Aero Sport Power IO-360M1 & Props

fodrv7 · #1 03-19-2005, 09:15 PM

I am about to hang my Aero Sport Power IO-360M1, which is fitted with lightspeed Igntion and High Compression pistons, on my RV-7 and so need to make a prop decision pretty soon. I would appreciate any information or opinions on MT or Hartzell props from anone using this specific engine.

Thamks,
Pete.

fodrv7 · #2 03-20-2005, 12:51 AM

Scott, thanks for your input. As I live in Australia, a million miles from anywhere, I am reluctant to buy a Whirlwind as I understand the blades needs to be returned to the factory periodically and the freight charges across the Pacific are prohibitive.
Also, a friend swapped the Hatzell on his RV-8 for an MT and lost 10KTS!!!!. Herr MT is trying to find out where it went and until he does I am not sending him any Deutschmarks. What a delema. Wish I hadn't ask Bart for the high comp pistons.

Regards,

Pete.

rv8ch · #3 03-20-2005, 05:22 AM

10 knots is a lot. Do you know what kind of Hartzell and what kind of MT? Was this a top speed reduction? Do you know what MP and RPM? Thanks!

robertahegy · #4 03-20-2005, 05:41 AM

I'm running a Hartzell Blended Airfoil C/S prop (74") on a 7A with an
0-360A1A. The prop is very smooth and I'm getting 204 mph at 8,000 ft msl, throttle wide open at 2400 rpm. Climb is great also, about 1800 fpm at gross.

Hartzell's reliability world wide has to be attractive.

Roberta

Captain_John · #5 03-20-2005, 05:53 AM

Questions:

Scott, what is the service interval and what procedure eeds to be done to the WW? It looks like a viable, but costly option. Nice airscrew!

Roberta, do you have an RPM restriction?

CJ

robertahegy · #6 03-20-2005, 10:05 AM

The restrictions listed by Van's are:

Do not operate above 22" MP below 2350 rpm.

Operating above 2600 rpm is limited to takeoff. Reduce to below 2600 rpm as soon as practical.

Diameter limits are 74" and 72".

These do not seem to be very inhibiting for me. I really have enjoyed flying this combo (0-360 A1A and Hartzell BA prop). I was originally going to go FP, but really glad I spent the money. Great climb, smooth criuse performance and really slows nicely in the pattern into our 1700 ft grass strip.

Roberta

fodrv7 · #7 03-20-2005, 04:30 PM

Perhaps I was not specific enough with my original question. We all know that the Hartzell produces better numbers than the MT; and when my mates RV-8 flight testing of his new MT is complete I would be happy to pass on the figures. But, meanwhile, I have flown it for over 60hrs with the Hartzell and since with the MT and it is significantly slower.
But back to my dilemma. I unwittingly specified High Compression pistons in my IO-360 M1. It seems I may have shot myself in the foot, for Mr. Hartzell will not recommend that any of his propellers be fitted to engines for which he has not carried out harmonic tests, and he has not tested IO-360s with HIGH COMP Pistons. That is not to say there will be harmonic problems. They just don?t know, because they haven?t tested them.
So I was interested the experience of those running this combination.
And maybe from anyone who is running an MT and who does not regret the extra cost of the prop.

Davepar · #8 03-21-2005, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Chastain

...I didn't want any restrictions between RPM ranges like the Hartzell mandates. My choice, therefore, was with the Whirlwind 200RV, as I can use it on a non-counterweighted crankshaft with electronic ignition and with absolutely no restrictions.

The Hartzell has RPM restrictions because they have mounted their prop on the specified engine, instrumented it, and tested it. They presumably found harmonics in some RPM ranges that they deemed could be destructive to the prop, and thus specified restrictions. Has Whirlwind gone through this same testing, or are they simply ignoring the issue? I'm not trying to troll here. I'd really like to know. The Whirlwind props look great, but I want to be convinced that my prop won't delaminate and explode.

Dave