Need real world data concerning one Slick mag and one electronic ignition

[vic syracuse]

I've done this on 3 airplanes so far. I think it is the best combination of safety and efficiency. High altitude performance is much improved with the electronic ignition. I don't believe you can go wrong with this set up.

Vic

[N941WR]

Originally Posted by tadsargent

... I am supposed to get 6% more power, but that was not my reasoning ...
Just say no to MAGS

Regards,
Tad "Stripes" Sargent

Axel,

That 6% more power is for any dual EI over dual mags. One EI and one mag will increase your power approximately 4%.

Those numbers came from a large engine builder who sees those numbers on his dyno and will remain anonymous. They also said it really doesn’t matter which EI you used.

Due to the complexity of installing the LSI, I'm not a fan. My preference is the P-mags as they are easy to install, don't have all the connections like the LSI, they work, don't require a 2nd battery if installing two, etc. However, this is your plane, select the EI you are comfortable with and install that.

[AX-O]

Thanks for the replies all.

Originally Posted by Walt

I would install the dual crank sensor to start with.

Originally Posted by Scott Hersha

Axel,
I have the crank triggered Light Speed which I recommend for accuracy and simplicity.

Why is the Hall Effect Module not as good or more difficult to use than the direct crank sensor?

[rvmills]

I can't comment on the Hall Effect vs. Crank Sensor question, but I've now had two different 1 mag/1 EI combos on my airplane, and both have worked well.

I bought the airplane with a LSE Plasma I and a Bendix non-impulse coupled mag. Worked great, but when the LSE Plasma I stopped working (brain box issue...older technology, replacements not available), I installed an Electroair EI.

The Electroair has been a great system as well. Straight-forward install, with a slightly different crank sensor design from the LSE. Like the LSE, it worked great with the Bendix mag...and now works great with the Slick impulse-coupled mag I recently installed (Bendix was due for overhaul and the Slick was available from a friend for a good price).

One item on the crank sensor (for either brand) is that the prop needs to be off for either installation (can't remember if your prop is on yet).

My experience with mag checks and performance has been similar to others that posted. 100-150 RPM drop with the EI off, and no drop with mag off. High altitude performance has been excellent with each system (though I can't compare it to two mags...sorry).

It really purrs with the EI though!

Cheers,
Bob

[Walt]

Originally Posted by AX-O

Why is the Hall Effect Module not as good or more difficult to use than the direct crank sensor?

I had the hall effect at first but started to experience some persistant oil leakage that we coudn't seem to fix. The crank sensor has no moving parts and needs no maintenance (although it's really not necessary I do pull the prop every year just to keep an eye on things and replace the alt belt). When I elected to go dual LS it was also the most economical way to go.

[db1yg]

Hi Axel,

I have a Hall Effect PIII and a Slick mag combo. If I had it to do over again, I would go with the direct crank sensing PIII vs the Hall effect. The Hall Effect is easier to install but it costs more and contains an electronic circuit board while the crank sensor is mechanical and, based on posts to this site, is more reliable. My Hall effect sensor seal went bad after around 125 hrs and allowed engine oil to coat the internal circuit board. I sent it back to Klaus and he replaced the seal but others have had a similar problems. No problems posted, however, on the direct crank sensor.

Reference performance, the mag/EI combo delivers very good performance, and is probably the reason my carb engine will run smoothly LOP. I get a 10-20 rpm drop when the mag is shut off but a 70 rpm drop with the EI off--as stated the EI is doing most of the work. If you start your engine on the mag and then switch on the EI you can actually hear the engine smooth out.

Hope this is of value.

Cheers,

db

[G3i Ignition]

Axel.
Great question and debate, ? electronic system, ? conventional mag. Not to be opinionated, a well known gentleman in the RV community that runs one of our ignition systems came by our G3i booth in KOSH this year and his quote stuck with me. ? A 1/2 system is like cooking a pancake and not flipping it, burned on one side and raw on the other?. There are great debates on flame propagation and cylinder pressures as flame fronts build across the combustion chamber from the first initial ionization for spark. Running a mag that is behind the initial EI ignition timing has to build more KV to ionize. If the magneto and harness is in good to excellent condition with no potential problems, they usually do OK. If they?re worn and getting tired this will shorten the useful remaining life of the component. This all has a bearing on the power range you operate you engine in also. At 60-65% or below @ higher altitudes the EI will advance the timing leaving the mag timing way behind. At the higher power settings the window of timing difference between the EI and mag is not that much. Dual electronic in my opinion is always better than a ? system. If you are concerned about the redundancy for an EI system, I do understand.
Sincerely,
Thomas Shpakow
www.g3ignition.com

[videobobk]

I started flying my 9A/O-320 with two slicks. During the 40 hours (at about 25, IIRC) I swapped out the right Slick for an E-Mag. I had good data by then, and I saw about one gph decrease in fuel burn. Also easier starting. Little improvement in speed or TO power. At about 100 hours I swapped the left mag for a P-Mag. Fuel burn improved slightly, maybe .2 gph. Again, starting may have been a little better, but not much as it started great with 1M/1E. BUT... the idle was much smoother, and there was a slight improvement in TO power and a 5 mph increase in top speed! I know it has to do with flame propagation and all that technical stuff, but it was quite noticeable. If you want to save fuel, one will do it. For smoothness and power, gotta add both. YMMV.

Bob Kelly

[N79PT]

Axel, I'm also running the Slick/LSE combo. I installed the Hall Effect Module and while I've never had any leaks there is a regular inspection (100 hr?) for bearing and seal wear. Originally I was concerned about the glue holding up,however, knowing what I now do about adhesives I would not worry! I wish I had installed the Direct Crank Sensor--no moving parts to worry about.

[dedgemon]

I think the direct crank sensor is probably more robust (no moving parts at all), but on a dual EI system I was reluctant to use it for BOTH ignitions. It would be a single point failure. So I used the direct crank sensor for one and the hall effect for the other. Its really just what you're comfortable with.

[/quote]
Why is the Hall Effect Module not as good or more difficult to use than the direct crank sensor?[/quote]