Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

40 Excellent

About johncuyle

  • Rank
    Full Member
  • Birthday 03/14/1979

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Redmond, WA
  • Reg #
  • Model

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I went through this. The ELT antenna is mounted inside the tail root fairing. There's a variety of antennas which fit or can be bent and made to fit with a little heat, but the fairing is riveted on and swapping the 121.5 antenna for the 406 requires pulling the tail off. I ended up with an extra hole in my plane because the added cost wasn't worth it. Don't know anything about the Artex option or whether it would be better/is somehow easier to install.
  2. I have the GMA-350C. I like it a lot. The spatial sound is a neat feature, push to command is cool (though I don't use it much as I haven't made it a habit yet) it has all the features I wanted like BT out for recording comms, it has plenty of inputs, etc. I have a GTN-650. Part of me wishes I'd gone with the GTN-750 and GMA35 for the integration, but there are a handful of features you lose going with the remote (behind the 750) 35 vs the 350, and somewhere in the back of my mind I didn't feel totally comfortable losing my audio panel if I had an issue with the 750, or possibly being forced into an upgrade if I swapped the 750 for something in the future. The GTX-345R was easier to go with because you don't lose any features and the 650 integrated controls are actually a bit easier to use IMO. I think my perfect practical radio stack would be the GMA350, GTN750, and GNC255, with the GTX345R. I don't think it is worth it for me to upgrade the 650 to a 750 and I think having both a 650 and a 750 is outrageous overkill and the money would be better spent on an MT propeller and a Kevlar Oxygen bottle. So I'll probably, in reality, end up with the GMA350C, GTN650, GTX345R (all of which I already have) and just replace the ancient, failing King secondary stuff with a GNC255, probably about the same time Garmin supports wiring a secondary NAV into certified G5 installs. Next upgrade is a GFC500... tl;dr The GMA-350 is great, definitely play with one, it might not hurt to go with the physical 350 rather than the remote 35 even if you end up going with a 750. It has the advantage that it gives you the option to decide a 650 is adequate since you use your iPad/decide to splurge on a G500TXi/the G3 becomes available for certified and you don't really need the screen real estate on the GPS after all. For reference, I am pretty sure the annunciator panel, GMA-350, GTN750, and GTN650 will all fit vertically stacked in a Mooney radio stack, possibly even with a small amount of room to spare.
  3. johncuyle

    which model is the best F,J,K or M

    I've never seen a Mooney with a 1300 pound UL.
  4. johncuyle

    Catching fuel from gascolator drain

    I do something like this. Problem is wind. Roll of duct tape is good, but the wind blows the gas stream and I've had some of it miss the funnel. I have a couple plastic closed bins from Home Depot that hold various stuff (you know, the stuff that you always carry in the back of the plane. A screwdriver, a couple other tools, spare gas catch, funnel, quart of oil, wheel chocks, some rags in one, various other cleaning supplies in the other. Makes it easy to alter the load in the back by pulling a bin or both bins if I'm just doing a sightseeing flight and returning to base without landing.) Anyway, I can stack the two bins, put the shorty funnel in the catch can, and it just nicely fits under the gascolator. Not quite wedges in, but keeps everything nice and stable and completely eliminates any wind mess. In my hangar I have a second catch, funnel, and bucket and I put the catch on the upturned bucket. No wind in the hangar, the bucket makes it easier to line up so I don't spill gas on my hangar floor. That die doesn't go away, like, forever.
  5. johncuyle

    SureFly Certified

    'sup LT1 buddy? I've got a '94 C4. I wouldn't use it as an example of a great ignition system. It's a weird hybrid opto-mechanical electronic system with only a single coil, IIRC. Why I use the Miata, with its single coil per cylinder fully electronic setup as my example. So far I've gone through one opti per 100k miles. Not as good as a Miata, better than anything else I've driven. The '95 Miata is the newest car I've owned. bob865: I assume the same thing that happens in a car: If you lose the battery it keeps running until it stops (the alternator provides sufficient power) then you can't restart because there's no power for the ignition or to get the alternator field up. If you lose the alternator(s) it keeps running until the battery is dead. On something with a dual alternator (and possibly dual battery setup) redundancy is pretty comparable to magnetos since you'd have to lose two of something to lose ignition, and in several cases the plane keeps running for a while/indefinitely, except none of the components have anywhere near the likelihood of having an issue that a magneto does so your odds of needing to land, like, right now are lower.
  6. johncuyle

    CGR-30 (or MVP-50, I guess) install time

    Will try to get some, particularly of the patch job they did where the strip gauges used to be.
  7. johncuyle

    SureFly Certified

    Three flights scrubbed in less than 300 hours of flying, on two different planes (neither of them mine.) Meanwhile my Miata hasn't had an ignition system failure in 190k miles. It's just completely bulletproof. A failure every hundred hours is a lot compared to never fails ever. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  8. johncuyle

    SureFly Certified

    Easier starting and not being as horribly unreliable as magnetos are what I want out of it. Even better if they eventually approve replacing both magnetos. I don't want timing advance.
  9. johncuyle

    SureFly Certified

    IIRC O2 sensors aren't accurate when cold, so until it's warmed up the engine needs to operate entirely in open loop mode. I'm looking forward to reading reports from early adopters who run TSIO-360's. It really seems like I should use this opportunity to make a Turbo Arrow joke but my sense of humor isn't back from winter vacation, apparently.
  10. johncuyle

    SureFly Certified

    O2 sensor is the primary means to set mixture. As another poster said, timing is mostly a table. As long as the mixture is reasonable, you don't need to worry a lot about detonation. With our engines, the red knob could be set pretty much anywhere. To original: The thread over on BT has a link to the timing advance table for Surefly. It only advances timing at MP <25", which would be below cruise power for me. I'm still a little more interested in E-Mags since the integrated generators allows replacing both mags and makes them less vulderable to full electrical system failures, but Surefly looks pretty good to me, particularly if I get to replacing my AP this year and can fit a standby alternator in place of the vacuum pump (almost certainly better reliability than the mag it would replace with two alternators.) It doesn't hurt that it's inexpensive, and my mechanic apparently has talked to someone with one of the experimental installs who had very positive feedback, and suggested I give it another look.
  11. johncuyle

    CGR-30 (or MVP-50, I guess) install time

    Following up: Estimate, around 30 hours give or take (seemed totally reasonable, I have extras in my setup). Actual: About 25. I guess they wanted it to be a (pleasant) surprise. Workmanship is fantastic, too. Command Aviation at KBLI. My panel is the original and it's been hacked up so many times for avionics installs for prior owners and now me, it was really nice to have it come out with patches that look like the original materials and otherwise looking much better than it did when it went in. The layout is great, everything seems to work fine, I shaved some weight, and I couldn't be more pleased than I am with either the CGR or the installation job.
  12. johncuyle

    SureFly Certified

    That's the problem. Advancing the timing to 38° seems likely to at least raise CHT a lot, and without a knock sensor risk detonation. TSIO-360-LB runs hot enough as is, even with the intercooler.
  13. johncuyle

    SureFly Certified

    I'm really pro electronic ignition because they don't constantly fail like mags do. I've not had an in flight failure but I've had to scrub three flights due to mag failures. The number of times my Miata's had an ignition failure in the last 20 years and 180k miles: zero. They just don't fail. The hotter spark is nice, but the variable timing basically doesn't matter for our aircraft. They spend their entire lives producing power in a narrow range between 2400 and 2700 RPM, so the fixed timing doesn't cripple them the way it would a car that needs to produce power between 1500 and 7000 RPM. Plus, without some sort of functional knock sensor, they can't pull timing to prevent detonation anyway. I'm totally on board with the idea of dual E-mags whenever they get certified. Electroair not so much. It advances timing without any way to know if the engine has detonation or CHT margin for that to be a good idea. Not sure about the surely, but unless it is significantly more sophisticated than the Electroair (knock sensor that can retard timing that works well enough to, say, allow operation safely on mogas) I'm probably not interested. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  14. johncuyle

    231 v 252 v 262

    Worth the money is hard. The differences between the 252 and 231 are: Engine operation. You must manually limit MP in the 231 and it's trickier to fly, particularly to get maximum engine power out of, than the 252. The 252 is barely harder to fly than a 201. There's a semi-automated wastegate available (the Merlyn) which eliminates bootstrapping and other fixed wastegate headaches, but doesn't limit MP and may actually make power management slightly harder (I've only flown with it.) Intercooler. The 252 features an intercooler in addition to the automatic wastegate. This improves high altitude performance and also helps keep the CHTs down, which should prolong life. The 231 can be fitted with an aftermarket intercooler and it more or less resolves this issue. If you buy one with it already fitted, great. If not, you can buy the kit (Turboplus) and have it installed, but the installation isn't trivial (expensive). I bought mine with no intercooler and got one of the first new turboplus kits and think every 231 should be upgraded. Electrical. The 252 is a 28v plane with a dual alternator setup. In addition to being more efficient and having greater redundancy (important for IFR) it is also eligible for FIKI TKS. While there is a standby alternator that should be able to be fitted to the 231 if you yank the vacuum system, it still doesn't get you the option for FIKI TKS. If FIKI TKS is something you need, the 231 isn't an option. Think hard here: FIKI looks like it may be a stumbling block with certain avionics upgrades (I don't think the G5 or GFC 500 can be fit to a FIKI plane, ask your Avionics/Autopilot shop.) The 262 fixes the first two shortcomings but not the third. I suppose you've probably already answered this question in the affirmative but, are you sure you want a turbo? If you're not going to be on oxygen going >300nm topping mountains or weather, a 201 offers ease of use, lower maintenance, and generally higher useful load.
  15. I purchased a CGR-30 combo this summer and am having it installed in my 231 at annual. The shop has had my plane for a while now. Whenever I've inquired as to what was taking so long with finishing the annual and installing the engine monitor, they have cited installation difficulty. In particular, they say the installation has taken much longer than, say, a JPI 930 because of the number of modules that required wiring in behind the panel. I know manufacturer install time estimates (I think EI says something like 20-30 hours) tend to be somewhat optimistic, and Mooney panels are not noted for being easy to work behind (though I'd expect an MSC to be used to that) but I wouldn't have expected it to be that much more difficult to install than a JPI. For people who have had EI monitors, either the CGR or MVP, installed, how many hours did your shop bill you for? They've had the plane for two months now. They haven't been working exclusively on my plane and they had a number of other panel and electrical jobs in there, so the total isn't going to be 8*40 hours but I really have no idea what number they're going to tell me (difficulty getting a running time total is a separate frustration) and I want to have some idea what other owners' experiences have been before then. Thanks.