vik

Insight is really nice. It is certified as primary for CHT/EGT, so you can remove the factory ones. It can not replace all other instruments though, but might be a good choice if that is OK with you.

I just mention this in the discussion about the battery, but it might fit the bill for you as well. EarthX LiFePo4 battery is now certified for Mooney. It only weights 5 lbs. Might be the easiest solution, plus you get a new hi-tech battery.

EarthX LiFePo4 is certified for Mooney now. I see no reason to buy ancient technology any more.

M20E of the same model year came with baffling. Same airframe, engine, cowling, prop etc == Just a log book entry.

I am going thru the change right now. Will report when done. As the consequence, I have the pieces for the dog house for sale if anyone is interested. Vik

Except a long (very very long) time pilot would say "I used single viscosity all my life and it works!". I have heard more "scientific" explanations why single viscosity is better. I can also create an explanation why adding BS to your oil is beneficial. For example: the smell will tell you the engine burns or leaks too much oil. Time to open a company to sell BS oil additive! I did use Victory 100 AW before simply because Victory AW 20W-50 was not yet available (or I could not find it) and I could get away with single viscosity where I live. Unlike my imaginary BS oil additive, camguard that is added to this oil works, is approved and even required by Lycosaur for some applications. Why not Aeroshell Plus 20W-50 which was available earlier? My scientific reason is usually written on a sticker on the shelf next to the oil bottles. Math is a science, right? Maybe I am missing something important. I would love to read some real studies not based on mythology and anecdotal evidences why one aviation brand is better than the other. I am trying to be open minded. The car industry moved to multi-viscosity oils long time ago and not looking back. My car went around the equator more than 10 times on multi-viscosity oil. Anecdotal evidence? Right. But millions of anecdotal evidences become statistics. Statistics is science, right? If only we could use group IV synthetic multi-viscosity oils! But that is another story. Until than, this Victory AW 20W-50 looks like the best deal in town. Multi-viscosity and no hassle to add camguard separately. I bet one does not save much if anything by mixing in camguard into a regular 20W-50 oil. Unless one has a stockpile of regular oil from the times of dinosaurs when oil was cheap. But wait, chemists say oil is made of dinosaurs. Chemistry is not my strong point, or maybe, it is history or both

They told me the same in the email. Moreover, they told me the other dealers will have to go thru them for parts etc. When I asked Duncan to buy few parts to finish the install (I do have STC permission letter from BK issued to my tail number), they told me to put myself on their waiting list to purchase the whole system anew. When I complained my email was blocked. With that kind of "support" AeroCruze 100 / Trutrak for Mooney is dead for all practical purposes. I am going with the D brand. For not much more I will get the modern glass panel and a better integrated autopilot once it is approved. Things are moving now as we see C182 autopilot got approved and Baron is close. Mooney is next. It is hard to predict when, but about 1/2 year from now (when dreamers hope to finally receive their AeroCruze 100 / TruTrak and start planning the installation) I will start counting months. For me, it worth waiting few months for a much better system and better overall deal. Autopilot installation takes a lot of effort. Especially for a stand alone system. Add (rather subtract) to that basically non-existent support in case of a future problems and it becomes a no brainer. What if an AD pops up later for AeroCruze 100? Does anyone really expect BK or the self-proclaimed "master dealer"/avionics shop to take care of it and fix the hardware/software? My guess is that Andrew had the usual arrangement with BK to stay for a year after he sold his company to support the product. Since he now moved to different adventures TruTrak/AeroCruze went south. Not the first, not the last. I can only thank Andrew for his great work and wish him the best in whatever he decides to pursue. I think he made the other companies to move their b.tt, so we have much better choices now.

My understanding is that CGR 30P and MVP-50P use the same boxes and sensors. It is the display which is different.

Just curious what you picked up at the end and how did it go? I have EI MVP-50P sitting in the box if anyone is interested. It has all the boxes and sensors and is configured for IO-360.

Remove the bar from the airplane. Use soda blaster to clean the handle and strip the old paint. Repaint where it was painted before. The worn spots will not come back to shine again, but overall it will look better.

G3X is not the only choice, but I agree that the high cost of Aspen upgrades and add-ons puts you in the real 10" glass panel territory. Not only you get a nice looking, large and clear glass panel, but also more features out of the box. With the current Aspen pricing model, the real glass panel will end up cheaper in the long run, if not from the start.

Just to warn everybody about the future "support" we will get the AeroCruze 100 / Trutrak for our Mooneys. I contacted Duncan to purchase the separate parts and unfortunately got the "support" one would expect from BendixKing these days. I already purchased AeroCruze 100 for another certified airplane, but decided it is better to put in Mooney, as it is a better traveling machine as we all know. I also have the BendixKing STC Letter of Approval permitting me to install Aero Cruze 100 issued to my Mooney. Here is the reply I got from Duncan: "Duncan is the master distributor for the BendixKing AeroCruze 100 Mooney STC Kits, other dealers purchase thru Duncan as well." "Duncan will be selling this AeroCruze 100 STC "as a full kit" all material needed is included, this is based on Duncan's discussions with BendixKing sales. " "Our best suggestion is for operators to purchase a full kit, and get themselves on the back-order list." When I talked to Andrew Barker some time ago, he mentioned that I should simply call one of the vendors to purchase the parts I need for the installation, which seems to be impossible. My reply to Criss Gress from Duncan was bounced with the following message "Message blocked Your message to chris.g@duncanaviation.com has been blocked. See technical details below for more information. The response from the remote server was: 550 permanent failure for one or more recipients (chris.g@duncanaviation.com:blocked) " My conclusions: 1. Like most other manufacturers, Trutrak did have some problems with heads and servos failures. One of these digiflight II heads failed in some weird and scary state is sitting in my hangar. Since Trutrak was acquired by BendixKing the only option was to upgrade to the next generation Vizion autopilot. So, in the future, the only option to replace the failed parts will be to purchase a new "full kit" from the "master distributor" - Duncan, who claims to be a monopoly and will charge appropriate. 2. Even if Duncan will agree to sell you replacement parts in the distant future, expect to pay close to the price of the "full kit". Many people have similar "great" experience with S-Tec for example. This is what usually happens with a single "master distributor". Before purchased by BendixKing, Trutrak itself was an exception, thanks to Andrew Barker, who had a different philosophy. But looks like he lost control of the company since that, so the philosophy also changed. 3. The situation about who owns AeroCruze 100 STC for Mooney installations is murky to say the least. Sort of a gray area. Proceed at your own risk. 4. I might be wrong, but the consensus on the boards seems to be that many, if not most, GA pilots do not even consider BendixKing products when researching their avionics upgrade options. I would like to see arguments why AeroCruze 100 should be an exception. So far, the product goes the same direction as other BendixKing products for GA. I base my conclusion on many complains from other pilots and my own calls to BendixKing trying to obtain any help. Non was ever provided. 5. At this point, other options look more attractive. In one option available now, despite higher initial price, one gets a more capable autopilot and, also important, better support in case of future problems. Personally, I put my project on hold until either the situation with BendixKing AeroCruze 100 is resolved or, more likely, another system from a well known and well respected manufacturer with a great customer support is finally certified. When I called that other great manufacturer recently to ask if I have to purchase the "full kit" to install their glass panel into my certified airplane or I can skip some components of STC I already have and some others that I plan to implement differently, the response was the following: - I have to purchase only the components required by STC (very few BTW) - if I already have some components required by STC, I should send those components back to them before the installation for "FAA blessing" - free of charge - although some of my already installed components will not interface with their system, they recommended me to keep them as the "setup works great as it is". I wish all you guys who already put yourselves "on the back-order list" with Duncan best of luck. You will need it in the future! Vik

This is somebody's 9-hole panel. My understanding is that one has to modify the yoke attachment point to accommodate the instruments in this fashion.

Does anyone have instruction on modifying the pilot's yoke support to accept a 9-hole panel? My understanding is that the triangle mount is turned around and the panel is trimmed to make a bit more clearance for the lower instrument just above the yoke shaft. A picture or a drawing would be nice.

EI CGR-30P looks very attractive until you realize that you need both CGR-30P and CGR-30C to replace all your primary instruments legally. A single CGR-30P (even their "premium" package) will not be able to show fuel quantity on the same display all the time with other required data. You either have to leave your original instrument cluster in, marking all instruments but fuel gauges "inop", or install another instrument certified as primary for the fuel gauges. At this point, there are better options around.

Eric is right on the money! An antenna is a device to match 377 Ohm impedance of the free space (air is close to free space) to 50 Ohm impedance of the RF cable. That balun is needed to convert balanced (antenna) to unbalanced (cable) load. Both are never perfect, but sort of work in a range of frequencies: around 100-120 MHz in our case. Look carefully at the picture that Eric attached. The balun is tuned to our frequency. Homework for you: what is the wavelength of 110 MHz. The wavelength is denoted as lambda in the picture. Two shields are electrically connected at the bottom of the loop and connected to the airframe ground. What often happens, the solder used on the wire there gets old and shields loose good connection or/and good connection to the ground. The antenna is dead! Unfortunately, you can not detect it measuring DC resistance. You need a vector network analyzer. You can also visually inspect the cable if you can get to it. Also, as somebody mentioned, the corroded connectors will cause the impedance mismatch. This will create a reflection point for radio wave. It is possible to loose almost all signal this way as well. So, check and clean all the connectors in the way. Once you calculate that lambda, you realize that it is pretty long. That means, the wave will not even notice a gap in your wire. Theoretically, you might have zero DC conductivity, but the antenna/cable will still work fine. Welcome to the magic world of RF Vik

I also had to pull the engine to fix a similar static leak from the oil sump gasket. What I discovered was that somebody messed with the engine 8 years ago to change the oil pump impeller (there is an AD on that). They pulled the accessory case leaving the oil sump in. Sure enough, the oil sump gasket was ruined. The exposed part of the oil sump was poorly cleaned from the old gasket, leaving some scratches on the mating surface. The corresponding piece was cut from a new gasket and put in place. A new accessory case gasket was installed with some sealant. The whole thing was probably executed with the engine in place. On a Mooney!!! That is how we get those static oil leaks. I ended up pulling the engine, pulling the oil sump and accessory case, cleaning all mating surfaces. New gaskets and just a bit of a blue sealant to fill scratches in aluminum and where the accessory case and the oil sump gaskets meet. Once you pull the engine, you want to paint the engine mount, replace the rubber vibration absorbers etc etc. Have fan! Vik

Thanks. My 67E should use the same. It is threaded as I was able to unscrew the remnants of the fitting. Will buy 3018 now.

Tons of useful information, but I still do not know if I need to buy 3018 or 12-36 zerks for the aft main gear bearings

So, what is the conclusion? Is it 3018 zerk or 12-36 UNS taper and where I can buy one. I have the same problem as many other owners, the grease fitting in the aft bearing of the main landing gear is missing.

I have heard that in UV light any oil will have some fluorescence, so no dye is needed. I tried once in a dark hangar with cheap UV flashlight. I indeed saw some traces of the oil which I could not see in daylight. I do not remember which oil was used at that time. Probably a mix of different brands, so the test is not really scientific. Maybe worth a try as the efforts required are minimal.

Pardon my incompetence, but Permatex makes so many different products. Same is with Pro Seal. I checked and many contain polysulphide. Which would you recommend? It is probably common knowledge among the community, but I have no clue.

Looks like my problem. The oil is leaking from the accessory case and oil sump gasket joint. Some work was done on the accessory case, so the rear portion of the sump gasket was replaced. Should I pull the oil sump to replace the whole gasket. If I do that, what sealant (if any) should I use on the joint?

Thanks. I will try to find the SB.

Do you have a picture of the air dam? Is it considered a minor mod?