Chris Strube Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 My engine recently swallowed an exhaust valve, destroying the cylinder and the Rajay turbo. I'd like to get an engine monitor to maybe head this off in the future. I need direction, as I know nothing about engine monitors. My 1965 E has the original cluster gauge, original MP/FP gauge, and a single EGT. I also have a Shadin fuel flow. I remember the customer dissatisfaction with JPI from a few years ago, and am considering an Electronics International CGR-30P, which is certified for primary replacement. I welcome all opinions, and will keep in mind that I get what I pay for. Thanks in advance... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oregon87 Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 Chris, if you have any questions regarding the CGR-30P, I am happy to help. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skates97 Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 I had a EDM830 in the plane for almost 3 years and never had a problem. Just put in an EDM900 along with the CiES senders. My only experience with JPI was trying to contact them with a question about how to hook up the CiES senders because there were three wires off the senders and the JPI manual showed three wires but the harness had two. I was not able to get anyone at JPI to answer the question. Fortunately one call to CiES and I had my answer in about two minutes, I needed to run a separate power line to the senders off a 1A fuse because the EDM would not supply enough power for them. So, take it for what it's worth, I couldn't get an answer out of JPI, but their product has been excellent. If you go with the EDM900/930 spend the extra money for the CiES senders, you will be glad you did. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oregon87 Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 Following up on the above post, we also offer a digital fuel probe (P-300M). It's powered by our system, so no need for a separate breaker, limiting a potential difficult troubleshoot during flight. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niko182 Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 I've had both JPI and EI primary instruments. I had a basic EI R1 tach and replaced it with a JPI900 installed. The EI did its job and it was great. The JPI was good for the most part and I liked it. I think the customer service is better with EI by the sounds of it. JPI was okay to deal with overall, but everyone seems to rave about EIs customer service. JPI was also a lot easier to deal with because I talked to them in person. They are right down the street from my airport. One of my tiedown neighbors has the CGR30 in his plane and it seems to do the job just fine. Its a nice piece of tech. Whatever route you go, I would recommend going primary. I would avoid the JPI830 for that reason alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baker Avionics Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 I feel the EI is the way to go. The CGR 30P is a phenomenal choice as are any of their systems. One of the best parts is their customer service should you ever have questions. They are spot on, know their products and supported very well. Primmer and the crew there are a great resource to have at all times. We install a lot here and I would definitely suggest going with them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xavierde Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 Any thought on the Garmin ones e.g. GI 275 (EIS) or the one integrated in the G3X/G500? I'm also looking at options to upgrade from an EDM-700. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtVandelay Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 If you go with the EDM900/930 spend the extra money for the CiES senders, you will be glad you did. I didn’t and don’t regret saving $2+ AMUs (I have 4 senders). I already had wing mounted mechanical gauges, so with the FF I have triple redundancy. Originals seem accurate enough, I did have the 2 lower units overhauled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIm20c Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 @oregon87 If you guys came out with a 900 size unit that would allow for installer configured limits you would sell a metric ton of them... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skates97 Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 58 minutes ago, ArtVandelay said: I didn’t and don’t regret saving $2+ AMUs (I have 4 senders). I already had wing mounted mechanical gauges, so with the FF I have triple redundancy. Originals seem accurate enough, I did have the 2 lower units overhauled. If I had 4 senders that were accurate along with the mechanical gauges I might agree with you. The senders in my plane were not reliable. However, even before I had fuel flow with the 830 I always landed within about 1/2 gallon of what I estimated I should have just by dipping the tanks and doing the math. Adding the CiES senders is peace of mind knowing that if something goes wrong and I am venting fuel I will see it on the 900. The OP has an "E" so he should be just looking at 2 senders (I think) and like me I don't think has mechanical wing gauges. Spending about $4k on the engine monitor it just makes sense in my mind to add the extra $840 for the senders, I spend that much in avgas making a couple trips from SoCal to Salt Lake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baker Avionics Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 9 minutes ago, Skates97 said: If I had 4 senders that were accurate along with the mechanical gauges I might agree with you. The senders in my plane were not reliable. However, even before I had fuel flow with the 830 I always landed within about 1/2 gallon of what I estimated I should have just by dipping the tanks and doing the math. Adding the CiES senders is peace of mind knowing that if something goes wrong and I am venting fuel I will see it on the 900. The OP has an "E" so he should be just looking at 2 senders (I think) and like me I don't think has mechanical wing gauges. Spending about $4k on the engine monitor it just makes sense in my mind to add the extra $840 for the senders, I spend that much in avgas making a couple trips from SoCal to Salt Lake. Richard, I totally agree! The thing is this, most people want to spend their money on the pretty and fancy avionics systems and then say "I will wait on the engine monitor until next time". We always suggest to do the engine monitor first and do it right! It doesn't matter how pretty your panel is if you cannot fly it. The engine monitor is the BEST upgrade in the cockpit anyone can do, in my opinion. Spend the extra money there. There is virtually zero upgrade for a quality and complete engine monitor that has been installed correctly and it will save you more money than anything else you can install. You will get better performance, fuel economy and will save your engine most of the time. BTW, Ryan is bringing the Aspen here to get installed. He is quite excited!!! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skates97 Posted September 22, 2020 Report Share Posted September 22, 2020 1 minute ago, Baker Avionics said: BTW, Ryan is bringing the Aspen here to get installed. He is quite excited!!! Awesome, I'll have to bug him for pictures when it's done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted September 23, 2020 Report Share Posted September 23, 2020 1) The best customer service for engine monitors appears to live here... Go EI and @oregon87 ! 2) The next best customer service has a really strong service center that is a retailer for JPI equipment... Go JPI and @Jeev ! 3) The third best customer service for engine monitors is Big G.... you can find Trek at that other website... 4) There is a fourth player in the engine monitor arena that doesn’t get mentioned very often, and I have never seen their service guy... that would be Insight... 5) There is also that cool service that when you download your data... you can upload it to them... and share with everyone at MS... they have a guy that live here too.... go Savvy! Hmmmmmm... there is a standard six-pack of engine gauges used in many Mooneys... Rectangular in shape... similar in size as a JPI 900... It would be really cool to swap in an EI primary instrument in that hole... two fuel levels, CHT, Amps/volt, OilP, OilT... The rectangle allows for more screen space for six cylinders of data... And for the lucky few... TIT and other turbo related data... Note: When you sell a product that isn’t quite finished... make sure @Marauder doesn’t buy it... He some how knows how electronic devices are supposed to be built and serviced... And his JPI900 didn’t come close to meeting ordinary aviation consumer expectations... PP thoughts only, just an ordinary aviation consumer... Best regards, -a- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Link Posted September 23, 2020 Report Share Posted September 23, 2020 I cheaped out and put in the 830 which I do like very much but now wish I’d spent a little more and bought the JPI 900. I think my wife spent the savings on lamps or something. I would not miss the money but do miss the better instrument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DXB Posted September 23, 2020 Report Share Posted September 23, 2020 I've had a JPI EDM900 installed for the past 5 years and recently upgraded the firmware on it to accomodate digital fuel senders. Overall the hardware from them is just fine - actually a pretty nice dispay. I have had a number of issues with it (multiple sensor problems, suboptimal firmware setup etc), but these are probably inevitable when retrofitting a complex multi-function unit like this. However JPI's technical support is suboptimal - the troubleshooting guidance they provided has typically been unhelpful or downright inaccurate, and so I've had to get deeper into fixing the issues on my own than I would prefer. The EI products cost more in general, but their customer service seems to have a stellar reputation. The extra expense may be worth it in this case, and if were to do it again I would certainly go with their products over JPI's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbridges Posted September 23, 2020 Report Share Posted September 23, 2020 10 hours ago, Lance Link said: I cheaped out and put in the 830 which I do like very much but now wish I’d spent a little more and bought the JPI 900. I think my wife spent the savings on lamps or something. I would not miss the money but do miss the better instrument. But now your living room is so well lit. At least you have that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baker Avionics Posted September 23, 2020 Report Share Posted September 23, 2020 16 hours ago, MIm20c said: @oregon87 If you guys came out with a 900 size unit that would allow for installer configured limits you would sell a metric ton of them... I cannot help but to somewhat agree with you on this, however, there is a reason why they do not want to get into that market, I am sure. I mean, there is a reason why their units are stand alone and primary units. There is really no need for them to reinvent the wheel on their niche. There is a reason why most of the other manufacturers use their products and technology for certifying their systems as well. For example, Dynon uses the FT-60/90 for their Skyview HDX as does Garmin in their G500TXi and other EIS units as well. I mean, there is a reason why they use EI versus other manufacturers products because they know what they are doing and will do all they can to be the best at what they do. JPI is a good product, for sure, but EI is head and shoulders above all of them, in my opinion. They make sense, the support is always phenomenal and the quality is second to none. Once you allow different hands to get into the pie, it gets muddied and then it creates issues. Some folks can do it, some can't and will just make a total mess of things. There is a reason why they do not want anyone to field configure their units and I do not lame them. We all have guidelines to follow to include the standards in the pOH of engine limitations, why would you want to change them? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Strube Posted September 23, 2020 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2020 I've decided to install the CGR-30P. I've found a good price here in Canada. My engineer is confident that it's in his comfort zone to do the install. He knows the plane well, and did the Rajay install. However, I'm a little uncomfortable paying for a learning curve. I'l be replacing all the legacy gauges, including the Garvin cluster, the tach, the MP/FP, the EGT, the OAT, etc. Any ideas on install time and cost? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Avalle Posted September 23, 2020 Report Share Posted September 23, 2020 21 hours ago, Skates97 said: I had a EDM830 in the plane for almost 3 years and never had a problem. Just put in an EDM900 along with the CiES senders. My only experience with JPI was trying to contact them with a question about how to hook up the CiES senders because there were three wires off the senders and the JPI manual showed three wires but the harness had two. I was not able to get anyone at JPI to answer the question. Fortunately one call to CiES and I had my answer in about two minutes, I needed to run a separate power line to the senders off a 1A fuse because the EDM would not supply enough power for them. So, take it for what it's worth, I couldn't get an answer out of JPI, but their product has been excellent. If you go with the EDM900/930 spend the extra money for the CiES senders, you will be glad you did. Indeed, JPI's techsupport is not among the best in the business. My experience with them has not been stellar and most of the times I had to figure out the solution to the problem by myself. However, the unit is really nice. I also installed the CIES senders connected to my FPI 900 and they are great. Oscar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oregon87 Posted September 23, 2020 Report Share Posted September 23, 2020 13 minutes ago, Chris Strube said: I've decided to install the CGR-30P. I've found a good price here in Canada. My engineer is confident that it's in his comfort zone to do the install. He knows the plane well, and did the Rajay install. However, I'm a little uncomfortable paying for a learning curve. I'l be replacing all the legacy gauges, including the Garvin cluster, the tach, the MP/FP, the EGT, the OAT, etc. Any ideas on install time and cost? A good estimate is 25-35 hours x your shop rate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skates97 Posted September 23, 2020 Report Share Posted September 23, 2020 15 hours ago, Lance Link said: I cheaped out and put in the 830 which I do like very much but now wish I’d spent a little more and bought the JPI 900. I think my wife spent the savings on lamps or something. I would not miss the money but do miss the better instrument. My wife labels plane upgrades by what could have been done to the house, ie: that one is the bathroom remodel, that is the new fridge, etc... Fortunately she likes having me fly her to see the grandkids which wins out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuellevel Posted October 31, 2020 Report Share Posted October 31, 2020 On 9/22/2020 at 1:47 PM, oregon87 said: Following up on the above post, we also offer a digital fuel probe (P-300M). It's powered by our system, so no need for a separate breaker, limiting a potential difficult troubleshoot during flight. Yes - I would qualify the digital part, but only legal interfacing to EI equipment - The last time I checked the EI STC. With a TSO the sender needs to be powered separately if it is to carry its own TSO designation. The difference is that CiES is ecumenical - we work with everybody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.