McCauley 3 blade prop vs Hartzell 3 blade

[Jon M]

After a recent prop strike on my J,  I am wanting to switch to a three blade.  I have heard that Hartzell 3 blade props are hard to balance and produce an oscillation at certain rpm's.  And that McCauley's don't have this problem.  Has any one had this experience?  And can you share your thoughts on the matter before I make my purchase.  Thanks.   

[KSMooniac]

Why would you want a metal 3 blade prop on a J? They're heavier, slower, vibrate more, cost more, and have no extra ground clearance.

Sent from my motorola edge plus 2023 using Tapatalk

[Pinecone]

Right this minute, I would put an MT on.

Hartzell is supposed to have a composite 3 blade coming, but it has been "almost ready to start selling" for several years.

[Jon M]

I was told it would produce more thrust on take off and climb?  And isn't a 3 blade on average 2 inches shorter then a 2 blade?  The weight is definitely a factor.  I will look into the Hartzell composite as well. Thanks for your feedback.

Edited January 5 by Jon M

[Pinecone]

Many times they are shorter.  But many times they are adapting a prop for another airplane, so it is not shorter.

In general, you can expect better (shorter) take off and better climb with 3 blades, but with a slight loss in cruise.  Reports of the MT seem to indicate no or very slight cruise difference.   The lighter weight, meaning more rear CG for the same loading may help that.

[KSMooniac]

The only prop option for a J that is a smaller diameter is the MT 3 blade composite.  I've had one since 2010 and like it for many reasons, especially versus the OEM McCaulley C212 that came on my '77.  I think the later C214 is a better performer and likely would not have upgraded from it, at least back then.  All of the 3 blade metal STC options are the same diameter as the C212 or C214, so you only gain weight and vibration and not ground clearance.  Moving the CG aft in a J with a lighter prop is a good thing, too.  Moving forward with a 3 blade metal prop is not a good thing.

[Jon M]

2 hours ago, KSMooniac said:

The only prop option for a J that is a smaller diameter is the MT 3 blade composite.  I've had one since 2010 and like it for many reasons, especially versus the OEM McCaulley C212 that came on my '77.  I think the later C214 is a better performer and likely would not have upgraded from it, at least back then.  All of the 3 blade metal STC options are the same diameter as the C212 or C214, so you only gain weight and vibration and not ground clearance.  Moving the CG aft in a J with a lighter prop is a good thing, too.  Moving forward with a 3 blade metal prop is not a good thing.

 

[Jon M]

Thanks KSMooniac.  I will look into the MT option.  And appreciate the feedback.  

[Fly Boomer]

@Jon M something happened to your response to @KSMooniac.  Post it again if you can remember what you said.

[Ragsf15e]

54 minutes ago, Jon M said:

Thanks KSMooniac.  I will look into the MT option.  And appreciate the feedback.  

I had the Mcauley 3 blade on my F and it served me well… but I would have rather had the 2 blade.  It’s lighter, faster and has the same diameter.  No bad vibration, just heavy and a few knots slow.

[Jon M]

Thanks everyone.  @KSMooniac. What about chipping on the MT from rocks/debris etc...?

Edited January 6 by Jon M

[Fly Boomer]

49 minutes ago, Jon M said:

Thanks everyone.  @KSMooniac. What about chipping on the MT from rocks/debris etc...?

@KSMooniac

[KSMooniac]

I've written here in the past quite a bit about my MT experience so please try search up some of my posts.  You might need google with site: mooneyspace.com though.

Short answer... I've had NO chipping from rocks/debris.  The stainless leading edge on mine has never been damaged or replaced.  /knocking on wood.  I had early paint failures but they were fixed under warranty albeit with hassle on my part.  MT blades can be infinite life, absent prop strike damage.