EI CGR-30P new engine monitor

[sreid]

Fuel flow, Oil Temp and MP indications are out to lunch.  Shop isn't sure what's going on...

 

Hi George, I'm not involved with E.I. other than I have a CGR-30p and like it, but my first thought is "Shop isn't sure what's going on..." does not equal "customer service at EI is horrific", unless there is something else going on where E.I. is not performing.

 

But, sorry to hear about your problems, I can imagine that must be pretty frustrating.

Steve

[GeorgePerry]

My shop isn't sure what's going on b/c they've send the wrong software load 4 times now.  Each time they load it there's confusion about what's accurate and what isn't based on the programmed information that EI sends in it's data packet.  Eagle is a low volume airplane with a de-rated IO550.  IE doesn't seem to understand how to get the correct software settings to match with the limitations in the POH or the preset K-factor to make the fuel flow work.

 

When my shop asks for technical support, they tell me all the support guys are not very knowledgeable and don't seem all that interested in resolving the problem.  I try to be fair, open minded and give vendors the benefit of the doubt, but these issues have been going on for months now.  I'm glad to hear that some Mooney drivers are happy with the product.  There's always two sides to a story.  For me, after going through this I would not buy from them again.  Hope that fills in the blanks.

[Marauder]

My shop isn't sure what's going on b/c they've send the wrong software load 4 times now. Each time they load it there's confusion about what's accurate and what isn't based on the programmed information that EI sends in it's data packet. Eagle is a low volume airplane with a de-rated IO550. IE doesn't seem to understand how to get the correct software settings to match with the limitations in the POH or the preset K-factor to make the fuel flow work.

When my shop asks for technical support, they tell me all the support guys are not very knowledgeable and don't seem all that interested in resolving the problem. I try to be fair, open minded and give vendors the benefit of the doubt, but these issues have been going on for months now. I'm glad to hear that some Mooney drivers are happy with the product. There's always two sides to a story. For me, after going through this I would not buy from them again. Hope that fills in the blanks.

George -- when I purchased the JPI 900 I filled out a document that contained a bunch of information on the plane. I also sent pictures of the panel instruments and sections of the POH showing the limitations. Was this not part of the EI process?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[GeorgePerry]

filling out an extensive form is part of the process but I have yet to see why b/c the software they send back doesn't reflect the information provided.  Its frustrating...

[carusoam]

Oops....

Didn't mean to hit the Post button...

-a-

[Marauder]

filling out an extensive form is part of the process but I have yet to see why b/c the software they send back doesn't reflect the information provided.  Its frustrating...

 

That is troubling since the unit is supposed to be setup as the primary for your airplane. Mine has my N number and serial number recorded in it. (BTW -- check your signature, you're missing something).

[Bob_Belville]

That is troubling since the unit is supposed to be setup as the primary for your airplane. Mine has my N number and serial number recorded in it. (BTW -- check your signature, you're missing something).

Like Marauder, I found JPI to be real sticklers for details with the 930 I got 3 years ago.

 

For example, when the installing avionics shop realized that with bladders the total fuel should have been 54 gal instead of the original certified 52 they were told that the unit would have to be returned to JPI for reprogramming. Robby was able to get them to let him do the reprogramming since the plane was (finally) ready to be picked up but their default is to keep tight control on EDMs that are certified as primary instruments. Ironically, when the shop calibrated the fuel quantity by adding fuel about a gallon at a time they were not able to add more than 26 per side but the capacity had to match the paperwork.

[BigTex]

Like Marauder, I found JPI to be real sticklers for details with the 930 I got 3 years ago.

For example, when the installing avionics shop realized that with bladders the total fuel should have been 54 gal instead of the original certified 52 they were told that the unit would have to be returned to JPI for reprogramming. Robby was able to get them to let him do the reprogramming since the plane was (finally) ready to be picked up but their default is to keep tight control on EDMs that are certified as primary instruments. Ironically, when the shop calibrated the fuel quantity by adding fuel about a gallon at a time they were not able to add more than 26 per side but the capacity had to match the paperwork.

Bob, Do you think that's because the additional gallon was left in each tank when drained as unusable fuel?