X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 22:27:03 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from smtp.perigee.net ([173.188.254.41] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.1) with ESMTPS id 5143131 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 02 Oct 2011 12:51:24 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=173.188.254.41; envelope-from=jschroeder@perigee.net Received: from [192.168.1.3] (dsl-208-26-41-198.perigee.net [208.26.41.198]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.perigee.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p92GouIT031750 for ; Sun, 2 Oct 2011 12:50:56 -0400 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Question regarding EMS (JPI, Dynon...) References: From: John Schroeder Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-15--35364184 X-Mailer: iPad Mail (8L1) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Message-Id: <80B4361E-790F-4557-ADB6-E9789DF85F42@perigee.net> X-Original-Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 12:49:51 -0400 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8L1) --Apple-Mail-15--35364184 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 We converted from a Blue Mountain EFIS to a Grand Rapids Horizon HX with the= ir Engine Information System (EIS 6000). We had The VM probes for the Blue M= ountain and are using them with the GRT. We bought a Princeton conversion mo= dule for each probe in order to use them with the Blue Mountain. We had to c= alibrate both the Princetons (1/4 tank increments) and the Blue Mountain (2 g= allon increments). We had no problem connecting the output from the Princeto= ns to the GRT HX. Since we had calibrated the Princeton modules in quarter t= ank increments, it was sufficient for the HX. The HX accuracy is very compa= rable as measured by comparing actual tank fills with what the gauge showed a= t shutdown - in our ES the comparison is between gallons to fill the 48 gall= on tank with the figure: 48 minus the gauge reading. Hope this helps. Cheers, John On Oct 2, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Colyn Case wrote: > I've had pretty good luck with my grt system. They make the eis6000 which= is really what the Chelton systems use. I bought their basic EFIS for disp= lay purposes. I have not had problems with their hardware boxes or softwar= e. I did have to rewire my CHT and EGT probes to avoid shorting. > Anyway, I'm sure they would be happy to tell you if you can use your old p= robes or not. >=20 > Many people have had excellent service with the EI system. But they will p= robably make you replace all your probes. Again call and find out. I'm sur= e you won't be the first VM refugee. >=20 >=20 > On Oct 1, 2011, at 9:29 AM, Patrick Hayoz wrote: >=20 >> Hello to all, >>=20 >> My engine monitoring system is a Vision Microsystems (VM) EPI 800 and wor= ked >> well for the last eight years =E2=80=93 and still works fine. >>=20 >> I'm thinking of a replacement system =E2=80=93 in case of a major failure= of the actual system. >>=20 >> My recent research showed that most of the installed sensors are compatib= le with the >> EMS used today. >>=20 >> Fuelprobe compatibility? >> Does anybody knows about the compatibility of the VM Fuel probes? I have t= wo of them >> installed in the wings. A calibration was done back in 2002 to respect of= the Fueltank geometry=E2=80=A6 >>=20 >> Which system to for? >> What are y>=20 >> Any hints and thoughts are welcome, thank you. >>=20 >> Patrick, LNC2, Switzerland >>=20 >>=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-15--35364184 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
We converted from a Blue Mountain EFIS t= o a Grand Rapids Horizon HX with their Engine Information System (EIS 6000).= We had The VM probes for the Blue Mountain and are using them with the GRT.= We bought a Princeton conversion module for each probe in order to use them= with the Blue Mountain. We had to calibrate both the Princetons (1/4 ta= nk increments) and the Blue Mountain (2 gallon increments). We had= no problem connecting the output from the Princetons to the GRT HX. Since w= e had calibrated the Princeton modules in quarter tank increments, it was su= fficient for the HX.  The HX accuracy is very comparable as measured by= comparing actual tank fills with what the gauge showed at shutdown - in our= ES the comparison is between gallons to fill the 48 gallon tank with the fi= gure: 48 minus the gauge reading.

Hope this h= elps.

Cheers,
John

On Oct 2, 2011, at 10:08 A= M, Colyn Case <colyncase@earth= link.net> wrote:

I've had pretty good luck with my grt system.  They mak= e the eis6000 which is really what the Chelton systems use.  I bought t= heir basic EFIS for display purposes.   I have not had problems with th= eir hardware boxes or software.   I did have to rewire my CHT and EGT p= robes to avoid shorting.
Anyway, I'm sure they would be happy to tell yo= u if you can use your old probes or not.

Many peopl= e have had excellent service with the EI system.  But they will probabl= y make you replace all your probes.  Again call and find out.  I'm= sure you won't be the first VM refugee.


<= div>On Oct 1, 2011, at 9:29 AM, Patrick Hayoz wrote:

Hello to all,

My engine monitoring system is a Vis= ion Microsystems (VM) EPI 800 and worked
well for the last eight y= ears =E2=80=93 and still works fine.

I'm thinking o= f a replacement system =E2=80=93 in case of a major failure of the actual sy= stem.

My recent research showed that most of the in= stalled sensors are compatible with the
EMS used today.
=
Fuelprobe compatibility?
Does anybody knows a= bout the compatibility of the VM Fuel probes? I have two of them
i= nstalled in the wings. A calibration was done back in 2002 to respect of the= Fueltank geometry=E2=80=A6

Which system to for?=
What are y<our experiences with JPI, Dynon and others?

Any hints and thoughts are welcome, thank you.

Patrick, LNC2, Switzerland



= --Apple-Mail-15--35364184--