X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 16:40:30 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.224] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.3) with ESMTP id 1337574 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:53:19 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.249.82.224; envelope-from=akadamson@gmail.com Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i29so165143wxd for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:52:39 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:x-mailer:x-mimeole:thread-index:in-reply-to:sender; b=ZsU6lde7jXV5O8fZYw75feLtkopoi7mKEFQ/iBBE5BaK0hLKGphoqnV01LT0Rq5cA5u4LoPgCLhpZvavYM/VJkp9TAaFafxZ58oi2Pty9E54r5e69Bkns3J5O4AyYyz8eeYHtzbp4mb87kIA69p+8Ocy5QiwFRp/EMElWeUs90I= Received: by 10.70.71.1 with SMTP id t1mr5283156wxa; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:50:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from Typhoon ( [68.68.83.221]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id h11sm3709769wxd.2006.08.18.11.50.50; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:50:50 -0700 (PDT) From: "Alan K. Adamson" X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" Subject: RE: [LML] Prop for Legacy X-Original-Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:50:52 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <005901c6c2f7$3b578560$2501a8c0@highrf.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_005A_01C6C2D5.B445E560" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 Thread-Index: AcbC9GUQaz62QiQ4SKyQIUm0v0i2UAAAJg8w In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: Alan Adamson This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_005A_01C6C2D5.B445E560 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ok, all, great info... Let me share a bit more after some digging. I heard back from Dave Morss. His setup is a little different, it's actually a hybrid. His official statement is that it's an MT prop with custom blades. Those blades were made by Aero Composites. So We'll assume it's an MT hub, with Aerocomposites blades. Tim Ong rightfully shared the experience last year. On the Sport class race, they quickly removed the MT/AC prop from Dave's Legacy and replaced it with the Hartzell from 199L. Dave picked up at least 10 kts and it made the whole class a race for that position. Go look at the times and you'll see how narrow those 4 Legacys were. However, this may not be equivalent to what would happen with a full MT setup. Ok, on to the MT topic. I just got off the phone with MT. Here's the scoop. There is *NO* new airfoil on the blades, they have been a scimitar design from the beginning (whenever that was). The *DID* however come out with a counterweighted prop last year, but it's the same blade design, with the counterweights added at the bladeholder. As for the discussion on the weight. I found that 53lbs on the mt-propellers.com website, however, in talking with the US MT gang, they gave me a 56 (with spinner), for the non-counterweighted, and add about 6-7lbs for the counterweighted version (both of those are with spinner). So, to really put all of this in perspective, we'd need a Legacy that has flown with the Hartzell at a known configuration, and with the MT in the same configuration. I'm not sure we're going to make that happen, so I guess we are back to ground zero. Couple of other tidbits. The MT is 72" so on the RG that might take up some ground clearance. On the FG if I go there, that shouldn't be a problem as it set higher than the RG anyway. So, there ya have it! Alan _____ From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Leighton Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 2:31 PM To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: [LML] Prop for Legacy I have just recently installed a 3 blade MT on a Legacy with the IO-550 and am curious where the 53# weight info comes from. I put it on a good digital scale and it weighed 63#. This is a counterweighted prop and the bulk of the weight seems to be in the hub as the blades appear to be very light. One thing that appeals to me with this prop is that the default (no oil pressure) position of the blades is in course pitch which is a good thing when trying to glide with a dead engine. On the negative side, however, is the fact that the MT spinner diameter is about 1/2 inch larger in diameter than the Hartzell and the cowling is designed for the Hartzell, apparently, and requires quite a bit of body work to fit the MT. Also, the spinner on a Hartzell is fore and aft adjustable which makes it easier to get a good spinner/cowling gap but the MT is in a fixed position. Haven't flown it yet so can't give any performance data. Looks cool, though. We report, you decide. Leighton Mangels ------=_NextPart_000_005A_01C6C2D5.B445E560 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ok, all, great info... Let me share a bit more = after some=20 digging.
 
I heard back from Dave Morss.  His setup = is a little=20 different, it's actually a hybrid.  His official statement is that = it's an=20 MT prop with custom blades.  Those blades were made by Aero=20 Composites.  So We'll assume it's an MT hub, with Aerocomposites=20 blades. 
 
Tim Ong rightfully shared the experience last = year. =20 On the Sport class race, they quickly removed the MT/AC prop from Dave's = Legacy=20 and replaced it with the Hartzell from 199L.  Dave picked up at = least 10=20 kts and it made the whole class a race for that position.  Go look = at the=20 times and you'll see how narrow those 4 Legacys were.  However, = this may=20 not be equivalent to what would happen with a full MT = setup.
 
Ok, on to the MT topic.  I just got off = the phone with=20 MT.  Here's the scoop.  There is *NO* new airfoil on the = blades, they=20 have been a scimitar design from the beginning (whenever that = was).  The=20 *DID* however come out with a counterweighted prop last year, but it's = the same=20 blade design, with the counterweights added at the=20 bladeholder.
 
As for the discussion on the weight.  I = found that=20 53lbs on the mt-propellers.com website, however, in talking with the US = MT gang,=20 they gave me a 56 (with spinner), for the non-counterweighted, and add = about=20 6-7lbs for the counterweighted version (both of those are with=20 spinner).
 
So, to really put all of this in perspective, = we'd need a=20 Legacy that has flown with the Hartzell at a known configuration, and = with the=20 MT in the same configuration.  I'm not sure we're going to make = that=20 happen, so I guess we are back to ground zero.
 
Couple of other tidbits.  The MT is 72" so = on the RG=20 that might take up some ground clearance.  On the FG if I go there, = that=20 shouldn't be a problem as it set higher than the RG = anyway.
 
So, there ya have it!
Alan

From: Lancair Mailing List=20 [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = Leighton
Sent:=20 Friday, August 18, 2006 2:31 PM
To: Lancair Mailing=20 List
Subject: [LML] Prop for Legacy

I have just recently installed a 3 blade MT on a = Legacy with=20 the IO-550 and am curious where the 53# weight info comes from.  I = put it=20 on a good digital scale and it weighed 63#.  This is a = counterweighted prop=20 and the bulk of the weight seems to be in the hub as the blades appear = to be=20 very light.  One thing that appeals to me with this prop is that = the=20 default (no oil pressure) position of the blades is in course pitch = which is a=20 good thing when trying to glide with a dead engine.  On the = negative side,=20 however, is the fact that the MT spinner diameter is about 1/2 inch = larger in=20 diameter than the Hartzell and the cowling is designed for the Hartzell, = apparently, and requires quite a bit of body work to fit the MT.  = Also, the=20 spinner on a Hartzell is fore and aft adjustable which makes it easier = to get a=20 good spinner/cowling gap but the MT is in a fixed position.  = Haven't flown=20 it yet so can't give any performance data.  Looks cool, = though.  We=20 report, you decide.
 
Leighton Mangels
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_005A_01C6C2D5.B445E560--