MT 4 Blade Pirep

[Lucas]

I have to replace my prop after a strike

I still have to decide either to go with Hartzell 3 Blade I had before or to buy MT 4-blade. Price seems to be identical on both propellers. 

[SkepticalJohn]

The changes I've noticed going from the original Rocket 3-blade to 4 was the smoothness, weight loss and reverse thrust. The 3 was smooth but the 4 is like silk. The mechanic balanced it to 0.02 ips - which is similar to turboprop smoothness. The plane lost ~35lbs with the composite 4-blade. Right where it needs weight-loss, on the nose. I haven't found any penalties - except cost. But if you're looking at the same price for each...

If I had to do it again, even with the increased cost, I'd still pick the 4-blade MT composite.

[LANCECASPER]

3 hours ago, Lucas said:

I have to replace my prop after a strike

I still have to decide either to go with Hartzell 3 Blade I had before or to buy MT 4-blade. Price seems to be identical on both propellers. 

You should now have a third option - the Hartzell Top Prop (Acclaim Prop) was just made available for the M20M. 

@daytonabch04 can maybe provide a PIREP.

[Parker_Woodruff]

16 hours ago, Lucas said:

I have to replace my prop after a strike

I still have to decide either to go with Hartzell 3 Blade I had before or to buy MT 4-blade. Price seems to be identical on both propellers. 

Stick with the 3-blade Hartzell

[Fly Boomer]

15 hours ago, Parker_Woodruff said:

Stick with the 3-blade Hartzell

No dog in this fight, but curious why?

[Yooper Rocketman]

On 6/28/2022 at 3:13 AM, Lucas said:

I have to replace my prop after a strike

I still have to decide either to go with Hartzell 3 Blade I had before or to buy MT 4-blade. Price seems to be identical on both propellers. 

I like the 4 blade MT.  Definitely smoother than my previous 3 blade.  It was installed about 3 years ago and the peeling paint issue is still a problem.  Also, having problems due to the install (oil rag left in the end of the crank) I was able to see what customer service looks like to MT.  Send it Deland FL for the prop governor and prop hub cleaning, at MY EXPENSE, and back to Germany for the paint issue (free, except for the freight each way across the Atlantic).  

It's YOUR'S once you buy it!

Tom

[Shadrach]

42 minutes ago, Yooper Rocketman said:

I like the 4 blade MT.  Definitely smoother than my previous 3 blade.  It was installed about 3 years ago and the peeling paint issue is still a problem.  Also, having problems due to the install (oil rag left in the end of the crank) I was able to see what customer service looks like to MT.  Send it Deland FL for the prop governor and prop hub cleaning, at MY EXPENSE, and back to Germany for the paint issue (free, except for the freight each way across the Atlantic).  

It's YOUR'S once you buy it!

Tom

I don’t know that McCauly or Hartzell are much better but your story certainly does not encourage taking the risk to go MT.

[Will.iam]

What about the 3 blade MT prop? Wouldn’t that be even lighter than the 4 blade and alot lighter than the 3 blade Hartzell?

[philiplane]

After 10 years of dealing with customer's MT props...I wouldn't take one for free. Fragile, high maintenance, leaky, etc.

You are far better off with anything from Hartzell. 

Lightweight is not a good idea in some things. Magnetos, starters, propellers for example. Once you get too light, you sacrifice durability. 

Edited June 30, 2022 by philiplane

[Lucas]

MT is too expensive and has too long of a lead time. I went with a TopProp for my Acclaim one I had before. Fingers crossed. 

[201Mooniac]

I can't speak to anything but my experience but when I needed a prop replaced for my M20J about 2 years ago, the MT prop was in stock at MT in Deland, FL (as compared to 3 month delivery estimates from distributors) and both the service from MT and performance of the prop are excellent.  I understand there were some problems a number of years ago but my experience is that it has performed superior in most ways compared to the Macauley it replaced.

[PMcClure]

Bumping this thread with some questions: Any update from the users of the MT 4 blade composite prop? I spoke to flight resource yesterday and am considering this as an enhancement as we work toward firewall forward replacement. They said negative pitch (reverse) is an option for the Ovation but would require a field approval. Adds $9500 plus field approval cost. Any thoughts on that option? Also, Hartzel has a 3 blade replacement composite prop. Any pireps on that?

[exM20K]

6 minutes ago, PMcClure said:

They said negative pitch (reverse) is an option for the Ovation but would require a field approval. Adds $9500 plus field approval cost. Any thoughts on that option?

If you need reverse thrust to get stopped, you'll never get out of that field again. 

-dan

[1980Mooney]

10 minutes ago, exM20K said:

If you need reverse thrust to get stopped, you'll never get out of that field again. 

-dan

At least it will be in one piece when it lands.  That is until they have to cut the tail off to trailer it out.....

Edited September 19, 2023 by 1980Mooney

[GeeBee]

This MT went into reverse, airborne. The pilot was a co-pilot I flew with. Said MT was surprised the propeller could reverse airborne, but it did.

https://www.accidents.app/summaries/accident/20050902X01377

[SkepticalJohn]

17 minutes ago, exM20K said:

If you need reverse thrust to get stopped, you'll never get out of that field again. 

-dan

On the jet I fly at work, I'd agree. When it comes to a Mooney Rocket, I couldn't disagree more. Per MT, I have the only Mooney with reverse. My plane will leave the ground on takeoff in ~1,000 ft ground roll. It will not land that short even with my reverse.

[SkepticalJohn]

1 minute ago, GeeBee said:

This MT went into reverse, airborne. The pilot was a co-pilot I flew with. Said MT was surprised the propeller could reverse airborne, but it did.

https://www.accidents.app/summaries/accident/20050902X01377

MT fixed that flaw years ago. My Mooney's reverse has several lockouts to prevent something like this happening. 3 criteria have to be met before the lock moves and it'll go into beta: Squat switch indicates on the ground, 1400 max engine RPM, 50 knots IAS. When those are met AND you press the reverse button, only then will it go into reverse.

[PMcClure]

5 minutes ago, SkepticalJohn said:

On the jet I fly at work, I'd agree. When it comes to a Mooney Rocket, I couldn't disagree more. Per MT, I have the only Mooney with reverse. My plane will leave the ground on takeoff in ~1,000 ft ground roll. It will not land that short even with my reverse.

It's a good question though - why reverse? I can only imagine how good the short field take off roll and climb rates are with a light 310hp Ovation with a 4 blade composite prop. Would I use reverse? Probably not and I rarely fly into short fields. Would it be nice to have if you needed it, sure. Worth 10K, doubt it. But welcome any thoughts on reverse as well as other input on Hartzell 3 blade composite vs MT 4 blade vs steel and updated info on the MT performance and durability. 

[SkepticalJohn]

9 minutes ago, PMcClure said:

It's a good question though - why reverse? I can only imagine how good the short field take off roll and climb rates are with a light 310hp Ovation with a 4 blade composite prop. Would I use reverse? Probably not and I rarely fly into short fields. Would it be nice to have if you needed it, sure. Worth 10K, doubt it. But welcome any thoughts on reverse as well as other input on Hartzell 3 blade composite vs MT 4 blade vs steel and updated info on the MT performance and durability. 

My situation is similar, I rarely use reverse. But when I do use it, it's either needed or it adds another safety option. If there were a slippery runway, brake failure (one or both), or running out of a runway that should've been long enough - it'd be nice to push a button and get 310 hp of stopping power. As long as someone doesn't use it like some Cirrus folks uses their parachutes, to get somewhere they have no business being, it's a great option to have.

Not sure where the 9k or 10k folks are quoting for the MT with reverse. Mine, prop ready for my mech to install, complete with field approval, governor, shipping from Germany, was (going from memory) 32.7k. Maybe a 9k add-on to the regular MT 4 blade composite.

John

[PMcClure]

7 minutes ago, SkepticalJohn said:

My situation is similar, I rarely use reverse. But when I do use it, it's either needed or it adds another safety option. If there were a slippery runway, brake failure (one or both), or running out of a runway that should've been long enough - it'd be nice to push a button and get 310 hp of stopping power. As long as someone doesn't use it like some Cirrus folks uses their parachutes, to get somewhere they have no business being, it's a great option to have.

Not sure where the 9k or 10k folks are quoting for the MT with reverse. Mine, prop ready for my mech to install, complete with field approval, governor, shipping from Germany, was (going from memory) 32.7k. Maybe a 9k add-on to the regular MT 4 blade composite.

John

quoted 24.5 +9 + field approval for reverse. 

[1980Mooney]

1 hour ago, PMcClure said:

It's a good question though - why reverse? I can only imagine how good the short field take off roll and climb rates are with a light 310hp Ovation with a 4 blade composite prop. Would I use reverse? Probably not and I rarely fly into short fields. Would it be nice to have if you needed it, sure. Worth 10K, doubt it. But welcome any thoughts on reverse as well as other input on Hartzell 3 blade composite vs MT 4 blade vs steel and updated info on the MT performance and durability. 

Your Ovation has superior stopping ability compared to the Rocket 305 and Missile 300 conversions. They retain the single piston brake calipers found on the lighter J and original K. They are marginal at best with the added weight of the TSIO-520 or IO-550.
 

And if the Rocket/Missile is loaded up anywhere near the MGW of 3,200 lbs and/or you land a little too fast they are less than awe inspiring.  Sometimes it doesn’t feel like the brakes are doing anything - like they are fading - as the runway exit which the Tower wants you to exit rapidly approaches. 

[exM20K]

The motor mounts are designed for the engine to pull the plane.  How does pushing with the reversed prop affect the mounts? Nobody knows….  
-dan

[Aerodon]

I have a spare new chrome 4-bladed MT spinner for a Mooney if anyone is interested......

[EricJ]

19 minutes ago, exM20K said:

The motor mounts are designed for the engine to pull the plane.  How does pushing with the reversed prop affect the mounts? Nobody knows….  
-dan

If you pull the power off significantly at reasonable airspeeds, e.g., cruise, descent, whatever, the prop causes a ton of drag and pushes against the airframe and slows it down.     Same thing.    Many people push against the prop to put the airplane back in a hangar, even when it's resisting against a door track or something.    If it was a problem I think it would have shown up long ago.

[exM20K]

25 minutes ago, EricJ said:

If you pull the power off significantly at reasonable airspeeds, e.g., cruise, descent, whatever, the prop causes a ton of drag and pushes against the airframe and slows it down.     Same thing.    Many people push against the prop to put the airplane back in a hangar, even when it's resisting against a door track or something.    If it was a problem I think it would have shown up long ago.

decelerating a 3000# airplane from 75 ->0 in 1000 feet is an entirely different load than pushing on the prop or going to idle in flight.