KSMooniac

Shock cooling is a myth, so you don't need to fret about cooling off the engine too fast. If it were a problem, shock heating would also be a problem, and we would be cracking cylinders on takeoff. I run WOT until setting up for an approach or within 5 miles of entering a pattern for a visual approach. If I'm flying instruments and just need an intermediate descent, then I'll just reduce MP to maintain a constant-airspeed descent, and then restore MP when reaching the target altitude so I won't have to mess with trim.

Here is the MT spec sheet: http://www.mt-propellerusa.com/pdf/stcflyer/FL034US.pdf 71" diameter, 46 lbs. Stainless steel leading edge strips...that is what I will choose whenever the time comes to upgrade.

Well, I might have learned something new then if the McCauley is indeed a smaller diameter...I remember looking at STC's a year or two ago and all of the 2- and 3-blade props (except the MT...don't remember) were 74" diameter.

Norm, that is amazing! You've done about everything I thought about doing, but I only opted for the modified dorsal fin/root, and hinge covers before paint last year. I decided not to go with the LoPresti after reading a mixed bag of comments. I would have liked to delete my pop-up cabin vent too and go with the later model system, but it seemed like a huge amount of work to do so... Did Lone Star do all of this work for you? Which smooth belly mod did you choose? What is your empty weight/useful load after all of these improvements? I'm still toying around with my own TN-system idea, and if that goes, I think I will make a new cowling system from scratch out of carbon fiber to offset some of the weight-gain of the turbo system. Losing ~10 lbs with an MT prop and perhaps 5-7 lbs in the cowl would help tremendously.

The 3-blade metal props on the market for Mooneys should not cut down on noise since they are the same diameter as the 2-blade options.

It is not too out of line IMO. Old damage history isn't a huge deal. I would deduct for bladders and the 3-blade prop. Cosmetics aren't great, and it looks like the windows should be changed too. Upside is the engine time and a fairly good panel. I bet it would sell in the mid-80's or so. I paid more for my '77 3 years ago, but with much higher engine time but a better panel.

The need for dressing with an MT is greatly reduced since the leading edge is a piece of stainless steel, and thus much tougher than the aluminum props. I doubt you would ever need to do anything to the MT short of a prop strike or other impact damage. My 2-blade McCauley has had plenty of nicks and dressing over the years.

If you're hell-bent on getting a 3-blade, I think the MT is the absolute best choice...lighter weight, smooth operation, and likely longer life. The cost will be the same or less from the figures you just quoted on the metal props. I'm likely going to upgrade to the MT from my 2-blade McCaulley one of these days as I think it is that good and worth the money.

DaV8or, on the Mooneys with the fixed bench seat, it is a PITA to remove it because there is a bolt wedged between the seat and the side panel that is a nuiscance at best. The seat bottom comes out easily, though. I've got an idea for an STC to make it easily foldable, but haven't made the time to start working on it yet...maybe this year after my annual next month, though. I'm anxious to hear what Bryan found too.

I agree with what Jim said. You should be able to find an airworthy used prop for ~$2000 I bet, and that might be the smarter choice now if it allows you to keep your plane. You could always upgrade to a new prop down the road and re-sell the used one...perhaps for the same money. Last year I got a good discount quote on an MT from a distributor in MI or WI or somewhere up there...in the neighborhood of $9k IIRC outright. There are usually Sun-n-Fun specials too on those. Is there insurance involved with this? If you're having to pay out-of-pocket, I'd be more worried about the engine tear-down inspection as it will cost more than a new prop, especially if damage is found.

Gary, no tail stand for me. I have a cheapy Pep Boys cherry picker (<$100) on the engine lifting ring. It doesn't take much weight to do the job, either.

The manual says to support the weight on the front end...not by the tail. FWIW

I answered on the email list and will cross-post here too: I'm a happy EDM-700 user. I fly LOP 95% of the time, and thus don't need an 800 to tell me what power setting I'm using because I can calculate it directly from the fuel flow. I think the new -730/830 display looks really nice, and offers a direct USB download instead of having to mess with their special cable + an USB-Serial adaptor, so that is worth something. Functionally, the units are identical to the -700/800 units from everything I understand, which is a good thing. Last fall JPI was running a very good deal IMO to unload the legacy units, and it may still be going on. Typically they offer discounts around Sun-n-Fun too. Depending on your budget and panel space, you might consider the larger all-in-one instruments that can serve as primary instrumentation, allowing you to remove all of the legacy analog instruments. I was thinking about upgrading my unit to a -730, but have decided to wait until the day I do a glass panel retrofit and then opt for a primary replacement so I can remove all the old stuff.

It got delayed/postponed for some reason...I don't remember the details since I couldn't go anyway.

Sweet! I'm not surprised one bit. 9.5 GPH = 71% power when LOP. That is a perfect power setting for a J at 5500'.

Well, they go down from peak...but 50 ROP is the same temp as 50 LOP. If one is operating at 100 ROP and then goes to 20 LOP, the EGTs will be higher. CHT and peak ICP will be lower, which is the most important concept.

The raw values of EGTs are essentially meaningless in terms of exhaust life. They are only useful as tools for monitoring engine performance and diagnostics, which is why the OEM single EGT instruments only have a scale with no numbers.

The higher the ICP, the more stress is placed on the cylinder itself, as well as the piston, rings, connecting rod, crank, bearings, valves, etc. Higher stress and higher heat are harder on all metallic components, so minimizing those things will increase the fatigue life.

If Jim can run smoothly at 20-30 LOP, that is sufficient for typical non-turbo Mooney cruise altitudes of 7-9,000 feet. If his CHTs creep up above 380 in the summer like mine sometime do, then he might not be able to lean further to keep them cool, and then should go back to 100 dF ROP. However, I'd still want to fix my engine so that I can run smooth LOP all the way to 100.

I agree with just about everything above, except the Go Fast and Go Far settings while LOP. 25 dF LOP is more power/more fuel than 50 dF LOP, so 25 dF LOP = Go Fast, and 50 dF LOP = Go Far. Both are superior settings to peak or ROP in terms of efficiency, internal pressures and CHT. The most efficient setting is in the 40-50 dF LOP range, but 25 dF is pretty good while retaining a good amount of cruise speed. In my plane, I'll typically aim for 20 dF LOP when above 7,000 feet, but in the summer sometimes I need to lean further to keep CHTs below 380 dF. The other thing to keep in mind for us non-turbo operators is that the dreaded "Red Box" (an APS-coined term) is not constant. It scales with power output, which means altitude for us. At 8,000 feet, we can only make 75% or thereabouts maximum power, and with a cruise RPM and LOP power setting it is less. You need to be "rich enough" to be out of the red box on one side, or "lean enough" to be out of it on the other side. Thus, the amount of degrees off of peak reduces as power decreases, so at 70% or so 10-20 dF LOP is fine, and by 60% or so you can fly peak or anywhere and the ICP won't be so high as to harm anything. CHT will still be higher, though. If flying down low at 80% or 85% power, one needs to be *more* LOP or ROP...like 60-70 dF LOP, or 150 dF ROP. Turbo guys have it easy...their red box is constant up to the critical altitude of the turbo. Cirrus got it right with their Turbo SR-22 and their POH puts cruise at WOT, 2500 RPM, and lean to 17.5 GPH. This is 87% power LOP, about 70 dF LOP I think. They go faster and burn less fuel than a 75% ROP power setting, while maintaining cooler CHTs! Regarding your ability to run smoothly at 50 dF LOP...no, you don't really have to, but ideally it would be best if your engine were smooth all the way to idle cut off. If you typically fly up higher in cruise then 20-30 dF LOP would be fine, but if you're staying low to minimize headwinds for example, it would be nicer to leave the throttle wide open and just pull the mixture back a bit more to stay out of the red box. The engine is more efficient at WOT since the butterfly doesn't disturb the incoming air. If your plane cannot get to 50 dF LOP, then you might start looking for a small induction leak first...

Oh, and after getting the education, I think you might agree that installing an engine monitor is a tremendous bang-for-the-buck upgrade! If you're into owner-assist maintenance, it is a good candidate for you to do since much of the expense is tedious, but not difficult, installation/routing/securing of the probes that can be done easily by any owner with mechanical aptitude, under proper supervision of course.

Excellent! I think you can probably see why many 231s seem to have top overhauls now... I think the $100 hardcopy is likely the nice, organized notebook we got at the live class, and not just a dump of powerpoint slides. It includes some excerpts from various POH's as well to show errors in published procedures by the OEM's. It is worth it IMO, but I suppose printing your own isn't bad either, but of course that isn't exactly free either. One thing they stressed in the class is that you do not have to have an engine monitor to run LOP, and in fact, running LOP with a single EGT gauge becomes your de facto monitor in that if you can run smoothly LOP, then you know that your induction, fuel delivery and spark systems are all working properly. If something goes wrong with any of them, you will get rough operation immediately and you'll feel it! If you are running ROP, then the power loss from any malfunction might not be enough to feel, and you can continue to cruise along fat, dumb and happy. If you decide to take the live class in the future, I believe the "tuition" for the on-line course will count towards the live one, so keep that in mind.

Great movie, indeed. The guy behind it is making another one, that I believe is due out this year and I'm sure it will be outstanding. A piece of somewhat related trivia...he appears to be "in a relationship" with Jennie Mitchell, of Mooney sales/marketing fame.

BEAUTIFUL!

Congrats again! I might stop by next week (23rd, perhaps) if you're available and not flying! I'm anxious to see it and see your excrement-eatin' grin in person.