M20D6607U Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 Hi Gang! I'm replacing my propeller and wanted to hear from the group on experience with Hartzell and McCauley, two and three blades. I'm told by my prop shop, the McCauley 3 blade is about as fast as the 2 blade and is not much more money. He says McCauley is easier to deal with too. What has been your experience. Thanks for the responses! Ron Quote
Hank Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 (edited) I like my Hartzell! It's smooth, I run 5-10 mph faster than book, and all I've ever done is pull the spinner and grease it at annual the last eight years. Edited March 9, 2016 by Hank 2 Quote
flight2000 Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 (edited) Another vote for Hartzell - Top Prop installed on my 67E. No issues with support from Hartzell for me or my mechanic, so no idea what the bias is based on from your shop... Cheers, Brian Edited March 9, 2016 by flight2000 1 Quote
M20D6607U Posted March 9, 2016 Author Report Posted March 9, 2016 Any big speed differences Between the 2 & 3 blade? Quote
Hank Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 38 minutes ago, M20D6607U said: Any big speed differences Between the 2 & 3 blade? Book speed for my C is 161-164 mph with a 2-blade prop. The Hartzell 3-blade flies me around at 172 mph true at 9000-10,000 msl. So much for 3-blades being slow . . . Quote
Rookie Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 1 hour ago, Hank said: I like my Hartzell! It's smooth, I run 5-10 mph faster than book, and all I've ever done is pull the spinner and grease it at annual the last eight years. This is a good looking piece! 2 Quote
carusoam Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 Two blades are often faster in level flight. Less 'flat plate' surface area / wind resistance. Three blades are often better at climbing and getting off the runway. The only way (best way?) to know would be to get actual data from an owner with the same plane, prop and engine combo. Fortunately MS has a lot of owners with real data. Some are actual aero engineers... One of those guys went with a two blade, composite, European built prop on his J. Best regards, -a- 1 Quote
nels Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 What is the weight difference three to two blade? Quote
carusoam Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 Good point, Nels... Hartzell builds the same TopProp in three different weights... 1) Thick hearty blades. Strong enough to for a flight school. 2) Thin light blades. Strong and light for the private owner. 3) Composite. Extra light, good for eliminating the Charlie weight in the back. Best regards, -a- 1 Quote
Hank Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 The OP, like me, has no need of charlie weights. Just one of the many benefits of flying a short body . . . 1 Quote
DrBill Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 I've got a Hartzel 3 blade and like it.. Just had it O/H with the engine. Came with the plane when I got it 5 years ago. Bill 2 Quote
carusoam Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 I have to review my C's data, I have a fuzzy old memory of a small block of lead attached to a structure in the tail..? Without Charlie weights, how are you going to install the FIKI AC system in that fine C? Best regards, -a- Quote
jamesm Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 The newer Hartzell 2 blade Scimitar/ Top Prop is heavier the original Hartzell 2 blade prop not sure how it the compares to the McCauley . As least for My year of the C model The Scimitar removes the RPM restrictions ( Avoid continuous operation range of 2000-2300 RPM ). As I understand it the 3 prop blade is the same length as 2 blade if true.... stating the obvious... you are going be adding weight and reducing your payload weight of the airplane, maybe the extra weight plenty versus performance is worth it. I like my 2 blade scimitar prop other than after I first putting it on it seem like it was that was finding every lose pebble within miles of the prop and seem like it didn't matter that I swept around blades before starting the engine. James '67C 2 Quote
Norian Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 Sorry guys,learning here.What is a charlie weight.???? Quote
Ron McBride Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 Charlie weights are lead weights added in the tail for balance. Usually found on the K's and newer. Ron Quote
Hank Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 Just now, N803RM said: Charlie weights are lead weights added in the tail for balance. Usually found on the K's and newer. Ron Used to help balance the heavier 6-cylinder engines. We don't have that problem. Even with the heavier 3-blade, I still have 969lb useful load. But yes, blade length is the same as for 2-blade props (74"). 1 Quote
carusoam Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 Additional info on Charlie weights... 1) They give flexibility in Aircraft design to allow various equipment to be put on board or taken out depending on what the owner wants. 2) The long body Mooney has a few blocks of lead that can be exchanged for an installed O2 system, AC system, and FIKI tanks. 3) The lead blocks are heavy in their current location. Moving them further aft would allow them to be smaller but would generate a less desirable rotational momentum. Important thought for stall/spin recovery. 4) I have a lot of lead blocks. None of the nice other features... Best regards, -a- 1 Quote
Norian Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 Thank you very much guys,new things learned 1 Quote
M20F Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 Jerry Manthey has a write up in Decmber 2015 MAPA Log covering two versus three bladed props. His opinion is stick with the two bladed and that is in part because the crankshaft is balanced for a two bladed prop. Personally I don't see any advantage to a three bladed prop on a 200HP normally aspirated engine and a lot of down sides (weight, expense, slower cruise,etc.). 3 Quote
M20F Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 15 hours ago, Hank said: Book speed for my C is 161-164 mph with a 2-blade prop. The Hartzell 3-blade flies me around at 172 mph true at 9000-10,000 msl. So much for 3-blades being slow . . . That doesn't tell you anything other than your plane is faster than book. It doesn't tell you that if you hung a two bladed prop it would be slower than your three bladed prop. 1 Quote
mike_elliott Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 15 hours ago, Hank said: Book speed for my C is 161-164 mph with a 2-blade prop. The Hartzell 3-blade flies me around at 172 mph true at 9000-10,000 msl. So much for 3-blades being slow . . . You put a 2 blade on that C and it will scream! Don Maxwell had a C owner swear by his 3 blade on how silky smooth and fast it was. Came time to have it resealed, Don took the owner to lunch while his guys pulled the 3 blade to send off to the prop shop. While they were at lunch, Don had them hang his 2 blade ferry prop on it and took the owner for a ride. The owner ordered a new 2 blade soon after. Just sayin'..... 3 Quote
mike_elliott Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 4 minutes ago, M20F said: Jerry Manthey has a write up in Decmber 2015 MAPA Log covering two versus three bladed props. His opinion is stick with the two bladed and that is in part because the crankshaft is balanced for a two bladed prop. Personally I don't see any advantage to a three bladed prop on a 200HP normally aspirated engine and a lot of down sides (weight, expense, slower cruise,etc.). a 4 cylinder fires at 180 degree intervals, like the opposing blades on a 2 blade, while a 6 cylinder fires at 60 deg intervals, like a 3 blade. Perhaps this harmonic makes for a better balance if you don't fight it. 1 Quote
47U Posted March 10, 2016 Report Posted March 10, 2016 If you frequent short fields, the three-blade may help bleed off airspeed and assist in getting slowed down. My weight difference between the two-blade Hartzell and three-blade McCauley is 16 lbs.. The McCauley was installed 26 years ago, has been overhauled twice, and the prop/polished spinner still run and look great. There was a nuisance vibe after install, but it turned out installing landing light cover cured it. Go figure. As Mike Elliot points out, some have not been as lucky. 1 Quote
xcrmckenna Posted May 27, 2017 Report Posted May 27, 2017 I'm starting to do some research on props. Looking at the spects the Hartzell Top Prop two blades and hub weighs 62-64lbs. And the MT three blade prop and hub weighs 46lbs. Is that correct? Or am I missing something? Quote
carusoam Posted May 27, 2017 Report Posted May 27, 2017 (edited) There are benefits to composite things... There are benefits for old standard things... I went with the TopProp and selected the thinner blades for minimizing weight... There is plenty of experience with the composite blade construction as they have been around for more than five years already. Topprop also offers a composite structure, see if you can find that. They are easy to call and talk to on the phone. They don't mind answering emails. MT has an office in Florida. They are easy to talk with also. Their STC wasn't quite finished when I needed a new prop a few years ago... I had two fears for the composite blades... erosion in IMC, not much of an issue when protected on the leading edge properly... no fly wheel effect, has not been much of an issue over the years... Best regards, -a- Edited May 27, 2017 by carusoam 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.