Ovation 310HP up grade-would you do it again?

[L. Trotter]

I have the read the performance "number" that  the Ovation 310HP upgrade produces. Numbers are one thing, real life experience is another. For those of you who have paid the price for the upgrade...would you do it again? Was the real life performance improvement worth the cost (approx. $5K)? 

 

[Hank]

Paging Anthony . . . Where are you, carusoam?  

Long story short, he loves his 310hp upgrade, "and so will you!" He has numbers and data to back it up. Sounds like his ground performance is similar to my C, but will outclimb me and outspeed me by large factors.

[M20S Driver]

I upgraded my Eagle from 280 to 310 a couple of months ago. I would surely do it again since I use the extra HP to get in an out of a high alt airport (KTRK).   Sea level climbs have a much lower CHT temps at 2700 RPM..

I target my cruise between 8-12K feet and 15.5-16.5 GPH spinning at 2400 RPM so there is no advantage in cruise performance for me.  

[carusoam]

The question is one of those that is always answered with 'it all depends...'

1) The small (10%) increase in excess HP is a seat of the pants difference.  The kind you can feel...

2) You don't need a WAAS GPS connected to your CloudAhoy app to measure the improvement in T/O distance.

3) But if you use one, you will probably measure a 30% shorter T/O distance 800' vs. 1200' (no real science involved in acquiring this data).

4) The initial climb rate was a bit surprising, I didn't believe it to be true.  It helped having another MSer on board to take a photo of the VSI on our way out to a NJMooney fly-in to AOPA headquarters.  That photo got posted around here somewhere. Expect 2k' fpm or something similar to that.

5) It really makes getting out of short fields a lot more comfortable.  You are off the ground before the halfway point of a 2k' long runway.

6) If you ever used high rpm to increase your descent rate. 2700 rpm should do better than 2500 rpm.

These are the key points that come to mind.

My decision was made pretty easy...

1) My CFI flys a Screamin' Eagle.

2) My pants seat recommended using my CloudAhoy for less emotional decision making.

3) My CFI helped bridge the gap between me and Continental, Hartzell, and the STC holder. I contacted or spoke directly with them all.

4) At the time, the four blade MT prop had not finished it's STC for the O yet. I also have some irrational fear of light weight composite props. The lack of flywheel effect is puzzling like an old wive's tale.

5) My nearest MSC was supportive.

6) I had the work performed by my home drome. Let me know if you need a recommendation.

7) Another local pilot with an original Eagle (244hp?) had his updated to the 310 hp after seeing the work done on mine. He may have taken a flight in mine.  Really easy decision.

8) When swapping things off the front there is always a concern about adding too much weight.  The newest version of the IO550 is the (N) as opposed to the original (G). The N saves a couple of pounds, dollars, and °CHT. The TopProp comes in three weights, thick, thin and composite.

9) The 310 HP, Thin TopProp, and requisite STCs, delivered on their promise.

10) The polished spinner is pretty cool looking. A slightly different diameter than the original Mac.

11) If you want to fly the fastest, normally aspirated, factory built, four seater, on or off the planet...

Wouldn't YOU do this again?

Did I just answer your question with another question?

 

Keep in mind I am only a PP, not a mechanic.

This is my experience, not a recommendation.

Best regards,

-a-

[carusoam]

As M20S generously points out above...

1) The extra power does cost extra FF.

2) It's there when you want it.  Operates as original, when you don't want the excess.

3) It is the same performance and FF as the original, if you don't want to cruise at the recommended 2550rpm.

Best regards and Welcome aboard LT,

-a-

[BorealOne]

What Anthony said. x2.

Had it done as part of a TBO engine swap. Incremental cost to go 310 in that context made it a no-brainer.

[Guest]

One of these would be more effective.

Clarence

[GeorgePerry]

  On 11/21/2015 at 3:44 AM, L. Trotter said:

I have the read the performance "number" that  the Ovation 310HP upgrade produces. Numbers are one thing, real life experience is another. For those of you who have paid the price for the upgrade...would you do it again? Was the real life performance improvement worth the cost (approx. $5K)? 

 

Expand  

Sure the STC is 5 AMU, but If you need the 3 bladed Prop add on another 12.5 AMU plus the reworked prop governor plus labor.  All in if you need everything is +/- 20 AMU  

[Bob_Belville]

  On 11/21/2015 at 12:06 PM, M20Doc said:

One of these would be more effective.

Clarence

Expand  

Anyone ever hang an IO720 on a Mooney?

[Txbyker]

Yes, do it if it fits your budget.  I fly IFR most of the time and ATC seems to clear me "direct" and to altitude much faster as I climb at >1000 fpm.  To me the greatest benefit is takeoff and climb and like M20S Driver no benefit in cruise but you sure get there quicker.

Russ

[DAVIDWH]

I looked at this when my engine went to Western Skyways for overhaul last year.

I am at a long runway sea level port and rapid climbs to altitude not necessary here. After I found out no benefit in cruise speed I folded

like Rhonda Rousey.

However for those in need of a beast I might suggest the P210 Silver Eagle Rolls Royce equipped turbine. (Forgive me for mentioning the C word on a Mooney post)

The 250B17 F2  Rolls engine climbs at 3000 ft. min., takes off in 600ft. and lands in 500 ft. (Its called reverse thrust) Fuel burn is acceptable and engine weight is reduced from 487 lbs to a mere 212 lbs.

Now if only those Brits could reduce the cost a bit. (Not likely)

 

Best,

DH

[triple8s]

So if the 310 O climbs out at 2000 FPM.......... Wonder how this'n does? 

 

http://aircraftmerchants.com/cf/acDetail.cfm?AircraftId=AF4ED3BD-EB93-4D07-A7B1-108F46178B90

[aviatoreb]

  On 11/21/2015 at 10:27 PM, triple8s said:

So if the 310 O climbs out at 2000 FPM.......... Wonder how this'n does? 

 

http://aircraftmerchants.com/cf/acDetail.cfm?AircraftId=AF4ED3BD-EB93-4D07-A7B1-108F46178B90

Expand  

I saw that airplane while it was for sale - very cool machine.  I wonder who has it now.

[carusoam]

If 10% more excess HP is good, then 20% more must be better?

That starts off in the direction of needing to test the set-up as a whole.  

- Does the prop match the engine's output?

- Does the plane use all the power that can be developed?

- at what point does the LB run out of tail?

 

Fortunately ...

- the liquid Rocket engine met the requirements of getting an STC for that air frame. 

- MS would be the place to find more details about the STC, and it's owner.

 

Unfortunately ...

- there are not a lot of users that you can ask about their personal experience.

 

Compare that to the STCs generated for the Missile, Rocket, Screamin' Eagle and Standing O.  Full sets of user data as if they were written for Mooney pilots.

Time to dust off the RR engine last seen in TX around 2008.  Price of fuel has gotten down to the level that this may be making sense again.

Hang on tightly,

-a-

[THill182]

I had the 310hp conversion done to my 2000 M20R with the 2-bladed toothpick prop. As far as upgrades go -- it's a no brainer. Would do it again in a second. Final cruise speeds are not much different (unless to go pedal-to-the-metal -- not something I do...) but the takeoff and climb performance are well worth it. Essentially, I can fly now in and out of any airport -- even in the mountains -- any time with reasonable fuel and useful load. Landings are also simpler, as the 2-bladed Ovation tended to float forever unless you observed very closely the proper touch-down speeds. In fact, if you read the Ovation accidents the bounced-landing-with-bent-prop accident is perhaps the most common accident for that type. This is now much harder to do with the three-bladed prop which provides a great speed break on landing. Drawback is slightly worse glide distance if prop ever stops spinning.

Anyway, no question that I'd do it again.

 

[Tyler G]

  On 11/21/2015 at 3:44 AM, L. Trotter said:

performance "number" that  the Ovation 310HP upgrade produces.

Expand  

What is the performance gain from the upgrade? With the 3 blade prop of course. 

Edited May 13, 2021 by Tyler G

[GeeBee]

Rate of climb is directly related to % increase in power. Speed is a square function. So rate of climb will be much improved, but top speed only marginally so.

 

[Niko182]

  On 5/13/2021 at 11:44 PM, Tyler G said:

What is the performance gain from the upgrade? With the 3 blade prop of course. 

Expand  

Way shorter takeoff roll, Increased climb, not really a change in cruise speed. A really nice bump in useful load for the Eagles too.

[carusoam]

T/O roll.  800’ vs. 1.2k’

Initial Climb rate over 2k’

Scales back to ordinary fuel flows during cruise.

 

Perfect for leaping over tall neighboring Class B airspace in a single bound...

no unusual wear issues or other surprises...

PP thoughts only, not a CFI or mechanic...

Best regards,

-a-

[Cruiser]

The 310 HP is a paperwork function. The engine doesn't change so 75% of 310 is 232.5 hp.

Just run the 280 HP IO550 at 85% and you should get the same performance. 

Climb and T/O performance are a function of the propeller change

[Mooney217RN]

All day long and twice on Sundays.  I'd recommend this STC to anyone with an Ovation.

[exM20K]

  On 5/14/2021 at 12:39 PM, Cruiser said:

Climb and T/O performance are a function of the propeller change

Expand  

In the Acclaim, you also go from 2500 to 2700 rpm, which contributes substantially to thrust on takeoff.  I believe Ovation is similar.

-dan

[Jerry 5TJ]

  On 11/21/2015 at 4:32 PM, DAVIDWH said:

P210 Silver Eagle Rolls Royce equipped turbine. (Forgive me for mentioning the C word on a Mooney post)

The 250B17 F2  Rolls engine climbs at 3000 ft. min., takes off in 600ft. and lands in 500 ft. (Its called reverse thrust) Fuel burn is acceptable and engine weight is reduced from 487 lbs to a mere 212 lbs.

Expand  

Good review of the positives.  

The P210 Silver Eagles I have flown (4 of them) did not quite live up to those figures.  Maybe on a cold day. And well under gross.  

The engine is lighter but the fuel is 10% heavier per gallon and you need a lot of gallons.  

And if your piston P210 was FIKI, it lost that in the conversion—no SE is certified for FIKI. 

But it is smooth and stronger than the turbocharged piston P210.   I enjoyed flying the SE.  

[Tyler G]

Is there any adjustments made to the POH regarding take-off roll, climb etc? Are those noted somewhere? Obviously you would want this data to do calculations. 

[Tyler G]

  On 5/14/2021 at 1:36 AM, Niko182 said:

Way shorter takeoff roll, Increased climb, not really a change in cruise speed. A really nice bump in useful load for the Eagles too.

Expand  

Are the specs listed somewhere? Updated POH?