What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Whirlwind 300-72 Information

Skykingbob

Well Known Member
I am building an RV-8. I have a Superior XIO-360 with 9:1 pistons and two electronic ignitions. I would like to hear about the experience of anyone on the forum that has the WW 300-72 on the higher compression engine to see how the propeller has been operating and if you have had any problems running it on the higher compression engine (e.g. - blade problems, hub problems, operating problems, how many hours, simple flights or aerobatics, etc)

Plenty of great folks on this forum....appreciate the information and help prior to slapping down the money to buy one. :)
 
Last edited:
I have only heard of good experiances with Whirlwind props, but the best and most up-to-date information is going to come directly from them. They are constantly develiping new stuff that is not on their web site. - Call them and discuss your details and they will give you straight answers.
 
Clarification

Thank you so much Keith and Jesse for your input. I have actually been in communication with Hunter (same last name as your Keith....relative?) at Whirlwind(WW) who has been responding promptly to my inquiries and has been very helpful.

I also have communicated with Paul Dye as well as read his article on the 300.

The information I am trying to ascertain concerning the higher compression IO-360 folks that I was told from WW prop which have bought the 300 propeller.

WW has the normal compression IO-360 (8.5:1 approx 180HP) listed as applicable to this propeller but due to NOT testing it on the (9:1 approx 192HP) configuration is not listed as an applicable engine.

So that's where I am in the process. The propeller is not "unsafe" to run on the higher compression....there is just no data to know the issues or longevity of running the 300 on such a configuration.

I know about the 330 series but I am shunning the 17 pounds extra in front of the nose of the RV8.

So if any high compression IO-360 folks have any information about their experience with this prop on their aircraft I would love to hear any Clint Eastwood comments of the "Good, the Bad, or the Ugly" you have experienced with the propeller and your engine configuration.

Thanks again to all....this is a great forum.
 
Last edited:
Thank you so much Keith and Jesse for your input. I have actually been in communication with Hunter (same last name as your Keith....relative?) at Whirlwind(WW) who has been responding promptly to my inquiries and has been very helpful.

Yes, Hunter is one of my sons. He got his masters in Aerospace Engineering at Virginia Tech. and then worked at HondaJet for a while before going to Wirlwind. He has a RV6A that he has flown all over the place. - He will take good care of you.
 
Yes, Hunter is one of my sons. He got his masters in Aerospace Engineering at Virginia Tech. and then worked at HondaJet for a while before going to Wirlwind. He has a RV6A that he has flown all over the place. - He will take good care of you.

That's really cool to hear. I, too, have been talking with Hunter in the last week.

Hunter was very professional and informative. He's a great representative for Whirlwind. You have reason to be a proud papa.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if the info I can share is applicable or not.

I have a angle-valve IO-360, so 8.7 compression. (not too different from 9:1)
I also have one Light Speed ignition that runs fairly advanced at cruise.
So that part is probably fairly equivalent.

But...

I have a WW 200RV prop, which uses the McCauley style hub. So I don't know if my experience with it is reflective of the WW 300-72 or not. At about 300 hrs, it was throwing grease badly enough that I decided to pull it and have it re-sealed. The story at the time was that the assembly plant (then in Ohio) had switched grease formulation and it turned out to be incompatible with the seals, and led to early seal failure and throwing grease. The prop ended up needing a full overhaul, all new bearings and races. The bearing races showed a lot of wear/trauma.

Now, with another 300+ hrs on it, it seems to be fine, no grease spitting. So, I was willing to take the story about the grease change at face value.

But...

Now I read on the WW site that the McCauley style hub didn't seem to tolerate the high compression and spark advance, as motivation for WW designing a new hub. That news, along with my overhaul experience, calls into question whether the 200RV prop should be running on an angle-valve engine? I love the performance, and the smoothness, but it might be that my engine is pretty hard on it?

An acquaintance with a parallel-valve IO-360 with (I believe) 10:1 pistons had his WW 200RV prop overhauled last fall at something like 450 hrs, also spitting grease badly) and found similar need to replace all the bearings and races. His prop is similar vintage to mine.

So - in summary -- I don't know. Just giving you some data points.
 
The angle valve engines usually have crankshaft dampers (AKA counterweights) that lessen the beating on the prop.

There's threads on here about the Whirlwind 330 prop. From what I understand, it's designed to handle hopped up engines. Higher CR, aggressive EI, stroked 370/375.
 
Bob
The 300-72 on my rv9a is performing perfectly so far. I can easily out accelerate on takeoff,a rv 7a with more hp and a blended airfoil. ( he pulls away a bit in cruise though) at altitude I regain some of that. I beat vans numbers easily in climb and cruise although my hp will be over 160 due to 10:1 compression. I am considering the same prop on a rans s21 I have just ordered an engine for. Aero Sport io 320 again with pmags and 9.5 compression this time.
Incidentally my prop was the first one out the door to the general public, I had ordered it 1.5 years ahead of when it arrived, the testing was not done at that time. It was assembled in Ohio, not the west coast as they are now. Turnaround now is fast, and the people I have talked to are professional and honest.
The only bad thing is I will have to pay full rate for the next one.:-(
 
I'm not sure if the info I can share is applicable or not.

So - in summary -- I don't know. Just giving you some data points.

Steve,

Thanks for sharing....yes from what I understand the McCauley was just having too many issues so WW went to the drawing board and made the home grown hub. Data is always good.....more data-greater accuracy...the law of large numbers right? Thanks again!
 
Hunter

Yes, Hunter is one of my sons. He got his masters in Aerospace Engineering at Virginia Tech. and then worked at HondaJet for a while before going to Wirlwind.

Keith,

Spoken like a truly proud father!! As one who lived in Greensboro (Honda Jet) and now in Virginia (Virginia Tech) it seems like Whirlwind is very fortunate to have one such as Hunter with his professional pedigree. Great guy to speak with and get information.

I also guess after having 7 children.....it seems you made a good choice to find the RV hobby :D
 
330

The angle valve engines usually have crankshaft dampers (AKA counterweights) that lessen the beating on the prop.

There's threads on here about the Whirlwind 330 prop. From what I understand, it's designed to handle hopped up engines. Higher CR, aggressive EI, stroked 370/375.

David,

Yes you are correct about the 330 props.....the down side is they are 17 lbs heavier! There are differences also when raising compression through piston as opposed to stroking the engine. Either way no data = no data....so you are correct the heavier hub should be able to handle the loads....we will see. And the 300-72 may be able to handle the loads effectively also....again to be seen.

Thanks again for your input!:)
 
Pirep

Bob
The 300-72 on my rv9a is performing perfectly so far. I can easily out accelerate on takeoff,a rv 7a with more hp and a blended airfoil. ( he pulls away a bit in cruise though) at altitude I regain some of that. I beat vans numbers easily in climb and cruise although my hp will be over 160 due to 10:1 compression. I am considering the same prop on a rans s21 I have just ordered an engine for. Aero Sport io 320 again with pmags and 9.5 compression this time.
Incidentally my prop was the first one out the door to the general public, I had ordered it 1.5 years ahead of when it arrived, the testing was not done at that time. It was assembled in Ohio, not the west coast as they are now. Turnaround now is fast, and the people I have talked to are professional and honest.
The only bad thing is I will have to pay full rate for the next one.:-(

Jack,

Thank you so much for taking the time to update your experience! More data to help make decisions is very helpful!

Now you are getting ready for ANOTHER build! Wow...congrats! In the words of Wiley Coyote you must have the incurable sickness of "Experimentalus Amaturus Buildacus" no known cure available...

Thanks again Jack:)
 
...me too!

Thanks for all the previous posts and useful information…I have been following this thread with great interest. I too have an IO-360X with 9:1 compression, but really like the performance, price point, and weight of the 300-72...not to mention the look of those 3 blades! :D I have heard some really good things about the prop, but would just like to get some more comparable input before making the final decision. Thanks for the brain-trust of information on this site!
 
The angle valve engines usually have crankshaft dampers (AKA counterweights) that lessen the beating on the prop.

There's threads on here about the Whirlwind 330 prop. From what I understand, it's designed to handle hopped up engines. Higher CR, aggressive EI, stroked 370/375.

I don't know about 'most'. Some models do. Some models don't. Mine does not.
 
I am building an RV-8. I have a Superior XIO-360 with 9:1 pistons and two electronic ignitions. I would like to hear about the experience of anyone on the forum that has the WW 300-72 on the higher compression engine to see how the propeller has been operating and if you have had any problems running it on the higher compression engine (e.g. - blade problems, hub problems, operating problems, how many hours, simple flights or aerobatics, etc)
I have the WW 300-72 on my Rans S-21 with the IOX-340 engine with 9.0:1 CR and dual P-mags. The prop was dynamically balanced before the first flight and started throwing grease from the beginning. Hunter said that was to be expected for the first 5 hours. It then seemed to decrease after about 10 hours until around 15 hours or so when it started to get worse, with 31 hours TT now. I have had no other operational problems and the performance with this prop seems great, but I have nothing to compare it to.
 
Back
Top