X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:11:54 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [64.12.143.101] (HELO imo-m13.mail.aol.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.5) with ESMTP id 3021250 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:06:58 -0400 Received: from RMiller904@aol.com by imo-m13.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.4.) id q.c9e.323ad9a9 (65097) for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:06:51 -0400 (EDT) From: RMiller904@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:06:51 EDT Subject: Re: [LML] Mags V Electronic ignition -LNC2 X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1215781611" X-Mailer: Unknown sub 34 X-Spam-Flag:NO -------------------------------1215781611 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am amazed how many like them, the 4P I flew the hours off off and the Velocity both with 550s in them had electroic and they replaced 8 of them within 50hrs, I would not have it on a plane I owned. Ron _www.ronsflying.com_ (http://www.ronsflying.com/) In a message dated 7/11/2008 7:47:13 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, LHenney@charter.net writes: Gerard, This is a bit hard to get your arms around because you can have either; better fuel economy or better TAS; or a little of both. Read Klaus' web page http://www.lightspeedengineering.com/ He shoots very straight. In my case it took two items which allowed very lean of peak operations. Both the electronic ignition coupled with ram air pressurized injector shrouds allow smooth operation deep on the lean side of peak. This of course costs a couple kts too. A third item; a new prop (Catto-carbon) I think this further improved L.O.P. smoothness (compared to my Hartzell CS) allowing me comfortable cruise operation. As far as greater TAS; yes electronic ignition does improve performance. This performance is touted to be due to improved spark energy while the mag tends to loose power as we ascend. Additionally, of course they advance the timing as MP and RPM decrease. I can't give good data as I've never run a mag on my plane. Rough idea of fuel savings: 1-2 gph. Go with the Lightspeed: I've got 800 hours on a dual set up. So I guess I've saved 800-1600 gallons of fuel, :) I then burned that fuel in races all over the country :) Fast or slow, electronic ignitions are very cool. Larry -----Original Message----- From: gerardoconnell@optusnet.com.au [mailto:gerardoconnell@optusnet.com.au] Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 9:20 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Mags V Electronic ignition -LNC2 Can anyone provide a rough idea of the performance improvement (TAS and MPG or fuel flow) expected on the 0-320 after converting from 2 mags to one mag + electronic ignition? With the price of fuel heading North I am wondering if its worth the investment Gerard -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html **************Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com! (http://www.tourtracker.com?NCID=aolmus00050000000112) -------------------------------1215781611 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am amazed how many like them, the 4P I flew the hours off off and the= =20 Velocity both with 550s in them had electroic and they replaced 8 of them wi= thin=20 50hrs, I would not have it on a plane I owned.  Ron
 
www.ronsflying.com
 =20
 
In a message dated 7/11/2008 7:47:13 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,=20 LHenney@charter.net writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000=20 size=3D2>Gerard,

This is a bit hard to get your arms around because= you=20 can have either;
better fuel economy or better TAS; or a little of=20 both.  Read Klaus' web
page http://www.lightspeedengineering.com/=20= He=20 shoots very straight.

In my case it took two items which allowed ve= ry=20 lean of peak operations.
Both the electronic ignition coupled with ram=20= air=20 pressurized injector
shrouds allow smooth operation deep on the lean si= de=20 of peak.  This of
course costs a couple kts too.  A third ite= m; a=20 new prop (Catto-carbon) I
think this further improved L.O.P. smoothness= =20 (compared to my Hartzell CS)
allowing me comfortable cruise=20 operation.

As far as greater TAS; yes electronic ignition does impr= ove=20 performance.
This performance is touted to be due to improved spark ene= rgy=20 while the mag
tends to loose power as we ascend.  Additionally, of= =20 course they advance the
timing as MP and RPM decrease.  I can't gi= ve=20 good data as I've never run a
mag on my plane.  

Roug= h=20 idea of fuel savings:  1-2 gph.

Go with the Lightspeed: =20= I've=20 got 800 hours on a dual set up.  So I guess
I've saved 800-1600=20 gallons of fuel, :)  I then burned that fuel in races
all over the= =20 country :)

Fast or slow, electronic ignitions are very=20 cool.

Larry

-----Original Message-----
From:=20 gerardoconnell@optusnet.com.au=20 [mailto:gerardoconnell@optusnet.com.au]

Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2= 008=20 9:20 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: Mags V Electronic ignitio= n=20 -LNC2

Can anyone provide a rough idea of the performance improvemen= t=20 (TAS and MPG
or fuel flow) expected on the 0-320 after converting from=20= 2=20 mags to one mag
+ electronic ignition?

With the price of fuel=20 heading North I am wondering if its worth=20 the
investment

Gerard


--
For archives and unsub=20 http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html



Get the sc= oop on last night's hottest shows and the live music scene in your area - Chec= k out TourTracker.com!
-------------------------------1215781611--