PDA

View Full Version : New aeromatic propeller on MY 0 200



dynoluc
11-18-2009, 12:57 AM
I bought a new AEROMATIC prop for my zenith 701 /750 with a continental O 200

It took some time to set the prop but it is worth it

Airspeed was 80 mph at 2500 rpm


New airspeed 95 +++ at 2500 rpm [cruise]

takeoffs are unbelievable 2700 rpm 40 mph 1000 +++ fpm

IT'S TRUE IT LIKE BOLTING A SECOND ENGINE UNBELIEVABLE

Dave Calkins
11-18-2009, 07:16 AM
I want one. Actually, I want two.

One for a 180 HP Lycoming and one for a 340 HP Continental.

garyh
11-18-2009, 12:04 PM
dynoluc,
did your new prop come from tarver propellers in nevada?
www.aeromatic.com

gary

Roger Peterson
11-18-2009, 12:14 PM
Been waiting for a report on one. How do you think it would work on a PA!! on floats.

garyh
11-18-2009, 05:41 PM
roger,
i've had an aeromatic on my pa18-95 for about a year now and it is a good compromise for having a takeoff prop and cruise prop combined automatically into one. if getting off short on floats is your only concern i would suggest that a fixed takeoff prop would be best because the leading edge is thinner and may bite a little better for takeoff, however, if you have a ways to go and want good takeoff and cruise then the aeromatic is best.
gary

hotrod180
11-19-2009, 09:21 PM
I bought a new AEROMATIC prop .........

How much?

garyh
11-20-2009, 10:33 AM
hotrod,
a new fixed pitch cruise prop=2500
a new fixed pitch climb prop=2500
a new aeromatic(cruise&climb)=5000
www.aeromatic.com

CptKelly
11-21-2009, 06:55 PM
Dave Calkins,
The Aeromatic prop cannot be used on either the 0-320 or 0-360 Lycomings. It is spelled out on Tarver's web site. The reason is the probability of lag bolt failures. Aeromatics work wonders for the small continentals, however. I had one years ago on a C-90 powered Clip Wing Cub, and it was like having two engines in that cub.

Mike

Dave Calkins
11-21-2009, 08:48 PM
Dave Calkins,
The Aeromatic prop cannot be used on either the 0-320 or 0-360 Lycomings. It is spelled out on Tarver's web site. The reason is the probability of lag bolt failures. Aeromatics work wonders for the small continentals, however. I had one years ago on a C-90 powered Clip Wing Cub, and it was like having two engines in that cub.

Mike

Mike, I was aware that they're not suitable to anything more than an O-235. I was speaking facetiously. The Aeromatic technology would be great as a lightweight alternative to some Hartzell or McCauley constant speed prop.

DAVE

hotrod180
11-22-2009, 10:33 PM
I didn't look closely enough at the Tarver site to realize that they're only good for up to O-235. They used to hang them on 200 horse Rangers as I recall. I've also heard of a Ranger throwing a blade, and shaking the engine right off the mount in a matter of seconds.
I'm more inclined toward a controllable prop. I guess MT has one, but they're pretty spendy. and I'm not sure of what they're approved on anyway. The other controllable are the old ones such as the beech Roby, etc. Never seemed to catch on so maybe that kinda sez something about their suitability.

Eric

Roger Peterson
11-23-2009, 11:57 AM
The two props I am looking at are the Aeromatic and the Sensenich composite propeller C08-1E. I fly the PA11 with a souped up 0-200 on floats for 4 months each summer and then fly back to Texas for the rest of the year. I am now using a 76AK2-40 and my cruse speed on wheels is about 85. That is a long haul fromn Canada to Texas at that speed. Also I only turn 2500 Static with that prop. Would like to turn 2700 Static.
Any Ideas which one might do the best for me.

dynoluc
11-24-2009, 04:20 PM
The aromatic prop IS best of both world climb and cruise speed

more video to come

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3yySVw7hIc

dynoluc
11-24-2009, 04:31 PM
MY new prop came from tarver propellers in nevada

I wanted a MT prop but at 11,800.00 us it was out of the budjet
the arematic was half $$$$

The aromatic is very simple

dynoluc
11-24-2009, 04:32 PM
MY new prop came from tarver propellers in nevada

I wanted a MT prop but at 11,800.00 us it was out of the budjet
the arematic was half $$$$

The aromatic is very simple

Roger Peterson
11-24-2009, 05:53 PM
How was the setup on the aeromatic. Did it take much trial and error work.

garyh
11-24-2009, 06:43 PM
roger,
it took just a tad over 1.5 hr. to remove fixed prop, install new aeromatic, do a static rpm check and adjust the hub shims to get the correct static rpm's, go do a run around the patch, adjust the arm weights to get the correct rpm setting and go fly around the patch to see if rpm is set correctly. nice thing about the prop is you can change the arm weights in 5 min. to change your rpm setting for different altitudes, eg. at my altitude of 1000 ft. during the summer i add or subtract weight to get 2625 rpm but as the weather in late fall cools i have to adjust the arm weights or the rpm will increase to 2680+ which i don't want. likewise, if i move to denver at 5000 ft. elevation i can adjust the arm weight to give me 2625 rpm there also.
by the way this tarver aeromatic is on my pa18-95 and for this engine it is a great mod.
gary

Roger Peterson
11-25-2009, 11:10 AM
Talked with the guy at Tarver and am going to go with the Aeromatic. I am now running a 76AK2-40. Don't know if I should order 74" or 76" blades for it. My engine is putting out about 120HP and want good performance on floats. Anyone got any feelings on which might be best on the Aeromatic on Floats.
What are you running Gary and what engine is it on.

garyh
11-25-2009, 11:37 AM
roger,
i am running a 73" prop on my c90-12 engine because my type certificate only allows 73" on koppers aeromatic(now it's tarver).
i would speak further with old kent tarver because he possesses a great deal of knowledge on these props.
gary

Roger Peterson
11-26-2009, 08:31 PM
Ordering mine tomorrow. What is your red line and did he give you a red line for the prop.

C-FIJK
11-26-2009, 10:24 PM
Hi Roger would you not think that a longer prop would be better , all borer props are usually longer than a standard prop !

I would take the longer one

My plane is still not ready :(

Gerry

Roger Peterson
11-26-2009, 10:39 PM
That was my feeling also. Attached is a e-mail to Tarver and his reply.
I am not a Prop Engr, so hate to screw up something that someone more knowledgeable than me has designed.

----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Peterson
To: info@aeromatic.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 7:35 PM
Subject: Prop for my PA11

Enjoyed talking with you about a prop for my PA11. I will be ordering it next week, but still trying to decide if I would be better off with 74" or 76" blades.
I have a souped up 0-200 continental that is developing between 115 and 120 HP. I have the engine balanced the same as the ones used in the cafe races and it is very smooth and I have run is for a couple of hours at 3500 RPM
I am now using a 76AK2-40 Sensenich and my static RPM is just under 2500 RPM
At WOT, level flight, I can reach 3,000 RPM but normally cruse at about 2400 RPM which gives me a speed of about 83 mph.
I spend 5 month each summer in Canada on floats, but it would sure be nice to have a faster cruse as the flight back and forth to Texas gets long.
I have been playing with the tip speed calculator on P Ponk Web Site http://www.pponk.com/HTML%20PAGES/propcalc.html and if I stay with 2750 as red line, it looks like 76" might be better, but I know there is more to it than that. I have flown in Super Cubs using the Bore 80" props and they really pull.

Roger
Just a few problems I see with the tip calculator. You have to add the forward speed of the airplane to the tip speed. The calculator sayd that a 74" prop doing 2800 rpm, the tip speed is 616.4 mph and that equals mach .86 at 0 deg. At 100 deg 616.4 mph equals .78 mach.
Add cruise speed of 100 mph to the 616.4 = 716.4 mph which = approx mach .94.

Density altitude is used to calculate mach number and DA not only takes into account temperature but also the specific weight of air at the altitude of operation. The thickness of the blade at the tip also affects what tip speed you can go. A real thin blade can go closer to mach 1 without mach buffet than a thicker one. The effeciency curve is not linear. You could have air going over mach 1 when the tip speed is less than mach 1.

At the flight levels that we fly at, usually vfom 0 to 10K' the temp from summer flying to winter flying is far greater difference than the elaps rate of temp due to altitude change. Where I am I could be flying in the winter at 0 degrees and as high as 110 deg in summer. That's a big difference, 110 deg. The temp gradent from 0 to 10,000' on a given standard day is only 35.7 deg.

So you can see that there is more to it that the calculator deals with.


Happy Thanksgiving.

Kent

Roger Peterson
11-26-2009, 10:41 PM
Gerrry, Do you think you will have it by next spring. You might forget how to fly by the time it is done.

garyh
11-26-2009, 11:38 PM
roger,
book redline is 2625 rpm for 5 min. there after 2425 rpm max for my c90-12f engine.
gary

C-FIJK
11-27-2009, 12:36 AM
Roger Get Kevin on board also he needs one for his Champ!!!!

Hoping to have the plane for Xmas , will keep you posted, interior is almost complete then we have a bit of work on the trailing edge wing skins and then paint

Roger Peterson
12-01-2009, 02:22 PM
Just talked to Kent Tarver and he is starting a 76" for my PA11 With a 0-200. Will use it on both floats and wheels. Going to set it up for 2750 RPM Max

garyh
12-01-2009, 03:11 PM
roger,
the ONLY downside to my f200-73 prop. was the extra 9 lbs. of wt.
congrats
gary

cubdriver2
12-01-2009, 03:33 PM
When I got my pa11, C90,0200 cam and timing, it had been on floats for quite some time, it had a C150 climb prop MC DCM 69x48 on it, the floats were sold before I got it, that prop would turn 2675 on a 80* day and 2750+ in the winter, I tried a few different, longer, flatter props but never found one that would take off and climb as short as that little stick up front, it got sent out for overhaul and came back at 67" and worked even better, it even cruised at around 88 mph @ 2400 rpm. I loved that prop, and it never worked the engine that hard on the hottest day it never went over 180*

Glenn

JimC
12-07-2009, 04:52 AM
........Just a few problems I see with the tip calculator. You have to add the forward speed of the airplane to the tip speed. The calculator sayd that a 74" prop doing 2800 rpm, the tip speed is 616.4 mph and that equals mach .86 at 0 deg. At 100 deg 616.4 mph equals .78 mach.
Add cruise speed of 100 mph to the 616.4 = 716.4 mph which = approx mach .94.

The statement above is incorrect. With a tip speed of 616.4 mph due to rpm and an airspeed of 100 mph, the tipspeed becomes
(616.4^2 + 100^2)^0.5 = 624.44 mph, not 716.4 mph

I do agree that the tip calculator has problems.
JimC

JimC
01-19-2016, 07:35 PM
Roger, on your hopped up O-200, how did that Tarver compare vs the 76AK-2 40?

Roger Peterson
01-19-2016, 10:12 PM
Never put it on. It is still laying in the shop. Planning on putting it on my son's plane in a week or two.

hotrod180
01-20-2016, 12:01 PM
FWIW recently I heard a rumor about Tarver losing his production certificate or something.
Checked the aeromatic.com website and found this posted:
"Until further notice, the FAA has put me out of business for certifiec propeller work."