Return-Path: <lancair.list-request@olsusa.com>
Received: from blizzard.wise.edt.ericsson.se
          (blizzard-ext.wise.edt.ericsson.se [194.237.142.2])
          by truman.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219
          ID# 0-52269U2500L250S0V35) with ESMTP id com
          for <lancair.list@olsusa.com>; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:07:38 -0500
Received: from mailserver1.ericsson.se (mailserver1.ericsson.se [136.225.152.91])
	by blizzard.wise.edt.ericsson.se (8.9.0/8.9.0/WIREfire-1.2) with ESMTP id QAA24622
	for <lancair.list@olsusa.com>; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:08:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: from esealnt141.ericsson.se (esealnt141.ericsson.se [130.100.102.216])
	by mailserver1.ericsson.se (8.8.8/8.8.8/eri-1.0) with ESMTP id QAA25854
	for <lancair.list@olsusa.com>; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:10:14 +0100 (MET)
Received: by esealnt141 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9)
	id <C63WQH4Y>; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:05:43 +0100
Message-ID: <01FC42FED6D5D011BF3D00805FBE51AAB833AF@esekint101>
From: "Sven Jerlhagen (QCS)" <Sven.Jerlhagen@ecs.ericsson.se>
To: "'lancair.list@olsusa.com'" <lancair.list@olsusa.com>
Subject: RE: Fixed pitch prop vs. constant speed
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:04:46 +0100
X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com
Mime-Version: 1.0

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>
I'm using a Warnke high aspect ratio 70*76 with a 160 hp O-320. At 120 kts
climb is only marginally affected by prop, and from 140 kts climb is only
affected by power and weight. At slower speeds the CS perfoms better. A CS
prop might give around 5 to 10 kts in cruise. I like the fixed because of
lower cost and lower weight. 50 lbs lighter also gives better climb ! Please
email me if you like more numbers.

Sven
SE-XOP