Chris B

i have checked all the wiring and everything looks fine. i am leaning towards i have an induction leak somewhere between #2 and #4. here is the EGT deltas between ~25 inches and ~15 inches. visually i am not seeing and signs of a leak. i haven't had time to do a pressure test yet.

Thanks for your suggestions. Next flight I will lean at a much slower pace and see what it looks like. You mentioned EGT#2, not sure if its related or not but #2 CHT also runs significantly cooler than the rest. It is up front so that might be expected but it has the oil cooler mounted in front of it. #1 has a baffle in front of so it is blocked a bit also. I did end up running down to the plan to check on the data capture rate. It is currently set at 0.3 seconds. This sure does seem like a pretty fast capture speed. Should I change this? If so, what would be recommended value be?

I am not sure of the data collection speed. I never changed it from its default. I will take note of that on my next flight. I will also do the gami spread and while I'm at it, the induction leak test and see if that shows anything interesting. Here is an example of the lean attempt that has me stumped. Top is odd cylinders and the bottom is even. I am pretty sure at the low FF point (8.6gph) the engine was running very rough and that is why I starting coming back in with the FF. Again, this is all very new to me but I would expect with a very rough running engine, the EGTs would fall off but maybe I am wrong with that expectation.

Not the best picture but you should be able to get an idea of their plumbing. I am not looking to run LOP, I will be sticking to ROP. I am just confused why I would see a clear peak and fall off of the EGT during one lean find attempt but another attempt the EGTs would climb and just remain flat.

I have been playing around with my new MVP-50p on my newly overhauled 0-540. I have been struggling to get the Lean Find - ROP process to give me reliable leaning guidance. This morning I went up to play around again and captured something interesting (at least to me). I can't understand what the data i showing me, hoping you guys can help. If you look at the savvy report here, specifically between the times 00:23:30 and 00:32:00 you will see what I am talking about. I was at 7500ft, 20/2300, around 65% HP. Book called for cruise fuel flow of 11.5ish gph. Following the old lean until rough, rich until smooth it start to become rough around 10gph and smooth out around 11.5gph. The first 2 leaning attempts with the Lean Find feature (00:24:10 and 00:25:32) looked as expected, all EGTs peaked and fell off as I went pretty far LOP. The 3rd and 4th attempts ( 00:29:08 and 00:31:00) look different. As I went far LOP, pretty much the same fuel flow as attempts 1 and 2, the EGHTs didn't peak and fall off, they just remain kind of flat. I wish I would have paid attention to how rough the engine was running during each attempt but I didn't. I just know it was very rough as the fuel flow got low but not sure if there was a variation between the attempts. What I can't wrap my head around is why the two different patterns? What do you guys think?

Thanks Mark for the clarification. 337 makes a lot more sense.

Lol..haven't actually got that far. I would like to add some gear up warning into my headset. I see a few options out there one of which I believe is the flightmate feature in the 450B. If the 450B checks enough boxes on paper I will follow up with my mechanic and see what he thinks before I offically go down that road.

Thanks @EricJ, that makes sense to me. Still waiting for my mechanics response but I would expect it to be similar to yours. The installation manual I saw online mentions that the setup for the flightmate is on the "installers page"...pretty sure that was what it said. Does your manually mention that and if it does, is that section of the 450B configuration open or does it require some top secret password or something like that? Thanks

Thanks everyone. It was Mark at PS Engineering that I was talking with that prompted this question. My question was more what did Mark's response mean: "Unless you’re A & P can perform an 8130-3 (he would have to go through a DMIR). The flightmate was done under NORSEE."? Since this is all new to me I can't understand why a 8130-3 would need to be created by the installing A&P if they configured flightmate to alert on gear up. My assumption is the answer is buried in the "The flightmate was done under NORSEE" part of Mark's response but I am not familiar with that either.

I have been looking at upgrading my PMA8000B to the new PMA450B. I liked how the upgrade is plug and play and I am thinking about having my A&P do this while the plane is down for its engine overhaul. One of the many features that I like was the flightmate and its ability to tell me that my gear is up in my headset. In researching what the installation requires for this I found out that this can only be done by an authorized ps engineering installer. Seeing how the entire world is backed up right now I was hoping to avoid trying to get into an avionics shop and just have my A&P do the work. I asked ps engineering about this and they said: Unless you’re A & P can perform an 8130-3 (he would have to go through a DMIR). The flightmate was done under NORSEE. Can anyone out there help me understand what that means...other than No, the A&P most likely can't do it? Thanks

I will email Greg now. Thanks everyone

Yes, I am for sure not buying until osh, but seeing how I wont be able to actually attend this year, I figure I would start shopping around for some dealers

I have settled on getting a MVP-50p to replace my JPI-800. I know I can get it straight from EI but I want to check out some other dealers to see if I can find it a little cheaper. Is there a dealer or 2 that everyone around here likes using? Thanks

Yes, they are talking about the Sun n Fun in a couple of weeks

On the topic of Electroair's dual mag replacement, I got this email from Smooth Power LLC yesterday when I asked how the dual mag replacement is going: "We will start selling the four cylinder systems at Sun'n Fun. The six cylinder system should be mid summer."

I am looking to buy a plane (C brand) that currently has a JPI-800. The seller also has a 930 that he bought last year with the intention of installing it but ended up deciding to sell the plane for something bigger. Anyway, assuming I could get a good price on it, do you think it would be worth the upgrade? The 800 has oil pressure (I think), oil temp, fuel flow, maybe more. I know the original fuel gauges are not all that accurate but he does have a Shadin Fuel computer in addition to the 800 which he says is very accurate. It seems that all the 930 would bring to the table is more accurate fuel gauges, a cooler display, and the possibility to clean up the right side of the panel. Am I missing anything? The logical side of my brain is saying to save the money and put it towards gas to fly the hell out of it. Thoughts?

Looks like it's not really gone: https://www.controller.com/listing/for-sale/200260523/1963-mooney-m20c-piston-single-aircraft maybe the guy who just bought is flipping it? it is a great plane. if it just had electric gear i would have bought it.

it was my first flight in one and i only have 172 and 182s to compare it with. i think my next task is to ask around and see if there are any kind souls in my area with a F or J that wouldn't mind giving me a show and tell. to date i have seen 3 C models and that has been it.

Yes, that is what I am hoping to do. I figure I might be comfortable flying in the second to the last notch. If that is the case and I get some more holes drilled for the passenger side then the passenger can offset to the rear a little more.

I am 6' with a 38" inseam and no where near the build of a linebacker. When I flew with Matt I was on the last hole and was comfortable on the pedals.

That is some good news. I wonder if there is an approved option to get more holes? From what I understand, the F and the J are very similar, same fuselage I think?...anyway, If the J had longer tracks is it a safe bet that the F would have the same?

@Matt_AZwas kind enough to take me up in my first ride in a Mooney. He has a very nice C model. One thing that I noticed was the lack of shoulder room for me. I am have broad shoulders (and belly) and it kind of reminded me of flying in my C152 days (space wise only). My question is this: Do the F models have more travel in the aft direction that the C models? In Matt's plane I was all the way back in the furthest lock position, not sure where Matt had his seat. Was thinking if there was way to get the passenger seat further back then flying with a passenger (my wife 99% of the time) might be a little more comfortable. On paper the F or J models really check a lot of boxes for me so I am really hoping I can find a configuration that give us a little wiggle room when flying with a passenger. I am currently flying a 172 and a 182 so we are used to a little bit more shoulder space. Thanks

Thanks for the offer Cowboy, I will contact you as well. I'm way out in the east valley and want to get back out to DVT to meet both you and Matt here soon. With any luck the stars will be in alignment and I can meet both of you guys in one trip.

if i would have know there were so many of you guys at DVT i would have planned to spend the day out there and meet everyone...lol. i am hoping to meet some guys with either a F or a J in the east valley.

yeap, that's him, great guy. thanks