X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 05:25:00 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from proxy1.addr.com ([38.113.244.28] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.3) with ESMTPS id 1336555 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 01:28:32 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=38.113.244.28; envelope-from=timothy.ong@leadingedgeaircraft.com Received: from COMPUTER2 (bc97237.bendcable.com [66.220.97.237]) by proxy1.addr.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) with SMTP id k7I5Rlmo043264 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:27:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-Message-ID: <045201c6c286$10d7c460$6501a8c0@COMPUTER2> From: "Timothy Ong" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] MT vs. Hartzell prop for the Legacy? X-Original-Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:20:47 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-ADDRSPAMFilter: Passed Alan, I have had this discussions many times. Check out the Reno race results for the last two years. Pay particular attention to Dave Morss's times. He used an MT propeller for all of the racing except the last day. There is 10 mph difference in his average speeds when he used Lancair's Hartzell propeller off of N199L. There is no better propeller for the engine no matter what the weight advantage. Regards, Timothy Ong