Engine Monitor Preference

[Igor_U]

3 hours ago, oregon87 said:

  If a probe does fail unexpectedly and within warranty period, we will happily replace it at no charge.  As an aside, if you happen to attend Sun N Fun or Oshkosh and have a failed probe outside of warranty, maybe even WAY outside of warranty, it wouldn't be terribly uncommon for one of staff members manning the booth to put one in your bag of swag at no charge.  Having said that, you guys and gals CANNOT use this post as a way to get free probe!  

I can attest that.

Few years ago (17!!?) shortly I bought my F, I spoke to the gentlemen at the IE boot on the fly-in/air-show at KEUG about the probe issue with the old EGT4 instrument. I wasn't sure if instrument should have thinner or bigger probe. He reached under the counter pulled out the correct one and gave it to me; free! I wasn't even the original buyer; instrument was installed 1-15y before I bought the plane.

Needless to say, when CGR30 came out it was top on my Santa list. 

 

[Vance Harral]

19 hours ago, oregon87 said:

However, to see numerous issues with a single aircraft would be exceedingly rare.  Not to point fingers, but we have found some installers do not install our connectors per the provided instructions.  As a result, the operator experiences connection related problems and the blame is incorrectly placed on the manufacturer of the product.

I really like EI and this comment is not intended to bash them.

That said, @oregon87, you need to be aware that EI has a history of connector problems, and at least in my personal experience, they have not always been honest about it.

We installed a UBG-16 in 2009 and I'm glad we did, but over the course of the next several years, I had no less than 5 EGT/CHT drop-outs due to broken thermocouple wires right at the quick-connectors for the probes.  I assure you these were installed exactly in accordance with the instructions: wire doubled before crimping, two drops of oil on the spade, wires secured, but not "overtightened" per the installation manual.  Still, continual breaks.  I contacted EI both in writing and by phone, cordially, on a couple of occasions.  I politely asked if this was a known problem, and if they could offer any guidance or assistance.  I was told, in essence, "This problem is particular to you, we know of no chronic problems with our connectors.  You must be installing them wrong."

About a year after I gave up complaining and resigned myself to ordering a large batch of spade connectors and replacing them regularly ( I still have a dozen in my spare parts bin), EI announced their "new and improved" OLC-1 connector.  Obviously, I raised an eyebrow at this: you guys wouldn't have redesigned the connector unless the previous solution had a problem.

The OLC-1 completely resolved our problems with wires breaking, so good on EI.  Nothing wrong with improving a product after lots of field test.  But even though it was over a decade ago, I'm still salty about being told the problem was with me/my shop, when in fact it was a design flaw all along.

After a few years of working with the OLC-1 and noting that it was reliable, but arguably a little difficult to install, EI came out with the OLC-2.  Same concept, but independent set screws for each wire.  Another improvement, so good on ya', but yet another indication that the connectors were an evolving solution.

So given this history of continually updating your connector design, it just rings a little hollow to say here in public that "to see numerous issues with a single aircraft would be exceedingly rare".  That just not true, dude.  I'm living proof.

[oregon87]

Hi Vance -

I respectfully disagree with your opinion that we developed the OLC-1 connector due to the spade connectors being problematic.  That just simply is not true.  Spade connectors work fantastically well, have been used for decades without issue, when installed properly.  Please understand, I am not implying that was the problem with your particular installation.  I honestly don't know.  I would've like to have seen the suspect connectors to determine if they were mis-crimped, affected by heat, etc.  The OLC-1's were specifically designed to combat poor installations as we found numerous installers did not know how to crimp properly.  The design of the OLC-1 connector basically removed the need for one of our tech support positions as we were fielding so many calls due to poor connections.  To be fair, we did modify the OLC-1 connector to included two set screws (OLC-2) as we did hear feedback from installers that the OLC-1 could be difficult to install.  

I'll bore you with a story so you will have a better understanding of our engineering/design theory.  We were working with an OEM to which we were supplying engine monitoring systems.  They had numerous complaints about erratic indications and were confident in their installation and that the problem was in our system.  We sent our VP to their plant to discuss as they were ready to pull the plug on our relationship.  Having investigated their installations, we found that their lead avionics tech was installing the spade connectors with side cutter pliers!  This was their lead tech, charged with the oversight of all installations and the training of new staff and he was using improper tools/techniques.  Our VP was able to simply pull on the connectors to remove them.  It was this experience that cemented the reality of what other issues are likely going on in the field and felt it incumbent upon us to develop a more "fool proof" connector.  

 

[DCarlton]

Interesting discussion.  As a retired DOD engineer, I've had infinite discussions with fellow engineers regarding crimping and soldering.  Quality components and correct quality tools and procedures are essential to good crimps.  

[Vance Harral]

29 minutes ago, oregon87 said:

Hi Vance -

The OLC-1's were specifically designed to combat poor installations as we found numerous installers did not know how to crimp properly.  The design of the OLC-1 connector basically removed the need for one of our tech support positions as we were fielding so many calls due to poor connections.

 

Right.  You guys chose a connector that had tons of problems in the field, as evidenced by the fact you had to employ someone full time just to answer questions about them.  Then you staked out a position for a long time that issues with the connectors were "likely" due to improper installation, citing a few anecdotes as evidence.

Look, I get it.  Lots of people crimp stuff with a four dollar crimp tool from Autozone, don't ensure the wire shows through the witness hole before ham-fisting it shut, bend the connector while crimping, etc. etc. etc.  There are lots of failure modes.  So maybe don't choose those connectors in the first place for a product that requires widespread field installation?  I'm an engineer too.  When I choose components for my company's products, one of the criteria is reasonable performance in the field across a broad variety of skill sets, without a support engineer standing next to the installer and holding their hand.

Why EI didn't just tell me at the time that there were lots of problems with spade connectors - maybe installer induced - and that maybe I should consider soldering them or whatever, is lost to history.  Instead, I was specifically told at the time there were "no widespread installation problems".  Now I know that's not true, and that's why I'm being so grumpy about it.  You're admitting right now that wasn't the case.  There's a good reason lots of companies - including now you - avoid spade connectors in difficult environments.  You guys were just late to the party in figuring that out, but that's not an unforgivable sin.  I'm not complaining about the engineering history, I'm complaining about transparency and customer support.

I do appreciate the reply, and I understand you're just trying to do right by your company.  I like EI, and want them to succeed.  I don't want you to get run off of Mooneyspace or other public forums.  What I'm trying to communicate to you as a fan of the company is, EI has an established history of connector problems.  Claiming that's not true, and/or blaming the problem on your customers, is not a winning strategy.  Were I running the EI PR department, the story would go like this: "We originally chose spade connectors based on widespread industry use, but it turns out those were not a good solution for our particular application, due to a combination of installation issues and the environment in which they operate.  While we wish we'd been able to foresee that problem, we acknowledged the issue, and designed a new connector to resolve it.  We encourage our customers who hear about connector problems to understand this history, and the steps we've taken to fix it."  Instead, we get, "Yeah, it was all the installers' fault, and we were forced to design around their incompetence".  Again, not a winning strategy.  Even if that's what you really believe.  Even if it is, in fact, somewhat or even largely true.

The main thing I'll say in closing is, we haven't had a lick of connector trouble since moving to the new style connector; and because of that, I'm still happy to recommend EI products to friends and colleagues.

[EricJ]

6 hours ago, DCarlton said:

Interesting discussion.  As a retired DOD engineer, I've had infinite discussions with fellow engineers regarding crimping and soldering.  Quality components and correct quality tools and procedures are essential to good crimps.  

Generally a crimp will be more long-term reliable and ultimately less expensive to produce and maintain than soldering, but it does require that the crimp be done properly.   I'd think it'd be easier to train somebody to reliably crimp properly than to reliably solder properly.   Hardly any industry solders connectors any more in production, which seems telling.   

[N201MKTurbo]

When you solder to a stranded wire, the solder will wick up the wire. It makes a high stress point in the wire at the end of the solder wicking. This can be somewhat mitigated by putting heat shrink on the joint past the solder wicking. The heat shrink stabilizes the wire and keeps it from flexing at the high stress area.

Crimped joints are immune from this effect and most crimp connectors have wire supports to support the wire insulation upstream from the wire crimp. A properly crimped connection is much more reliable than a soldered connection.

[Pinecone]

And a properly crimped connector provides a more reliable connection.   When properly crimped, the two parts actually fuse.

I had a GREAT talk with an RF connector engineer for a major connector company (Amphenol) on a flight one time.

[Vance Harral]

My hypothesis about the EI connector failures is not so much that crimping is hard and soldering would be easier/better.  It's that the particularly large "quick connect" spades they chose were not a good solution, independent of whether those connectors were crimped or soldered.  For one thing, they are heavier than other choices, which is an issue in a high vibration environment like the engine compartment of a piston airplane.  For another, they were arguably the worst of all worlds: supposedly "quick" to connect and disconnect, but even using "two drops of oil" per the installation manual, I always found them to be difficult to pull apart on occasions when I wished to do so.  Difficult enough to require tools, which increases the likelihood of stressing the wire to pull them apart.

If I had it to do all over again without the benefit of the OLC connectors, I'd likely use small, lightweight butt crimp splices, and just leave plenty of spare wire to cut and re-splice a half dozen times or so over the life of the airplane.  But I make no claim this was/is an "obvious" solution, and I haven't done any engineering analysis to support that statement.

Again, the OLC connectors EI now ships with their product seem to be a good, reliable solution.  Haven't had any problems since moving to them.  If you haven't seen these gizmos, they're little, lightweight barrel connectors, with tiny hex screws that hold the wire in the connector: https://iflyei.com/product/olc-2/  The fact that they have moving parts (the screws) is interesting, but they seem to work very well, at least to the extent my experience represents a single data point.

[N201MKTurbo]

3 hours ago, Vance Harral said:

My hypothesis about the EI connector failures is not so much that crimping is hard and soldering would be easier/better.  It's that the particularly large "quick connect" spades they chose were not a good solution, independent of whether those connectors were crimped or soldered.  For one thing, they are heavier than other choices, which is an issue in a high vibration environment like the engine compartment of a piston airplane.  For another, they were arguably the worst of all worlds: supposedly "quick" to connect and disconnect, but even using "two drops of oil" per the installation manual, I always found them to be difficult to pull apart on occasions when I wished to do so.  Difficult enough to require tools, which increases the likelihood of stressing the wire to pull them apart.

If I had it to do all over again without the benefit of the OLC connectors, I'd likely use small, lightweight butt crimp splices, and just leave plenty of spare wire to cut and re-splice a half dozen times or so over the life of the airplane.  But I make no claim this was/is an "obvious" solution, and I haven't done any engineering analysis to support that statement.

Again, the OLC connectors EI now ships with their product seem to be a good, reliable solution.  Haven't had any problems since moving to them.  If you haven't seen these gizmos, they're little, lightweight barrel connectors, with tiny hex screws that hold the wire in the connector: https://iflyei.com/product/olc-2/  The fact that they have moving parts (the screws) is interesting, but they seem to work very well, at least to the extent my experience represents a single data point.

One other thing to consider with thermocouple connections is the connection forms additional thermocouples. These thermocouples will cancel themselves if they are all at the same temperature. With the new connectors, the distance between the opposing thermocouples will never be more than the diameter of the tiny screw and the screw should be isothermal across its face. With the old spade lug connectors the opposing thermocouples could be almost an inch apart. The temperature differential is still going to be small but not as much as the new connectors.

[jamesm]

I had switch from Insight G3 to CGR I elected to go with CGR since it has a bigger screen larger font. I was able to reused the insight thermocouple for EGT and CHT's from Insight engine monitor. I think I had to replace 2 egt probes in 12 years and had loose cht probe. Probably cause by starting technique. Insight uses a #4 lug ring terminal for their connections. Also I believe that Insight uses both J & K  type thermocouples for CHT's black wire   J type and K type yellow wire for EGT probes . Not Sure if have thermocouple with tighter temperature range  for the CHT's would make a difference or not.

[MarkW]

FWIW related to the original post, I just went through this decision process. I chose an EI CGR-30 combo to go into my 1962 C-model. Here's why:

The setup: My current engine instruments are factory original, all on the right side. Square gauge bundle, 3" RPM, 3" combo MP/fuel pressure, ammeter, factory carb temp with the handy "INOP" sticker on it. Etc. I have some 3" holes blanked out on the pilot's side of my panel where the original 6-pack was, since stuff came out when I had a pair of GI-275s installed last year for my primary avionics.

What to do for an engine monitor?

Because I chose Garmin for the avionics upgrade, a 3rd GI-275 seemed like a no-brainer. Got the hole ready for it where a VOR head used to be and everything. I asked a local Garmin shop three times for a quote. No joy. Too busy. Not sure when they could get all the stuff from Garmin (they said). Maybe just too small a job...?

I was whining about the above to a local EI dealer. He talked me through the options, and pointed out that the EI units are priced with probes. That's an extra expense with Garmin. Not a deal-breaker, I guess, but it makes a difference. Also, I have two holes available, so moving to the CGR 30 combo unit as opposed to the single GI-275 is no big deal to me. And then there's the $800 rebate.

So, I've filled out the form and selected the various options. I'll pay for the units now to take advantage of the rebate deal, then install at my next annual. The end result will be that 100% of my required instruments, avionics and engine, will be on the left side. The right side of my panel will be blank except for circuit breakers. I personally want that look, but some folks might not o right not have the extra panel space, so that's a factor, too.

Anyway, great topic, and I'm the beneficiary of the discussion here. (BTW, good to know about the connector discussion, but nothing about that has discouraged me from going with EI.)

Thanks, y'all!

 

[ArrowBerry]

Thanks for the input Mark. My mechanic has also expressed to me his dislike of the Garmin probes, being an older design that is less desirable? I am not incredibly mechanically savvy so don't ask me what that means, lol, but he was highly in favour of the CGR combo as well. An autopilot is also in the works so we'll see what the budget allows! Many thanks!

[carusoam]

Everybody brings a variation of technical input on all subjects around here…

To know this much technical detail about wire connections…

I would have to work for decades in an electrical panel constructing facility… as an electrician…

Always make friends with the guys wiring your projects…   (for follow-up questions)

 

Please continue to be nice to the vendors around here… it is better to have them here answering our questions, than have to go hunt them down somewhere else…

Best regards,

-a-