MT 3 blade composite prop

[milotron]

hi, apologies is this has been discussed already, but searching didn't turn anything up.

 

Anybody have on of these 3 blade MT composite props on a K ? Looking for performance or sound improvement feedback if anybody has first ( or second ) hand knowledge of this.

It is an MTV-12-D evidently.

 

 

iain

 

[peevee]

3 blade is for wimps, go 4 blade like @aviatoreb 

 

I'd be concerned about that paint erosion if I were him, but I have heard only good things about the MT props. There's a K on field with one, sure looks nice.

[milotron]

4 blade is awesome,  but likely far too much prop for my lowly TSIO360MB.

 

I did notice that erosion of the finish also.

 

iain

[Smroot]

I have this prop on my Encore.  It replaced a two blade Hartzell before I owned it so I can't personally compare the two.  It is smooth and improves climb performance but I think it slows me down.  I also have the paint peeling issue as in the photo.  

[milotron]

Nice!  What do you see for cruise speeds?

 

 

iain

[peevee]

2 minutes ago, Smroot said:

 I also have the paint peeling issue as in the photo.  

boy that would irritate me. It's pretty rare to see that on metal props.

[Smroot]

I'd say 5kts slower.  

 

[milotron]

My TKS knocks me down a bit already. That would likely put me 10kts under book speeds.

 

[kortopates]

Great prop, but be aware it adds new challenges to R & R'ing the lower cowling. Erik could give you a first hand account since you'll be in the same predicament with 3 blades.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[milotron]

36 minutes ago, kortopates said:

Great prop, but be aware it adds new challenges to R & R'ing the lower cowling. Erik could give you a first hand account since you'll be in the same predicament with 3 blades.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you have this on your 252?  

 

iain

[carusoam]

Expect some efficiency from the blade design, but the old blade design was pretty good...

the large chord paddles probably show up as a negative on the ASI....  exposed surface area.

improvements should be expected in getting off the ground and climb rate...

The engine still needs to drive the excess aero-efficiency that is available...  FF...

Will your plane benefit from a much lighter prop? (Mine would)

Is there a difference in blade length?

Best regards,

-a-

[KSMooniac]

I know their prop that is approved for the J is a smaller diameter than any of the metal options. I expect the K version is as well.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[milotron]

Anybody have a sense of the cost of these?

[aviatoreb]

I think they are supposed to have improved their paint process.  But separately the nickel leading edge is a much deeper sheath and substantial than the original stainless steel edge.   

As for performance, while 4 is going to be slower than 3, all things being equal, I don't think my install slowed me down but sped me up "slightly".  Why?  My guess - The old mcauley 3 blade it replaced was an old school design aerodynamically competing against this modern scimtar shaped 4 blade.  ALSO, not to be understated is the change of cg was significant rearward, as 35lbs came off the nose.  It changes a nose heavy airplane to a more centered cg airplane - which also makes for nice benefits in the "road feel" when hand flying, it feels a lot lighter.

And for sure climb improved a bit too.

[aviatoreb]

49 minutes ago, milotron said:

Anybody have a sense of the cost of these?

Yes I know how much....- but I am embarrassed to say.  :-O   You know what they say, "if you gotta ask...."

Cost is the big downside.

Sound, cg, cruise speed, climb, road feel, looks, ground clearance, durability, sound, and a few more things, all better.  Cost not so much.

[milotron]

4 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

Yes I know how much....- but I am embarrassed to say.  :-O   You know what they say, "if you gotta ask...."

Cost is the big downside.

Sound, cg, cruise speed, climb, road feel, looks, ground clearance, durability, sound, and a few more things, all better.  Cost not so much.

I suspected as much ...but soo pretty!

Did you come from a 2 or 3 blade? Rockets are all 3 I believe, correct?

[peevee]

5 minutes ago, milotron said:

I suspected as much ...but soo pretty!

Did you come from a 2 or 3 blade? Rockets are all 3 I believe, correct?

Correct. And a longer 3 blade than the stock k 2 blade, lol

[DonMuncy]

3 blade MT. If my memory is working properly, I think about 14 AMU. I love mine. Very much quieter, smoother, lighter, better take off and climb performance, and better landing speed drag for slowing down. I can not discern any cruise speed decrease, but I admit I do not have any really good data to back that up.

[aviatoreb]

1 hour ago, milotron said:

I suspected as much ...but soo pretty!

Did you come from a 2 or 3 blade? Rockets are all 3 I believe, correct?

Thanks!  And you know what they say, "its better to look good than to feel good ... and you look marvelous!"

Rockets have 3 blades because you need a lot of blade surface area to suck up 305hp, and 2 blades therefore would be too long.  Even the 3 blade is very long and you have a good bit less ground clearance than a standard M20k 2 blade.  The 4 blade you get back the original m20k tsio360 ground clearacne and a tad bit more I think.

 

[aviatoreb]

1 hour ago, DonMuncy said:

3 blade MT. If my memory is working properly, I think about 14 AMU. I love mine. Very much quieter, smoother, lighter, better take off and climb performance, and better landing speed drag for slowing down. I can not discern any cruise speed decrease, but I admit I do not have any really good data to back that up.

Ok...ok I'll let on but don't think I'm silly ... promise.

I can't remember exactly but I think STC and prop started at something like 17 or 18 with new prop governor too?  But it was a bit more because I had to custom pay for a 337 field approval that they handled for me.  Then I opted for the upcharge for the nickel treatment - which I think is very worthwhile to protect the investment.  So all in...it was 21-22ish?

[Guest]

I have a 3 blade MT on my 400 and am very happy with it, 38 pounds lighter than the Hartzell.  It's hard to say if it's smoother with 8 cylinders.  I have had no paint issues, I do wish I did the nickel leading edges.

Clarence

[kortopates]

Do you have this on your 252?  
 
iain

No, not yet but considering it for when the day comes. But also concerned about the added challenges with the cowling. I like that I can do it by myself right now. Mooney changed the height of the lower cowling on the long body's to handle the 3 blade props.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DonMuncy]

I forgot to mention. The 3 blade prop makes it a little more difficult to remove the lower cowling, but not much.

[kortopates]

Correct. And a longer 3 blade than the stock k 2 blade, lol

Yes, and by about 2 inches if I recall right. No porpoising for you!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[milotron]

11 minutes ago, kortopates said:

No, not yet but considering it for when the day comes. But also concerned about the added challenges with the cowling. I like that I can do it by myself right now. Mooney changed the height of the lower cowling on the long body's to handle the 3 blade props.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is what I am thinking. If/when by 2 blade prop requires major work or replacement this will be the route to go.

 

iain