM, ArjayS@AOL.COM wrote:
You have, single-handedly, changed my opinion of LSM.
Personally, I appreciated you coming out to Dayton, your non-salesman
style, and your "engineering openness"
Matt Drahzal
Us "cheapskates" who bought XeVision HID lamps instead of Lopresti Boom
Beams are now suffering with constantly breaking lamp cables. Tell your
marketing crew, it might be a good time to consider a summer special on
Boom Beams. I can demonstrate, based upon personal experience, that
spending a bit more on the certified Boom Beam will cost less that the
XeVision product.
MATT, I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS NOTE. I SAID I WOULD COME TO THE GROUP
AND ASK YOUR COLLECTIVE OPINION SO, YOU HAVE PROMPTED THE FIRST
QUESTION. WE HAVE JUST COMPLETED AND RECEIVED THE STC'S FOR OUR NEW
TECHNOLOGY HID LIGHT. WE'RE NOW SUPPLYING IT TO THE JET MARKET. HAWKERS
AND CITATIONS ARE OUR FIRST DELIVERIES. IT IS CALLED OUR "X3" SERIES AND
IT PRODUCES 65% MORE LIGHT THAN OUR PREVIOUSLY BRIGHTEST
BOOMBEAM=84=A2. THAT'S A GIGANTIC INCREASE.
IT'S MY OPINION THAT EVERYONE "WANTS" MORE LIGHT. NOT EVERYONE CAN
AFFORD IT. I HAVE KERATOCONIS, AND I'M AN AGING PILOT, SO THIS HITS HOME
WITH ME ESPECIALLY.
PERSONALLY I WANT TO ONLY OFFER THE NEW SYSTEM, BUT IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY
MORE EXPENSIVE. I'M THINKING OF DROPPING THE STANDARD BOOMBEAM=84=A2
COMPLETLY. HOWEVER IF THERE IS STILL A MARKET AT A LOWER PRICE I MAY
CONTINUE TO OFFER IT. IT LOOKS LIKE WE CAN HIT ABOUT THE $600-700 MARK
(DOWN FROM $1000). BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT MARKET. SO
WHAT DOES THE GROUP SAY...DO WE KEEP IT OR KILL IT?
RJ SIEGEL CEO/LoPresti Aviation Engineering
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=
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=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=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=3D=3D=3D=
3D
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: New Technology |
Well this is an unexpected result..
So far:
8 keep the lights at the lower price
2 in for the new lights..don't care what the cost is
2 don't ever use lights (who ARE these guys?)
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: New Technology |
They may only fly during the day.
--- On Tue, 7/20/10, ArjayS@aol.com <ArjayS@aol.com> wrote:
From: ArjayS@aol.com <ArjayS@aol.com>
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: New Technology
Well this is an unexpected result..
So far:
8--- keep the lights at the lower price
2--- in for the new lights..don't care what the cost is
2--- don't ever use lights-- (who ARE these guys?)
=0A=0A=0A
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: rumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance |
Wow, I am in trouble.- My plane has a single EI CHT probe-on number thr
ee and was seeing CHTs in the 440s on climb.-That would be 510 on the JPI
!!!-The plane is still at Fletch's.- I might have him do some cowl mods
until I can get a new cowl.
-
Brock
--- On Tue, 7/20/10, 923te <923te@att.net> wrote:
From: 923te <923te@att.net>
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
Hi Brock,
-
I'm still flight testing the Jag cowl but I am getting some data points tha
t I think are reliable.
As far as cooling performance of the Jag cowl I am finding a gain of 25 to
30degF in cooling of the CHTs. I run LASAR which is known to cause CHT's to
run 30 -35 degF higher than stock.- I always run WOT with an MT constant
speed prop and always lean to best power and turn the RPM for best speed.
Last year while racing I typically saw CHT's in the 380 range.- Recently,
while flight testing the Jag cowl-I have been seeing CHT's in mid 350's.
This for a DA of 4500'.-
-
On my flight home from California in April after installing the Jag cowl I
had rather higher than normal CHT temps. I found that the-under cylinder
baffle safety ties (normally springs) were broken and I believe this was wh
y-I saw the higher than usual temps.- This info for-those that-have
followed my emails concerning the Jag cowl.
-
For climb I really cannot give you a good data point from my flights for co
mparison as I usually use mixture to keep CHT's below 400 in climb.
-
Know that Gary uses JPI and I use EI and Gary has determined that JPI reads
70degF higher than EI. So when Gary says his CHT is 470 that is the same a
s my CHT reading 400....
-
I'm still working and flight testing to determine what speed gains the Jag
may have given my plane. I do think there is a speed gain-and will give t
hose numbers when I have good repeatable flight test-data to share.
-
If you have a stock cowl there are a number of things that can be done to i
ncrease cooling. But the Jaguar cowl is really an excellent way to upgrade
a Tiger. It looks really good and I think you will find both cooling and sp
eed benefits in addition to bringing the look of the plane into the 21st ce
ntury.
-
The LoPresti is NOT a cowl. It is a nose bowl and not a cowl. If you need a
new cowl the LoPresti won't replace your old cowl.
-
Another thing to keep in mind is that with the Jaguar cowl you get ALL NEW
baffles and baffle seals. And Gary did an excellent job designing these new
baffles so that they seal very well.-Most old Tigers are in need of this
.
-
Here are some links to pictures of a completed Jaguar Cowl installation:
http://web.mac.com/jkeesaman/N1976T/N1976T_Returns_Home.html
-
http://web.mac.com/jkeesaman/N1976T/Cowling_Spy_Photos%21.html
-
-
Your Fellow Grumman Enthusiast,
Ned
-
-
----- Original Message -----
From: Brock Windsor
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:31 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
Gary and/or Ned and whomever is flying the Jag cowl, how much did your CHTs
drop during climb and cruise?- I am seriously considering the jag cowl a
s my old stock cowl is cracking.--The-plane is getting its annual(my
first, ouch)-and Fletch squawked it so at some point I either need to fix
or replace and I really like the look of the Jag cowl.
-
Thanks Brock
----
--- On Mon, 7/19/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
#yiv1552009241 #yiv1621215963 DIV {
MARGIN:0px;}
The Jaguar cowling was approved a year ago. -There are 4 out there flying
, including mine. -Average speed increase is 5-6 knots.
As for the $1000/knot myth, that was posted here a while back by someone ot
her than myself, that was in pre-1970 dollars (before inflation). -In tod
ay's money, it's about $2000/knot.
From: "ArjayS@aol.com" <ArjayS@aol.com>
Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 6:15:26 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
COOL! As far as publishing the results, I agree, it's a GIGANTIC pain and i
t never ends.
Rj
It isn't published because then I'd have to do a whole bunch of performance
testing to verify the improvements. -Then, I'd have to change the POH.
-Then, I'd have to do a supplement. -Then . . . .-
I just did the cowling for cooling reasons. -
At 1000 MSL, if I push my plane, I can true out at 158 to 160 knots. -It
will comfortably go at 150 knots all day.
st" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamG
rumman-List
et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
=0A=0A=0A
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: New Technology |
I have an AG5B. They already have wingtip lights. Check with LoPresti for co
st of their HID's. Sounds like they are reducing the price to about half wha
t it once was.....
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 20, 2010, at 3:41 PM, "Tom Quinn" <quinn_tom@tqiinc.com> wrote:
> Ned,
>
> Sounds like an excellent setup. If you don=99t mind me aski
ng how much does it cost to install the system into a wing?
>
>
>
> Tom Quinn
>
> N249RR
>
>
>
> From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumma
n-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of 923te
> Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:28 PM
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: New Technology
>
>
>
> RJ
>
>
>
> My vote would be to keep the boom beams and sell them for the $600 you men
tioned. I have had 2 boom beams in the wing tips fir several years whichare w
igwagging duty minute of flight. They are an excellent see and avoid tool an
d are much brighter than the factory lights. I have had no trouble with them
and been very happy with their performance
>
> Ned
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Jul 20, 2010, at 7:31 AM, ArjayS@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> You have, single-handedly, changed my opinion of LSM.
> Personally, I appreciated you coming out to Dayton, your non-salesman styl
e, and your "engineering openness"
> Matt Drahzal
> Us "cheapskates" who bought XeVision HID lamps instead of Lopresti Boom Be
ams are now suffering with constantly breaking lamp cables. Tell your market
ing crew, it might be a good time to consider a summer special on Boom Beams
. I can demonstrate, based upon personal experience, that spending a bit mor
e on the certified Boom Beam will cost less that the XeVision product.
>
> MATT, I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS NOTE. I SAID I WOULD COME TO THE GROUP AND A
SK YOUR COLLECTIVE OPINION SO, YOU HAVE PROMPTED THE FIRST QUESTION. WE HAVE
JUST COMPLETED AND RECEIVED THE STC'S FOR OUR NEW TECHNOLOGY HID LIGHT. WE'
RE NOW SUPPLYING IT TO THE JET MARKET. HAWKERS AND CITATIONS ARE OUR FIRST D
ELIVERIES. IT IS CALLED OUR "X3" SERIES AND IT PRODUCES 65% MORE LIGHT THAN O
UR PREVIOUSLY BRIGHTEST BOOMBEAM=84=A2. THAT'S A GIGANTIC INCREASE.
> IT'S MY OPINION THAT EVERYONE "WANTS" MORE LIGHT. NOT EVERYONE CAN AFFORD I
T. I HAVE KERATOCONIS, AND I'M AN AGING PILOT, SO THIS HITS HOME WITH ME ESP
ECIALLY.
> PERSONALLY I WANT TO ONLY OFFER THE NEW SYSTEM, BUT IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY MOR
E EXPENSIVE. I'M THINKING OF DROPPING THE STANDARD BOOMBEAM=84=A2 COMPLET
LY. HOWEVER IF THERE IS STILL A MARKET AT A LOWER PRICE I MAY CONTINUE TO OFF
ER IT. IT LOOKS LIKE WE CAN HIT ABOUT THE $600-700 MARK (DOWN FROM $1000). B
UT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT MARKET. SO WHAT DOES THE GROUP SAY
...DO WE KEEP IT OR KILL IT?
>
> RJ SIEGEL CEO/LoPresti Aviation Engineering
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> http://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
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: rumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance |
The bottom line of the JPI EI 70 deg spread as it was discussed a few years a
go was that Lycoming probes were like the EI probes so that the EI temps or t
he JPI minus 70 temps are what should be used when comparing to Lycoming lim
its
As far as you being in trouble I would agree that 440 is too high although i
t is within Lycoming limits
There are several things that should be looked at on your cooling system and
perhaps your mixture in the carb
Sent from my iPhone it gin
On Jul 20, 2010, at 8:31 PM, Brock Windsor <n2_narcosis@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
> Wow, I am in trouble. My plane has a single EI CHT probe on number three a
nd was seeing CHTs in the 440s on climb. That would be 510 on the JPI!!! The
plane is still at Fletch's. I might have him do some cowl mods until I can
get a new cowl.
>
> Brock
>
> --- On Tue, 7/20/10, 923te <923te@att.net> wrote:
>
> From: 923te <923te@att.net>
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, July 20, 2010, 3:11 PM
>
> Hi Brock,
>
> I'm still flight testing the Jag cowl but I am getting some data points th
at I think are reliable.
> As far as cooling performance of the Jag cowl I am finding a gain of 25 to
30degF in cooling of the CHTs. I run LASAR which is known to cause CHT's to
run 30 -35 degF higher than stock. I always run WOT with an MT constant sp
eed prop and always lean to best power and turn the RPM for best speed. Last
year while racing I typically saw CHT's in the 380 range. Recently, while f
light testing the Jag cowl I have been seeing CHT's in mid 350's. This for a
DA of 4500'.
>
> On my flight home from California in April after installing the Jag cowl I
had rather higher than normal CHT temps. I found that the under cylinder ba
ffle safety ties (normally springs) were broken and I believe this was why I
saw the higher than usual temps. This info for those that have followed my
emails concerning the Jag cowl.
>
> For climb I really cannot give you a good data point from my flights for c
omparison as I usually use mixture to keep CHT's below 400 in climb.
>
> Know that Gary uses JPI and I use EI and Gary has determined that JPI read
s 70degF higher than EI. So when Gary says his CHT is 470 that is the same a
s my CHT reading 400....
>
> I'm still working and flight testing to determine what speed gains the Jag
may have given my plane. I do think there is a speed gain and will give tho
se numbers when I have good repeatable flight test data to share.
>
> If you have a stock cowl there are a number of things that can be done to i
ncrease cooling. But the Jaguar cowl is really an excellent way to upgrade a
Tiger. It looks really good and I think you will find both cooling and spee
d benefits in addition to bringing the look of the plane into the 21st centu
ry.
>
> The LoPresti is NOT a cowl. It is a nose bowl and not a cowl. If you need a
new cowl the LoPresti won't replace your old cowl.
>
> Another thing to keep in mind is that with the Jaguar cowl you get ALL NEW
baffles and baffle seals. And Gary did an excellent job designing these new
baffles so that they seal very well. Most old Tigers are in need of this.
>
> Here are some links to pictures of a completed Jaguar Cowl installation:
> http://web.mac.com/jkeesaman/N1976T/N1976T_Returns_Home.html
>
> http://web.mac.com/jkeesaman/N1976T/Cowling_Spy_Photos%21.html
>
>
> Your Fellow Grumman Enthusiast,
> Ned
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Brock Windsor
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:31 AM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
>
> Gary and/or Ned and whomever is flying the Jag cowl, how much did your CHT
s drop during climb and cruise? I am seriously considering the jag cowl as m
y old stock cowl is cracking. The plane is getting its annual(my first, ouc
h) and Fletch squawked it so at some point I either need to fix or replace a
nd I really like the look of the Jag cowl.
>
> Thanks Brock
>
>
> --- On Mon, 7/19/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>
> From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
> To: ArjayS@aol.com, "Teamgrumman List" <teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Monday, July 19, 2010, 8:39 PM
>
> The Jaguar cowling was approved a year ago. There are 4 out there flying,
including mine. Average speed increase is 5-6 knots.
>
> As for the $1000/knot myth, that was posted here a while back by someone o
ther than myself, that was in pre-1970 dollars (before inflation). In today
's money, it's about $2000/knot.
>
> From: "ArjayS@aol.com" <ArjayS@aol.com>
> To: teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM; teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 6:15:26 PM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
>
> COOL! As far as publishing the results, I agree, it's a GIGANTIC pain and i
t never ends.
> Rj
>
>
>> It isn't published because then I'd have to do a whole bunch of performan
ce testing to verify the improvements. Then, I'd have to change the POH. T
hen, I'd have to do a supplement. Then . . . .
>>
>> I just did the cowling for cooling reasons.
>>
>> At 1000 MSL, if I push my plane, I can true out at 158 to 160 knots. It w
ill comfortably go at 150 knots all day.
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> st" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Team
Grumman-List
> et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
>
> st" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Team
Grumman-List
> et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
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: New Technology |
I meant to mentioin that there is an STC for installing wingtip lights
in teh 70's grummans. Check with Fletchair or Ken Blackman for prices.
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 8:40 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: New Technology
I have an AG5B. They already have wingtip lights. Check with LoPresti
for cost of their HID's. Sounds like they are reducing the price to
about half what it once was.....
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 20, 2010, at 3:41 PM, "Tom Quinn" <quinn_tom@tqiinc.com> wrote:
Ned,
Sounds like an excellent setup. If you don=99t mind
me asking how much does it cost to install the system into a wing?
Tom Quinn
N249RR
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of 923te
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:28 PM
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: New Technology
RJ
My vote would be to keep the boom beams and sell them for the $600
you mentioned. I have had 2 boom beams in the wing tips fir several
years whichare wigwagging duty minute of flight. They are an excellent
see and avoid tool and are much brighter than the factory lights. I have
had no trouble with them and been very happy with their performance
Ned
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 20, 2010, at 7:31 AM, ArjayS@AOL.COM wrote:
You have, single-handedly, changed my opinion of LSM.
Personally, I appreciated you coming out to Dayton, your
non-salesman style, and your "engineering openness"
Matt Drahzal
Us "cheapskates" who bought XeVision HID lamps instead of Lopresti
Boom Beams are now suffering with constantly breaking lamp cables. Tell
your marketing crew, it might be a good time to consider a summer
special on Boom Beams. I can demonstrate, based upon personal
experience, that spending a bit more on the certified Boom Beam will
cost less that the XeVision product.
MATT, I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS NOTE. I SAID I WOULD COME TO THE
GROUP AND ASK YOUR COLLECTIVE OPINION SO, YOU HAVE PROMPTED THE FIRST
QUESTION. WE HAVE JUST COMPLETED AND RECEIVED THE STC'S FOR OUR NEW
TECHNOLOGY HID LIGHT. WE'RE NOW SUPPLYING IT TO THE JET MARKET. HAWKERS
AND CITATIONS ARE OUR FIRST DELIVERIES. IT IS CALLED OUR "X3" SERIES AND
IT PRODUCES 65% MORE LIGHT THAN OUR PREVIOUSLY BRIGHTEST
BOOMBEAM=84=A2. THAT'S A GIGANTIC INCREASE.
IT'S MY OPINION THAT EVERYONE "WANTS" MORE LIGHT. NOT EVERYONE CAN
AFFORD IT. I HAVE KERATOCONIS, AND I'M AN AGING PILOT, SO THIS HITS HOME
WITH ME ESPECIALLY.
PERSONALLY I WANT TO ONLY OFFER THE NEW SYSTEM, BUT IT'S
SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPENSIVE. I'M THINKING OF DROPPING THE STANDARD
BOOMBEAM=84=A2 COMPLETLY. HOWEVER IF THERE IS STILL A MARKET AT A
LOWER PRICE I MAY CONTINUE TO OFFER IT. IT LOOKS LIKE WE CAN HIT ABOUT
THE $600-700 MARK (DOWN FROM $1000). BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A
SIGNIFICANT MARKET. SO WHAT DOES THE GROUP SAY...DO WE KEEP IT OR KILL
IT?
RJ SIEGEL CEO/LoPresti Aviation Engineering
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listhttp://forums.matronic
s.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution
=========
t">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
=========
ums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
=========
http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribut
ion
=========
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: New Technology |
RJ,
I rarely use the landing light also. I had to change my light in 2008. I
installed it in 2004 right after I bought the plane. I only use the light after
I turn downwind at night. I think I've spent about $100 on bulbs in the last
20 years.
The biggest problem with the landing light you sell is that it is just TOO DAMN
LONG (DEEP?) . On my cowling, there is but 3/8 inches to the Power Flow
muffler. Now, if you can get the depth down to 1/2 of what it is and make the
price in the $100 neighborhood, I'd do it.
GL
________________________________
From: "ArjayS@aol.com" <ArjayS@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 3:09:46 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: New Technology
Well this is an unexpected result..
So far:
8 keep the lights at the lower price
2 in for the new lights..don't care what the cost is
2 don't ever use lights (who ARE these guys?)
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: rumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance |
First, before you panic, what kind of probe are you using? Under the spark
plug? What shape are the baffles in? Send pictures. A single probe is really
quite useless. It could be wrong.
________________________________
From: Brock Windsor <n2_narcosis@YAHOO.COM>
Sent: Tue, July 20, 2010 6:31:54 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
Wow, I am in trouble. My plane has a single EI CHT probe on number three and
was seeing CHTs in the 440s on climb. That would be 510 on the JPI!!! The plane
is still at Fletch's. I might have him do some cowl mods until I can get a new
cowl.
Brock
--- On Tue, 7/20/10, 923te <923te@att.net> wrote:
>From: 923te <923te@att.net>
>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
>To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
>Date: Tuesday, July 20, 2010, 3:11 PM
>
>
>Hi Brock,
>
>I'm still flight testing the Jag cowl but I am getting some data points that I
>think are reliable.
>As far as cooling performance of the Jag cowl I am finding a gain of 25 to
>30degF in cooling of the CHTs. I run LASAR which is known to cause CHT's to run
>30 -35 degF higher than stock. I always run WOT with an MT constant speed prop
>and always lean to best power and turn the RPM for best speed. Last year while
>racing I typically saw CHT's in the 380 range. Recently, while flight testing
>the Jag cowl I have been seeing CHT's in mid 350's. This for a DA of 4500'.
>
>On my flight home from California in April after installing the Jag cowl I had
>rather higher than normal CHT temps. I found that the under cylinder baffle
>safety ties (normally springs) were broken and I believe this was why I saw the
>higher than usual temps. This info for those that have followed my emails
>concerning the Jag cowl.
>
>For climb I really cannot give you a good data point from my flights for
>comparison as I usually use mixture to keep CHT's below 400 in climb.
>
>Know that Gary uses JPI and I use EI and Gary has determined that JPI reads
>70degF higher than EI. So when Gary says his CHT is 470 that is the same as my
>CHT reading 400....
>
>I'm still working and flight testing to determine what speed gains the Jag may
>have given my plane. I do think there is a speed gain and will give those
>numbers when I have good repeatable flight test data to share.
>
>If you have a stock cowl there are a number of things that can be done to
>increase cooling. But the Jaguar cowl is really an excellent way to upgrade a
>Tiger. It looks really good and I think you will find both cooling and speed
>benefits in addition to bringing the look of the plane into the 21st century.
>
>The LoPresti is NOT a cowl. It is a nose bowl and not a cowl. If you need a new
>cowl the LoPresti won't replace your old cowl.
>
>
>Another thing to keep in mind is that with the Jaguar cowl you get ALL NEW
>baffles and baffle seals. And Gary did an excellent job designing these new
>baffles so that they seal very well. Most old Tigers are in need of this.
>
>Here are some links to pictures of a completed Jaguar Cowl installation:
>http://web.mac.com/jkeesaman/N1976T/N1976T_Returns_Home.html
>
>http://web.mac.com/jkeesaman/N1976T/Cowling_Spy_Photos%21.html
>
>
>Your Fellow Grumman Enthusiast,
>Ned
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Brock Windsor
>>To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
>>Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:31 AM
>>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
>>
>>
>>Gary and/or Ned and whomever is flying the Jag cowl, how much did your CHTs drop
>>during climb and cruise? I am seriously considering the jag cowl as my old
>>stock cowl is cracking. The plane is getting its annual(my first, ouch) and
>>Fletch squawked it so at some point I either need to fix or replace and I really
>>like the look of the Jag cowl.
>>
>>Thanks Brock
>>
>>
>>--- On Mon, 7/19/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
>>>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
>>>To: ArjayS@aol.com, "Teamgrumman List" <teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>
>>>Date: Monday, July 19, 2010, 8:39 PM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>The Jaguar cowling was approved a year ago. There are 4 out there flying,
>>>including mine. Average speed increase is 5-6 knots.
>>>
>>>
>>>As for the $1000/knot myth, that was posted here a while back by someone other
>>>than myself, that was in pre-1970 dollars (before inflation). In today's money,
>>>it's about $2000/knot.
>>>
>>>
>>>
________________________________
From: "ArjayS@aol.com" <ArjayS@aol.com>
>>>To: teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM; teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
>>>Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 6:15:26 PM
>>>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List:LoPresti Nose Bowl Performance
>>>
>>>COOL! As far as publishing the results, I agree, it's a GIGANTIC pain and it
>>>never ends.
>>>Rj
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>It isn't published because then I'd have to do a whole bunch of performance
>>>testing to verify the improvements. Then, I'd have to change the POH. Then,
>>>I'd have to do a supplement. Then . . . .
>>>>
>>>>I just did the cowling for cooling reasons.
>>>>
>>>>At 1000 MSL, if I push my plane, I can true out at 158 to 160 knots. It will
>>>>comfortably go at 150 knots all day.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> st" rel=nofollow
>>>target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listet=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
>>> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>
>>
>>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>
st" rel=nofollow
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com llow
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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! --
|