kris_adams Posted June 17, 2016 Report Posted June 17, 2016 Hi Everyone, So while I was visiting my local friendly avionics shop last week for the ADSB upgrade & failed transponder replacement, I put a deposit down on the EI-CGR-30P and EI-CGR-30C. I have a few 40 year old gauges that are ready to be overhauled and I figured this was the right time to pull the trigger. Why did I do this instead of the MVP-50P? Since these will be primary gauges, I want them to be on the left side of the center stack. I have a JPI 730 (coming out) and a blank (former ADF indicator)-so I have the real estate for this. Lastly, this doesn't mess up my future plan of a 10" Dynon Skyview that I'll hopefully be able to put in a few years down the road. It takes a month or two for EI to configure the gauge so it'll be a while before I can post pic's. I'm pretty excited to get it install. Kris 2
kris_adams Posted June 17, 2016 Author Report Posted June 17, 2016 Btw, the owner of precision avionic's has an older 182 with a crazy panel: G500, couple Aspens, L3 transponder, 750, and an EI CG-30P (that I got to play with of course). Serious candy!
Piloto Posted June 20, 2016 Report Posted June 20, 2016 I went with the EI UBG-16. Very happy with it. In addition to EGT/CHT it reads voltage, OAT and fuel flow with large easy to read characters. I am happy with the M20J factory gauges. Proven reliable for over 30 years. José 1
Marauder Posted June 20, 2016 Report Posted June 20, 2016 I have a set of EI products in my plane, including a FP-5L that was installed way back in the 1990s. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 1
tony Posted June 21, 2016 Report Posted June 21, 2016 I installed the MVP-50 and have been satisfied since the first day. Glad I chose that over the JPI 2
orionflt Posted June 21, 2016 Report Posted June 21, 2016 37 minutes ago, tony said: I installed the MVP-50 and have been satisfied since the first day. Glad I chose that over the JPI me too Brian 1
kris_adams Posted June 21, 2016 Author Report Posted June 21, 2016 Thanks for the feedback! I upgraded my JPI to a 730 fuel flow shortly after buying 79H. It is reassuring to hear some great feedback on the EI products. Now if they'd just hurry up and get in!
macosxuser Posted June 30, 2016 Report Posted June 30, 2016 (edited) I've had both JPI and EI products in a variety of airplanes. For my E, I picked up a EDM930, but that was based on the assumption of a complete panel recut. I've use a EDM930 right now in another airplane I fly, and my Citabria has a UGB-16. I plan on putting a CGR-30 in the Citabria when panel upgrade time comes around, but for now it stays as is. I guess my point is, both are good products, and whichever one fits into your installation better is the one to pick. I don't like EI's current connector scheme, the barrels have proven to be finicky in the installations I've dealt with. Edited June 30, 2016 by macosxuser
Piloto Posted June 30, 2016 Report Posted June 30, 2016 10 minutes ago, macosxuser said: I've had both JPI and EI products in a variety of airplanes. For my E, I picked up a EDM930, but that was based on the assumption of a complete panel recut. I've use a EDM930 right now in another airplane I fly, and my Citabria has a UGB-16. I plan on putting a CGR-30 in the Citabria when panel upgrade time comes around, but for now it stays as is. I guess my point is, both are good products, and whichever one fits into your installation better is the one to pick. I don't like EI's current connector scheme, the barrels have proven to be finicky in the installations I've dealt with. When I first installed my UGB-16 I had some issues with the barrel connectors but finally got it resolved. The Allen wrench screw need to be real tight. You can test this by trying to pull out the wire. At every annual I retighten them. The advantage of the barrel connector is the long term conductivity needed for a 1 deg reading resolution. On mine the EGT and CHT readings are very stable allowing for one degree adjustment resolution. José
donkaye, MCFI Posted July 1, 2016 Report Posted July 1, 2016 On June 29, 2016 at 6:08 PM, macosxuser said: I've had both JPI and EI products in a variety of airplanes. For my E, I picked up a EDM930, but that was based on the assumption of a complete panel recut. I've use a EDM930 right now in another airplane I fly, and my Citabria has a UGB-16. I plan on putting a CGR-30 in the Citabria when panel upgrade time comes around, but for now it stays as is. I guess my point is, both are good products, and whichever one fits into your installation better is the one to pick. I don't like EI's current connector scheme, the barrels have proven to be finicky in the installations I've dealt with. I didn't like them either as they were constantly failing. I had them all removed, went back to the clip ons, and have not had a problem since.
donkaye, MCFI Posted July 1, 2016 Report Posted July 1, 2016 On June 20, 2016 at 6:00 PM, tony said: I installed the MVP-50 and have been satisfied since the first day. Glad I chose that over the JPI So much more information is available. The longer I have mine the happier I am with that decision.
kris_adams Posted November 4, 2016 Author Report Posted November 4, 2016 79H is in the shop getting the EI-CG30P and C installed. Hope it is only a week or two. I'll give updates as soon as I have them. I also am having the CIES fuel senders installed (from FuelLevel) at the same time. Of course time seems to be dragging by waiting for them to get done.
fuellevel Posted November 5, 2016 Report Posted November 5, 2016 We are waiting for that initial Mooneyspace report as well - lots of Mooney sender sets now out there. STC will be signed on Monday - so the senders will be TSO'd and STC'd We need to work out the Millivolt output for those owners with resistance Aerospace Logic gauges already installed. We know the people @ EI and they are good. But we are working more closely with JPI to enhance fuel quantity warnings. JPI will annunciate if the fuel totalizer and fuel remaining are off by 5 gallons 2
Recommended Posts