Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So, I decided to remove the FS-450 and the EDM 700 and replace them with either an 830 or 900.  I can see the advangated of the 830:

1. redundancy with the analogue gauges

2. Lower cost of acquisition

3. Lower cost because less invasion of the existing panel

What are the advantages of going with the 900 over the 830?  With the exception of perhaps a slight bump in value of the aircraft, I'm at a loss to see any.

Thanks.

Glen

Link to post
Share on other sites

*Members that donate $10 or more do not see advertisements*

And because the 830 is not primary, it means one of your CHTs will be inaccurate, oil temperature will be inaccurate and possibly oil pressure will be inaccurate all because the 830 can not replace the primary OEM sensors. Plus you will need to continue to maintain the OEM sensors/gauges - some times at considerable expense.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

There actually is only the illusion of redundancy. You can cross check the 830 to your factory gauges (which you won't because you will just be looking at the 830) but if a factory gauge fails you have to replace/fix it to be airworthy. 

I put in an 830 three years ago because I couldn't justify the funds for the 900 at the time. Times are better and I just upgraded to the 900, love it, and am glad I did. I don't regret putting in the 830, it gave me three years of use and provided valuable diagnostic information on more than one occasion. The 830 is better than no engine monitor, but if you have the funds for the 900 I would put it in. 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Glen Davis said:

So, I decided to remove the FS-450 and the EDM 700 and replace them with either an 830 or 900.  I can see the advangated of the 830:

1. redundancy with the analogue gauges

2. Lower cost of acquisition

3. Lower cost because less invasion of the existing panel

What are the advantages of going with the 900 over the 830?  With the exception of perhaps a slight bump in value of the aircraft, I'm at a loss to see any.

Thanks.

Glen

Lower cost should not dictate here.  There is no comparison really.  Despite it displaying much of the same data as the 830, the 900 is a completely different instrument in so many ways...many have been stated here.

Start fresh, do it the right way, lose the ship’s factory gauges, and put the 900 primary in.

Steve

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we got the primary vs other engine monitor out of the way...

We have the 900 vs 930 depending on how large a screen you prefer... how much real estate you have, and how you like to scan your instruments...

... and, if for some reason you want a different supplier than JPI... there are two others in the primary category...

EI and Big G...

EI is known for being a great company when it comes to service...

Big G is known for everything, nearly fully integrated...

PP thoughts only, not a mechanic...

A typical OilP sensor for the O is about $400 and about a four month wait...

Best regards,

-a-

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Glen Davis said:

1. redundancy with the analogue gauges There's no redundancy. The analogue gauges are required for airworthiness. The 830 is just there for looks.

2. Lower cost of acquisition Not after the factory gauges fail, as they inevitably do and then you have to pay again to remove the 830 and install the 900.

3. Lower cost because less invasion of the existing panel You don't have to remove the old gauges, just placard them inop until you're ready to cut a new panel.

Here's why the 900 is actually cheaper... 

You can install the 830 now and then pay to remove it and install the 900 later. Or you can just skip the 830 and install the 900 now.  Regardless, you're gonna install the 900. Probably when you get tired of spending to keep the old original factory gauges functioning. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I’m going to put a plug in for the 830. Since you have the 700 already it’s plug and play minus the connection for the fuel flow (which is a separate connector/harness). I use both models exactly the same and when I‘m frustrated at a display it’s the 900 every time. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

Here's why the 900 is actually cheaper... 

You can install the 830 now and then pay to remove it and install the 900 later. Or you can just skip the 830 and install the 900 now.  Regardless, you're gonna install the 900. Probably when you get tired of spending to keep the old original factory gauges functioning. 

<Raising my hand>

Yep, that's what I am ending up doing. Put in the 830 as an easy/inexpensive upgrade to the existing JPI and now have a 900 from @jeev waiting to go in to replace the existing 830 and original gauges.

I just love spending twice the labor, twice the cost, twice the time........:wacko:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all for the info.  There is one thing about the 900 that does bother me a bit over the 830.  It's this:

"I just installed a JPI 830. I didn't install a 900/930 because as a primary, the alarms are not adjustable. In other words, for example, on my Lycoming, redline for CHT is 500 degrees and the JPI (as a primary) 900/930 will not alarm till you get to 500 degrees. My 830 is not a primary so I set the CHT to alarm at 400 degrees. I am using the 830 (like Ron above, I have all the probes) to alert me when I have any engine problems well below redline values. I cannot do this with a 900/930 unless I'm willing to be alerted when it is too late. "   Thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are other things people worry about...

Is this your concern as well?

For the most part, CHTs are something you are monitoring and actively controlling... when one cylinder has a problem, it exceeds the redline, you get an alarm...
 

you are not using the JPI 900 to remind you that you are not monitoring the CHTs...

If you want to be annoyed about the JPI900... it has steady state alarm limits programmed in with double digit accuracy...

The RPM limit may be 2700 rpm... but during T/O roll on cold days... it may exceed the limit by a few rpm during acceleration...

That can be momentarily annoying...
 

Sound like you may want two devices... a 900 to eliminate all the old ship’s gauges... and an 830 for flexibility of programming...

You won’t be unique in this request... the FAA decided what they thought were important rules for primary instruments...

You might consider what MSers have the same wants as you... and follow their route... :)

 

Keep in mind many MSers use 380°F as a guidance to be gentle on the CHTs... if they can’t be held there, you will quickly learn to ignore whatever you programmed into the 830...

In the end, you still do the monitoring as PIC...

Also consider the offerings from EI... 

 

As you get used to flying your favorite systems... you probably put the alarms where they need to be, after sliding them towards the pre-programmed levels also chosen by the POH...

This doesn’t sound as friendly, as it is supposed to be... :)

Best regards,

-a-

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks all for the info.  There is one thing about the 900 that does bother me a bit over the 830.  It's this:

"I just installed a JPI 830. I didn't install a 900/930 because as a primary, the alarms are not adjustable. In other words, for example, on my Lycoming, redline for CHT is 500 degrees and the JPI (as a primary) 900/930 will not alarm till you get to 500 degrees. My 830 is not a primary so I set the CHT to alarm at 400 degrees. I am using the 830 (like Ron above, I have all the probes) to alert me when I have any engine problems well below redline values. I cannot do this with a 900/930 unless I'm willing to be alerted when it is too late. "   Thoughts?

My thoughts are you’re poorly informed.

 

JPI 900 allows pre alarms to be configured by the user, my CHT warning is set to 400.

I assume 930 has similar functionality.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe the 900/930 has “pre-alarms” that are adjustable. So essentially you can set an additional alarm that is more conservative than the factory limits (ie. 380° CHT) but not less (2701 RPM will always alarm). Pre-alarms appear to essentially be amber caution alerts and the factory limits appear as red warning alerts.

https://www.jpinstruments.com/FAQCategory/primary-instrument-alarms/

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jetdriven said:

the limits are not adjustable. Its annoying when the tach gets to 2701 RPM and it starts flashing red, for example.

Doesn’t need to get to 2701. It’s flashing emergency, world is going to end (sarcasm), if you reach 2700.000000 rpm. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2020 at 9:51 AM, Skates97 said:

There actually is only the illusion of redundancy. You can cross check the 830 to your factory gauges (which you won't because you will just be looking at the 830) but if a factory gauge fails you have to replace/fix it to be airworthy. 

I put in an 830 three years ago because I couldn't justify the funds for the 900 at the time. Times are better and I just upgraded to the 900, love it, and am glad I did. I don't regret putting in the 830, it gave me three years of use and provided valuable diagnostic information on more than one occasion. The 830 is better than no engine monitor, but if you have the funds for the 900 I would put it in. 

I fully agree with you. And this is how my panel looks now:

image.png.00a8b3b84e9a1b57bec8030a381446e2.png

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2020 at 6:24 PM, ArtVandelay said:

My thoughts are you’re poorly informed.

 

JPI 900 allows pre alarms to be configured by the user, my CHT warning is set to 400.

I assume 930 has similar functionality.

It does.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2020 at 5:37 PM, Glen Davis said:

Thanks all for the info.  There is one thing about the 900 that does bother me a bit over the 830.  It's this:

"I just installed a JPI 830. I didn't install a 900/930 because as a primary, the alarms are not adjustable. In other words, for example, on my Lycoming, redline for CHT is 500 degrees and the JPI (as a primary) 900/930 will not alarm till you get to 500 degrees. My 830 is not a primary so I set the CHT to alarm at 400 degrees. I am using the 830 (like Ron above, I have all the probes) to alert me when I have any engine problems well below redline values. I cannot do this with a 900/930 unless I'm willing to be alerted when it is too late. "   Thoughts?

Glenn - certainly not having a go at you, but regarding your subject line, there is no such thing as "830 vs. 900".  It isn't even close.  Not even a fair fight, because you're talking about two completely different products.

Do yourself a couple of favors...stop over-analyzing, lose the notion you seem to have about "redundancy" between the 830 + your ship's factory gauges, and go with the 900 or the 930.  Having flown extensively behind both (as well as the older 700), I can tell you they're worth every penny and then some.  There is nothing the 830 will do that the 900 and 930 will not.  The capability of the latter two is far superior.

Steve

  • Like 4
Link to post
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.