MT 3 blade composite prop

[kortopates]

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

Can you manage it alone or do you need a helper?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DonMuncy]

7 minutes ago, kortopates said:

Can you manage it alone or do you need a helper?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can do it by myself.

[kortopates]

I can do it by myself.

Good to hear. Do you slide it under from the side, rotating into position or are you somehow still able to bring it in under the prop?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DonMuncy]

Just now, kortopates said:

Good to hear. Do you slide it under from the side, rotating into position or are you somehow still able to bring it in under the prop?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It comes out the front, but you have to yaw it around some to clear. I have a little roll-around stool that is just the right height. I slide the stool under the cowl, undo the cam-locks, drop the cowl down onto the stool and then wiggle it right left, up and down and sneak it out.

[aviatoreb]

7 hours 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

...its a pain.  But it was a pain before.  Roughly a similar pain with 4 as it was with 3.

[peevee]

11 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

...its a pain.  But it was a pain before.  Roughly a similar pain with 4 as it was with 3.

I hadn't actually thought about it, how do you get the cowl off with a 4 blade? We can barely manage with the three!

[FoxMike]

I have an MT on order.  The STC says it weighs 63 lbs including the spinner.  The weight and balance of the Mooney shows the installed weight of the spinner and prop to be 80 lbs.net change 17lbs.  Someone said his Bravo lost 38lbs. during the change.  I wonder how that happened.  Am I missing some information?

[flumag]

I have it since 5 years on my K. 

[gsxrpilot]

That is beautiful. I need to have one for my K as well.

[Guest]

On September 2, 2017 at 1:09 PM, FoxMike said:

I have an MT on order.  The STC says it weighs 63 lbs including the spinner.  The weight and balance of the Mooney shows the installed weight of the spinner and prop to be 80 lbs.net change 17lbs.  Someone said his Bravo lost 38lbs. during the change.  I wonder how that happened.  Am I missing some information?

My Comanche 400 gained 38 pounds of useful load when I installed an MT propeller.  The original Hartzell on my Comanche was a steel hence the weight saving.

Clarence

[Emmet]

On 2.9.2017 at 7:09 PM, FoxMike said:

I have an MT on order.  The STC says it weighs 63 lbs including the spinner.  The weight and balance of the Mooney shows the installed weight of the spinner and prop to be 80 lbs.net change 17lbs.  Someone said his Bravo lost 38lbs. during the change.  I wonder how that happened.  Am I missing some information?

Lloyd lost quite some airspeed with his and therefore didn't use it for his RTW trip. Could you probably do some tests before and after the installation of yours to see if this prooves for other installations also ?

[CCowboy]

I installed the 3 blade MT prop back in 2008 when I rebuilt the engine in my 79' M20K-231.  Is is 17 lbs lighter than the McCaully prop it replaced.  Positives: improved take off and climb performance ( I generally fly in the intermountain west).  No decrease in cruise performance.  Less vibration, smoother.  Negatives, really need 2 persons to take off the lower cowl if you want to assure you don't have a chance of scraping the cowl flaps or back of the blades.  

The stainless steel leading edges have not acquired any stone nicks.  There is some wrinkling of the outer material at the roots, the factory calls this "root shrinkage"  and is cosmetic and not at risk of any damage or material failure.  

The cost in 2008 was around $10,000, but suspect more now.  I am very happy with that investment.

[milotron]

55 minutes ago, CCowboy said:

I installed the 3 blade MT prop back in 2008 when I rebuilt the engine in my 79' M20K-231.  Is is 17 lbs lighter than the McCaully prop it replaced.  Positives: improved take off and climb performance ( I generally fly in the intermountain west). 

Sounds like no downside aside from costs.  Did you have the 2 blade prop on previously?

 

iain

[LANCECASPER]

Don Maxwell did a seminar at MAPA yesterday. One of the things he mentioned were MT 3 blade props and how everyone's initial impression is great and it actually works. However he showed pictures of how these are not holding up very well in the field - they are developing some cracks and the company is very slow in providing replacement parts - many months AOG. He showed a picture of one where the cracks were pretty dramatic - if I remember correctly you're only allowed 2mm depth of the crack to remain airworthy and this one the crack was 9mm deep. After a few years experience in seeing how these hold up he says he likes metal airplanes and metal props.

[Txbyker]

Haven’t heard about the cracks.  There is a large adoption rate for turbines currently.  I am putting a 4 blade on in a couple of weeks.  MS’ser, Cirrus guys all reporting good things.  My 9 rear old 3 blade Hartzell will be overhauled and repainted if anyone is interested.

Russ

[gsxrpilot]

8 hours ago, Emmet said:

Lloyd lost quite some airspeed with his and therefore didn't use it for his RTW trip. Could you probably do some tests before and after the installation of yours to see if this prooves for other installations also ?

I think on later reflection, Brian said it wasn't the prop that cause the loss of airspeed. His 231 is just slower than book. He's looking for other reasons.

[Jerry 5TJ]

13 minutes ago, Txbyker said:

.....There is a large adoption rate for turbines currently....

Russ

Yes, the PA46 and TBM and PC12 folks are migrating to composite bladed props.  My P46T has a 4 blade composite Hartzell.  Steel leading edges seem to hold up better than aluminum.   Smooth operation. 

[LANCECASPER]

2 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

I think on later reflection, Brian said it wasn't the prop that cause the loss of airspeed. His 231 is just slower than book. He's looking for other reasons.

I know this is controversial, and sorry to disappoint, but the three blade MT prop performs worse in cruise than any of the five props that Mooney tested on the 252/Encore. Only if you were at a short field and need the take-off/climb difference would it be worth it. (Or if you lived in Europe and the noise dictated the 3 blade MT.) It does look awesome standing still though.

Mooney Encore ARTICLE- AOPA.pdf

Flying magazine article on Mooney Encore-prop highlighted.pdf

[flumag]

I think over all a good investment to have an MT 3 blade prop. As pro I see: weight, better performance and smoother run. But I also see a down site beside the price. I was flying just some days ago the North Atlantic again and sometime you cant avoid a bit ice. This is something that the prop dont like that much. Good message is it's easy to repair.  Maybe I also  have a "Monday blade" since one blade seems to have more problems than the other two.

 

[gsxrpilot]

6 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

I know this is controversial, and sorry to disappoint, but the three blade MT prop performs worse in cruise than any of the five props that Mooney tested on the 252/Encore. Only if you were at a short field and need the take-off/climb difference would it be worth it. (Or if you lived in Europe and the noise dictated the 3 blade MT.) It does look awesome standing still though.

Mooney Encore ARTICLE- AOPA.pdf

Flying magazine article on Mooney Encore-prop highlighted.pdf

Thanks for posting the articles. I hadn't seen those. 

[johncuyle]

The MT mentioned in those articles, is it the current model? I only started looking into it recently but MT's website indicates there's an old blade design and a new blade design. I've got the McCauley hot  prop and the boots cost quite a bit of speed according to the AFMS. I'd be looking at the MT hot prop to replace it and haven't seen any information on how much impact it has on the MT. The difference described in the articles is within the difference for the standard and hot McCauley. My 231 cruise is average at best to begin with.

[Guillaume]

17 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

I know this is controversial, and sorry to disappoint, but the three blade MT prop performs worse in cruise than any of the five props that Mooney tested on the 252/Encore. Only if you were at a short field and need the take-off/climb difference would it be worth it. (Or if you lived in Europe and the noise dictated the 3 blade MT.) It does look awesome standing still though.

When Mooney tested the MT prop in the late 90's it was the old blades design. The new scimitar blades design release in the early 00's supposedly improved overall performance.

[Emmet]

20 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

I think on later reflection, Brian said it wasn't the prop that cause the loss of airspeed. His 231 is just slower than book. He's looking for other reasons.

I thought he mentioned that cruise went up again after putting the old prop back on 

[LANCECASPER]

6 hours ago, Guillaume said:

When Mooney tested the MT prop in the late 90's it was the old blades design. The new scimitar blades design release in the early 00's supposedly improved overall performance.

Thanks for the update. It looks like the newer MT is 2 knots faster in cruise than the first MT version (which was 6 knots slower than the standard 252 prop according to the articles).  

When they are new they look great, but it looks by the pictures like they don't hold up as well as the standard prop though so you'd have to figure that into the long term cost.

[LANCECASPER]

4 hours ago, Emmet said:

I thought he mentioned that cruise went up again after putting the old prop back on 

From the Encore testing in the late 90's Mooney discovered how efficient in cruise that the two blade prop was. One thing that came out of that testing was the Ovation 2 with a two blade prop - a nice 7 knot bump in cruise performance, but not so good for take-off and climb though.