REFLECTOR: Ordering an MT Prop
reflector@tvbf.org
reflector@tvbf.org
Thu, 4 Dec 2003 13:49:22 EST
-------------------------------1070563762
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 12/4/2003 9:54:32 AM Pacific Standard Time,
romott@adelphia.net writes:
I had planned to buy an M/T for my IO360 but now I am SO glad I didn't waste
my money!
I have had many problems with my electric mt, however, most all were related
to the electric system. I have been so pissed off at it from time to time
regarding maintenance issues, and have told it "I hate you M*%&#@ F(#%^!" More
than once. The hydraulic is the way to go. That being said, and being one who
flew many years with a fixed pitch, then switched to the mt constant speed a
few years ago, I can say that is a ludicrous statements (IMHO). There is no
comparison between the two regarding takeoff. If you have done any flying with
your "catto" prop around the country, in and out of hot summer days, at gross,
with a little altitude, I will bet you have puckered your A-Hole a couple
times wondering if you were going to clear the obstacles at the end of the
runway. I know I have. I figured the added expense was insurance for my Son and I.
The basic rule of horsepower is "horsepower is directly related to RPM."
If you cant turn 2700, you don't have 200hp. True, at cruise (and above
120kt.) I would rather have the fixed pitch Performance propeller on as it cruised a
couple kts. faster, but if you can't make it off the runway without hitting
something at the end, you can't curies. I'll put up with the restricted RPM
range, and I think mt has addressed a lot of the electric and seal issues. Sure
it's expensive, but I'll keep flying it until something better comes down the
pike.
TEC
-------------------------------1070563762
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML><HEAD>
<META charset=3DUTF-8 http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charse=
t=3Dutf-8">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fffff=
f">
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 12/4/2003 9:54:32 AM Pacific Standard Time, romott@a=
delphia.net writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue=20=
2px solid"><FONT face=3DArial>I had planned to buy an M/T for my IO360 but n=
ow I am SO glad I didn't waste<BR>my money!</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV>I have had many problems with my electric mt, however, most all we=
re related to the electric system. I have been so pissed off at it fro=
m time to time regarding maintenance issues, and have told it "I hate you M*=
%&#@ F(#%^!" More than once. The hydraulic is the way to go. =
That being said, and being one who flew many years with a fixed p=
itch, then switched to the mt constant speed a few years ago, I can say that=
is a ludicrous statements (IMHO). There is no comparison between the=20=
two regarding takeoff. If you have done any flying with your "cat=
to" prop around the country, in and out of hot summer days, at gross, with a=
little altitude, I will bet you have puckered your A-Hole a couple tim=
es wondering if you were going to clear the obstacles at the end of the runw=
ay. I know I have. I figured the added expense was insurance for=
my Son and I. The basic rule of horsepower is "horsepower is directly=
related to RPM." If you cant turn 2700, you don't have 200hp.&n=
bsp; True, at cruise (and above 120kt.) I would rather have the fixed pitch=20=
Performance propeller on as it cruised a couple kts. faster, but if you can'=
t make it off the runway without hitting something at the end, you can'=
t curies. I'll put up with the restricted RPM range, and I think mt ha=
s addressed a lot of the electric and seal issues. Sure it's expe=
nsive, but I'll keep flying it until something better comes down the pike.</=
DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>TEC</DIV></BODY></HTML>
-------------------------------1070563762--