Jump to content

Request Insight into Upgrade Path and Value


RogueOne

Recommended Posts

Looks like vertical mount would fit there if we “lose” the strikefinder.  I am being convinced based on losing gauges to failure reality.  I see no place for strikefinder without a major panel redo that IS NOT HAPPENING (my final answer) :)  I went from NO on 900 to yes, but someday lol...

Thanks for the convincing/voices of reason...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like vertical mount would fit there if we “lose” the strikefinder.  I am being convinced based on losing gauges to failure reality.  I see no place for strikefinder without a major panel redo that IS NOT HAPPENING (my final answer)   I went from NO on 900 to yes, but someday lol...
Thanks for the convincing/voices of reason...

I did a 930 when I did my panel, precisely to save the incremental bleeding due to dying factory gauges and sensors. I’m very happy with it.

My factory fuel level senders were working fine so I drew the line there. They are accurate enough and the totalizer is dead nuts accurate. I know within a gallon how much is in each tank.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, RogueOne said:

Looks like vertical mount would fit there if we “lose” the strikefinder.  I am being convinced based on losing gauges to failure reality.  I see no place for strikefinder without a major panel redo that IS NOT HAPPENING (my final answer) :)  I went from NO on 900 to yes, but someday lol...

Thanks for the convincing/voices of reason...

I’d slide the backup AI to the right replacing the fuel totalizer. The 900 placed vertical extending into the old gauge strip location should work very well. 
 

...thinking by he end of this thread we’ll have you talked into a nice new panel with a g3x ;)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’d slide the backup AI to the right replacing the fuel totalizer. The 900 placed vertical extending into the old gauge strip location should work very well. 

The 900 does everything the fuel totalizer does. I’d pull it and sell it, there is plenty of old timer CBs who will need spares for their outdated equipment. Ditto for engine gauges.


Tom
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ArtVandelay said:


The 900 does everything the fuel totalizer does. I’d pull it and sell it, there is plenty of old timer CBs who will need spares for their outdated equipment. Ditto for engine gauges.


Tom

I agree, the 900 being primary there is no question it can replace the totalizer. However, I’m not so sure about the 830 being a legal replacement for that sensor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MIm20c said:

I’d slide the backup AI to the right replacing the fuel totalizer. The 900 placed vertical extending into the old gauge strip location should work very well.

^^^^^^ This is a good recommendation. 

With a Missile, you may find yourself flying farther (in the same amount of time as the E) and a bit higher. I would really want to keep the Strikefinder since weather can "happen" rather quickly in the summer.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, RogueOne said:

Looks like vertical mount would fit there if we “lose” the strikefinder.  I am being convinced based on losing gauges to failure reality.  I see no place for strikefinder without a major panel redo that IS NOT HAPPENING (my final answer) :)  I went from NO on 900 to yes, but someday lol...

Thanks for the convincing/voices of reason...

As an avionics junkie,  I could spend your money a million different ways. Instead, I will provide considerations. I would not look at this as a short term solution for now if you have ANY future plans for avionics upgrades. I have learned that if I had planned for my future avionics earlier, I would have saved money by not repaying for work a second time. There is one exception, the engine monitor.

> You are flying behind an expensive engine. I would make sure whatever monitor solution you select has the ability to show all critical data points in flight and has the ability to download the data for someone to look at. The folks at Savvy have helped me numerous times interpreting strange engine data. And for the 830 to 900 comparison - I originally installed an 830 only to pull it 18 months later for a 900. Why? When a factory gauge fails, it is a PITA to pull the gauge and send it out for a repair (plus pricey).

> As mentioned above, the StormScope is a real time tool and regardless if you are flying around thunderstorms or not, it has value. My WX-500 will show real time strike activity of building cumulus clouds. People think that a StormScope only shows thunderstorms. It doesn't. If a cloud is building into a thunderstorm, I will see those strikes and it indicates the potential for turbulence associated with the building cumulus cloud.

Good luck on the decision.

Avionics Junkie

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ArtVandelay said:


Depends if it’s listed as required equipment I think, I replaced mine with 830, no problems.


Tom

I think your J had fuel pressure?  Normally one or the other is required or at least a good idea. I don’t think Rogue’s panel has pressure info. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was the fella that suggested the primary 930, I think it would give you a lot of panel space.  But let me also give you the counterpoint.  There are failure modes of the 930 that leave you without any gauges at all.  To be certified as primary the system must have a small digital strip called a Remote Alert Display (RAD).  The RAD will read out MP and RPM, and other parameters if they become critical, if the main display goes down. However, if you ever find yourself in a circumstance where you must switch the Master off, you lose both.  Of course the same thing would happen with all the electrically powered gauges on your panel. There has also been a problem with an autodim circuit that was installed in the later model 930’s.  Some of the autodims would dim both the screen and the RAD to black. There was some discussion of the problem on Beechtalk. I recently sent mine in to have the unit modified so I could use CiES senders (digital). When it came back I had the problem. It did not appear to be recoverable, in other words I could not hit the DIM button and then brighten the display, or correct the problem by resetting the breaker, it would just dim to black again.  We sent it back, JPI reprogrammed it, then it dimmed again the first evening I used it.  After that though, the problem has not yet re-appeared. Hopefully JPI has the problem corrected by now.

I have never had a problem flying or landing the plane with these events.  Just know that it is possible to have a failure of all the gauges.  If I had to do the install over, I might leave that MP gauge over on the right side of the panel.  Might never need to use it in the life of the plane, but then again...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, things are not going good for me on the engine monitoring front.

I still have 1 estimate to come in, but all others have been incredibly expensive for an EDM900.  I cannot even fathom how they give me the quotes with a strait face.  EDM advertised @ 30 hours to install... to be safe  lets say it will take 60 and they are charging 100.00 per hour.  That would be 6000.00 for install and 5k for the unit.. 11 grand ish .. I would do that in a heartbeat.  However the quotes have come in at 20K +

I looked into an upgrade to an Insight G3 from my 603.  However that kit is 3500.00 and has a TON of sensors which puts me right back into HOURS and HOURS of labor.  At that point I would just do the EDM 900 and rid myself of the old gauges. 

BUT, I had the idea .... what if I just replaced the unreadable 603 head that has no data acquisition  ( insight says they do NOT repair them anymore) with a G3 display, which is compatible with all the existing sensors AND can log data.  That would be a SIMPLE head change.   So I asked Insight about purchasing JUST a G3 display ( and all new CHT sensors) and was  told that they dont Sell just the head with a few choice sensors.  The only thing they are willing to do is sell me an entire kit...  I cant believe it.  I cannot see why anyone would choose such a kit over the EDM900 when there is very little money to be saved in doing so.  They would rather shun me than help me out and secure me for future purchases.  I mean If I had the G3 in my plane, it would make sense to just start expanding the sensors going to it over time.  IE: perhaps I decide I want to feed it fuel flow, so I buy their sensor and install it. 

 

So here you have a company that will not support their older units and are unwilling to offer an affordable plug and play replacement for those units.  All the while pricing their inferior solution right up there with much much superior units. (edm900 vs G3 capabilities are leaps apart)

I am at the moment VERY put off by Insight, so much so that now I do not even want to purchase the replacement CHT sensor that I need if I just stay with the 603 till the adsb gold run by the avionics shops dies down.

Edited by Austintatious
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Austintatious said:

So here you have a company that will not support their older units and are unwilling to offer an affordable plug and play replacement for those units.  All the while pricing their inferior solution right up there with much much superior units. (edm900 vs G3 capabilities are leaps apart)

Remember that the guys that sell parts for certified airplanes have a lot of regulatory stuff to comply with.   They may want to sell you stuff, but they're only allowed to sell it in certain configurations for certain airplanes, or they'd have to spend a ton of money recertifying for that change.

So, it may not be the vendor, it may just be the way the system is.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, EricJ said:

Remember that the guys that sell parts for certified airplanes have a lot of regulatory stuff to comply with.   They may want to sell you stuff, but they're only allowed to sell it in certain configurations for certain airplanes, or they'd have to spend a ton of money recertifying for that change.

So, it may not be the vendor, it may just be the way the system is.

 

You may be right, but it begs the questions:

Why wouldnt they explain that to me?

If I already had a G3 system, would they sell me a new display if mine broke and was out of warranty?

If I bought the entire kit, is there anything that requires me to install every feature?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gsxrpilot said:

I know a couple of shops in Texas that would likely charge 40 hours for an EDM900 install. An A&P will charge less per hour than an Avionics shop and either can do it.

Absolutely.  My A&P installed our G3 in our old plane.  I will definitely have them do the 900 when we get there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was charged for 36 hours for the installation of my EDM 930. It was part of a complete panel redo so the shop saved some time vs. a stand alone installation. As I recall their normal charge is 40 hours.

You might call @AGL for a quote even if you’re not in the East.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the OP what is the estimated time to install an 830 with similar sensors?  IIRC the fuel level interface on the 900 was extremely easy to do. My guess is the 900 install labor would only be a few hundred more (not including the time to remove the old instruments). 
 

I think another important advantage is not having to double up probs on the tit and egt/cht (single cylinder). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.