|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

08-06-2011, 05:53 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison Wi
Posts: 2
|
|
200RV Propeller
We are to the point of buying our propeller to hang on our IO360A1B6 engine in the 7. Does anyone have experence or thoughts on the 200RV Carbon Fiber Propeller CS vs a Hartzell CS ?
Thanks
|

08-06-2011, 06:15 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: WA
Posts: 988
|
|
Great prop...
The whole assembly is about 17 lbs lighter, the prop is very smooth, fast, and quiet. If you search a bit you can easily find a direct prop performance comparison done with the same RV.
__________________
Stephen
RV7 powered by a lycoming thunderbolt IO-390
turning a whirlwind HRT prop
with more hours flying than building... 2,430 on the hobbs!
ORCA Flight
Race 771
margarita!
|

08-06-2011, 11:05 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Townsend, Montana
Posts: 3,179
|
|
love my WW200RV
__________________
Retired Dam guy. Life is good.
Brian, N155BKsold but bought back.
|

08-06-2011, 11:21 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Battle Ground, Washington
Posts: 138
|
|
Love mine too
I have an RV-8 with an IO-360 M1 and WW 200 RV prop. Fantastic prop. Great performance, very smooth, very high quality. Lighter than Hartzell as mentioned. I have more than 1000 hours on mine.
Dan Miller
|

08-07-2011, 04:45 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 1,628
|
|
The 200RV currently has a 650 hour inspection cycle. Not sure what Hartzel requires. Mine is just like the other Whirlwinds; fast, smooth, and quite.
__________________
Ron Schreck
IAC National Judge
RV-8, "Miss Izzy", 2250 Hours - Sold
VAF 2021 Donor
|

08-07-2011, 08:21 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 239
|
|
Which is more important, weight or free speed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by iareapilot
We are to the point of buying our propeller to hang on our IO360A1B6 engine in the 7. Does anyone have experence or thoughts on the 200RV Carbon Fiber Propeller CS vs a Hartzell CS ?
Thanks
|
I think if you're wanting the highest speed for a given power setting and lowest fuel flow, the blended-airfoil Hartzell has the rest beat. You've got a company with a longer reputation in Hartzell also.
It depends on what's important to you. For myself, I would go with Hartzell.
|

08-07-2011, 10:48 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Battle Ground, Washington
Posts: 138
|
|
What are the data for this statement?
Jakngoan,
I would like to see the data that support your statement about the performance of the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop versus the WW 200 RV. I know of no evidence that supports your statement. What is the basis for your statement about performance and efficiency? For sure Hartzell had been around longer.
Dan Miller
RV-8 WW 200 RV propeller
|

08-08-2011, 07:46 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Chandler, AZ
Posts: 2,904
|
|
200RV
I have one on my plane and it is very smooth, fast and efficient. In a head to head fly off with a neighbor, with the same plane, same engine and similar avionics with a Hartzell BA, I was able to pull away from him with matched power settings. And, he was 100 lbs lighter.
Also, there was a comparison done a few years ago.
Another point of interest, when I had mine balanced, it balanced to a 0.00. This is the only prop he had ever got to 0.00.
The overhaul time is like to rise to 1000 hours. There are hundreds out there now compiling time with no known issues.
I'm so impressed, I bought another one for the current project.
__________________
Darwin N. Barrie
Chandler AZ
www.JDair.com
RV-7 N717EE-Flying (Sold)
RV-7 N717AZ Flying, in paint
EMS Bell 407,
Eurocopter 350 A-Star Driver
|

08-08-2011, 08:17 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: pittsburgh pa
Posts: 533
|
|
200RV vs Hartzell
I have a 200RV. I love it's performance, smoothness ete etc. I suspect that it is largely responsible for my planes relatively fast cruise speeds.... but
6's and 7's tend towards aft CG's. Mine is a typical build and typically is significantly aft baggage limited. I would like to have the extra 19 pounds (or whatever it is) of the Hartzell on the nose to get me some CG margin.
I suggest you run some "what if" Cg numbers between the two props and decide.
I wish Dan Checkoway's CG table was still up. From that I think you will see that Hartzell CG's are typically 1"+ forward of 200rv or fixed pitch CG's. That is significant, especially in an airplane where you just can't adjust the load to move CG ahead - like the 6 and 7.
YMMV. Fly safe
__________________
Gary Reed
RV-6 IO-360
WW 200 RV now an Al Hartzell for improved CG
Last edited by gereed75 : 08-08-2011 at 08:20 AM.
|

08-08-2011, 11:36 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 778
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdmiller
I would like to see the data that support your statement about the performance of the Hartzell Blended Airfoil prop versus the WW 200 RV. I know of no evidence that supports your statement. What is the basis for your statement about performance and efficiency? For sure Hartzell had been around longer.
r
|
It doesn't seem that there has ever been a test where the same airplane was flown with both props (or else it hasn't been reported). Randy Lervold tested the 200RV against the non-BA Hartzell, and reported that the 200RV was 1-2 mph faster and 100 fpm better in climb. Van's tested the BA Hartzell with older 7496 blades against the non-BA Hartzell, and found the BA prop to be 3 mph faster and 60-70 fpm better climb. Its also been suggested that the current-production 7497 blades are less efficient than the original 7496 blades.
So which one wins? Who knows. However, the performance difference seems likely to be pretty minor. My guess would be that build differences between individual aircraft are probably a larger factor.
__________________
Alan Carroll
RV-8 N12AC
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:09 AM.
|