Input on Surefly ignition
 

I?ll be in the market to replace/rebuild one of my mags soon. Can?t find too much information on the Surefly electronic ignition system so figured I would see if anyone is using it and would care to comment. Seems well priced and straight forward to install. Feb. COPA issue has an article.
Cheers

I have one on my 6 cylinder Lyc.
 

All good! If I installed a couple more I could completely install one complete in 30 minutes. Just remove the plug wire back plate from your Slick. Install Shurefly as you would a magneto. Very easy to time. Don't need timing light. Timing light built in to it. I put about 20 hours on it then had to take my plane out of service for major engine work. Didn't get all the data on performance yet, but it runs smoother, easier starts, and a little cooler. (I detached the shower of sparks). Still in the beginning stage of testing. Fuel consumption decreased at least 5% LOP (probably a lot more but being conservative) Real happy with it and manufacture's support.

Steve Barnes

Can you qualify the statement Steve? For a given RPM and MP the only way to decrease fuel consumption is additional leaning.

Are you saying a switch from a magneto to a Surefly allows you to lean further before reaching an equal degree of roughness? What is the effect on airspeed?

Brought to you by the same people that created the plane power alternator!

...just sayin...

:cool: CJ

I purchased one last week in person and spent a lot of time with the general manager in the assembly shop looking at all the components and complete units at various stages of assembly. He was very forthcoming about mods made during the testing process and things they had to improve on. I got to see all the internals and was very impressed with the appearance of quality of the machined parts and components. Only time will tell as I haven't had time to install it yet but it is stone simple to install. For the cost of 1.5 AU's I figured it was worth a try,if I am unhappy in some way it is an easy swap back to the mag.


Keith

49clipper
 

Steve,
I installed one last year and have no compliants. I have about 50 hours on it. The claim was I would get a lower idle (if wanted), lower fuel consumption, get more LOP than i could with my mags, and better starting. I can say for sure, I did not need a slower idle (mine is fine already), I may be getting slightly lower fuel consumption, but if so, its so slight, its hard to tell, I can definitely run lean farther before onset of roughness (approx 45-65LOP), starting is the same (my engine has always started just fine at one or two blades. I have a O-320-D1A, with carb. My normal fuel consumption from the day i started flying it is 7.2 gph and it still seems to be right there. I fly LOP on virtually every flight. the one drawback which is completely normal is that your CHT's will rise about 30-45 degrees with the advanced leaning. that is not a problem for me since I typically run about 275-315 degrees normally. Now i run about 290-340f.
I will never be without a mag, period. Its a matter of trust and simplicity.
Would i do it again, hmmm. good question, I don't know.

Thanks Steve. Good info. We?ll see if anyone else has had similar results...
I have a Shower of Sparks that I would like to eliminate as well. Is there any reason to add an impulse coupling? Starting ok? Their instruction package says I will need to get a new Slick harness to replace the Bendix which is what I have.

A major attraction seems to be the lack of maintenance required. According to the COPA article no inspections or adjustments. Just throw it away after 2000hrs. However, just like any electronic ignition it requires electrons so you need to think about the need for a back up source.
I like the fact that it is self contained and doesn't need an outside timing source - no extra wires vulnerable to damage.

Thanks Dan
 

It leans noticeably more and stays smooth. To kill the engine I hace to pull the mixture quite a bit more. Surefly is not a magic bullet. It just does what the other high quality electronic ignitions do. I just like the way it mounted and used existing plug wires. About the same size and shape as a magneto.

Steve

Dead on. A switch from mag to any decent EI should net about the same result in terms of reduced cycle-to-cycle variation, the practical effect being ability to run lean.

Installation and operation ease are very strong features of the design.

Yes, additional advance will always increase CHT. Not a problem if the engine was already over-cooled in LOP cruise; plenty of cooing margin. It will be a problem if the installation exhibits marginal cooling before the change. It also takes away the ability to reduce cooling mass flow, if you're inclined towards such a mod.

The published advance map for the Surefly is very aggressive, and there is no provision for dual maps (i.e. one for ROP, one for LOP), so the result isn't optimum for either condition. At 2500 RPM, for example, the advance ramps up from base timing to 33-34 degrees across a spread of only 3.5"Hg. It means that best power climb from about 4500 upwards will probably include rapidly increasing CHT; too much advance for best power mixture. Not the best choice if your ops plan usually includes bulleting up to 11.5K, fine if your typical profile is a quick climb to 4500 for LOP cruise.