Well i pulled the trigger...PPONK it is!!!!

[182dude]

Ive decided to install the PPONK O-470-50 in the skylane!!

ive talked with steve up in washington, and have a ferry permit ready so i can fly out next week to take the plane to oregon to have the engine yanked rebuilt and reinstalled, as well as the annual completed!!

all in all with a brand new hartzell 82" prop this is not much more expensive then the fact new engine and the original prop.

im very excited to see what this plane will do when its done. any feedback pponk guys!!

Mike

[66skylane]

Great choice! Are you able to use your 470 core or are you using a 520 core? Which cylinders? Just curious...

Steve built mine about 500 hours ago and I would do the exact same thing again. I have a 3 blade mac but never flew it with a 2 blade so can't offer comparison details. I would sure like to try a MT though! I picked up about 9mph but gave some of that back when I put on the big fork and mains. It's a great set up.

[shortfielder]

You think you are happy now, wait to you fly that with the new engine. You'll be grinnin from ear to ear.

[Glidergeek]

I was a bit white knuckle for about the 1st 40 hours. It's a whole new game

[aktahoe1]

Ive decided to install the PPONK O-470-50 in the skylane!!

ive talked with steve up in washington, and have a ferry permit ready so i can fly out next week to take the plane to oregon to have the engine yanked rebuilt and reinstalled, as well as the annual completed!!

all in all with a brand new hartzell 82" prop this is not much more expensive then the fact new engine and the original prop.

im very excited to see what this plane will do when its done. any feedback pponk guys!!

Mike

Curious why you are going with the 82" Hartzell Prop?? Steve has several 3 balde 86" macs in stock

[aktahoe1]

Great choice! Are you able to use your 470 core or are you using a 520 core? Which cylinders? Just curious...

Steve built mine about 500 hours ago and I would do the exact same thing again. I have a 3 blade mac but never flew it with a 2 blade so can't offer comparison details. I would sure like to try a MT though! I picked up about 9mph but gave some of that back when I put on the big fork and mains. It's a great set up.

Steve just pilled an MT off an engine and was surprised to see that it was ALL wood inside. I too was leaning toward the MT but after that and several other reports, the 401 it is for me.

Did you ask about the O550 he is getting STC'd? Sounds like a winner as well.

Kind of interesting how much info is out there on PPonk. Seems like a great way to go. Put my engine in a crate and sent it to Knopp as well yesterday...

[aktahoe1]

Great choice! Are you able to use your 470 core or are you using a 520 core? Which cylinders? Just curious...

Steve built mine about 500 hours ago and I would do the exact same thing again. I have a 3 blade mac but never flew it with a 2 blade so can't offer comparison details. I would sure like to try a MT though! I picked up about 9mph but gave some of that back when I put on the big fork and mains. It's a great set up.

Steve just pilled an MT off an engine and was surprised to see that it was ALL wood inside. I too was leaning toward the MT but after that and several other reports, the 401 it is for me.

Did you ask about the O550 he is getting STC'd? Sounds like a winner as well.

Kind of interesting how much info is out there on PPonk. Seems like a great way to go. Put my engine in a crate and sent it to Knopp as well yesterday...

[Glidergeek]

Great choice! Are you able to use your 470 core or are you using a 520 core? Which cylinders? Just curious...

Steve built mine about 500 hours ago and I would do the exact same thing again. I have a 3 blade mac but never flew it with a 2 blade so can't offer comparison details. I would sure like to try a MT though! I picked up about 9mph but gave some of that back when I put on the big fork and mains. It's a great set up.

Steve just pilled an MT off an engine and was surprised to see that it was ALL wood inside. I too was leaning toward the MT but after that and several other reports, the 401 it is for me.

Did you ask about the O550 he is getting STC'd? Sounds like a winner as well.

Kind of interesting how much info is out there on PPonk. Seems like a great way to go. Put my engine in a crate and sent it to Knopp as well yesterday...

Kevin
I'm surprised that Steve didn't know it's wood inside, the advantage to that is a prop strike may be less devastating to the crank and case. The advantage to the 2 blade is less weight up front better CG less thrust than the 3 blade 88" or 86" though.

[aktahoe1]

Great choice! Are you able to use your 470 core or are you using a 520 core? Which cylinders? Just curious...

Steve built mine about 500 hours ago and I would do the exact same thing again. I have a 3 blade mac but never flew it with a 2 blade so can't offer comparison details. I would sure like to try a MT though! I picked up about 9mph but gave some of that back when I put on the big fork and mains. It's a great set up.

Steve just pilled an MT off an engine and was surprised to see that it was ALL wood inside. I too was leaning toward the MT but after that and several other reports, the 401 it is for me.

Did you ask about the O550 he is getting STC'd? Sounds like a winner as well.

Kind of interesting how much info is out there on PPonk. Seems like a great way to go. Put my engine in a crate and sent it to Knopp as well yesterday...

Kevin
I'm surprised that Steve didn't know it's wood inside, the advantage to that is a prop strike may be less devastating to the crank and case. The advantage to the 2 blade is less weight up front better CG less thrust than the 3 blade 88" or 86" though.

Hey Russ- He thought it had partial wood but not all wood. As said I have been going back and forth on my new prop. Still confident in the 86" 3 blade MAC after talking with a lot of people. With the bigger engine and Wing X addition, I am feeling pretty good about my decision....I think...

[Glidergeek]

I lucked out on mine bought it (86" 401) from Executive Prop in Van Nuys Ca for $7k and they gave me $1k for my old 203 it was a first run with good numbers on the width & thickness. Less than 1/2 of the MT but 35 lbs heavier

[182dude]

They are going to be building it using my original case...im going with the eci titan cylinders brand new...the 82" prop is personal preferance as i was thinking about doing a field approval on my current hartzell 7691 scimitar...for what im doing with my 182...stock tires wheelpants no dirt work other than my buddies strip between 2 cotton fields i believe the hartzell will be good. If i had a tw i would definately go for the mccauley longer blades.

Im taking the plane up to mcminville or next week and they are going to start the process, my only concern is the return flight for the break in, steve leads me to believe i need to stay between 2-4000 feet with full power to break in for about 2 hr. Anyone with experience in the portland area please give me some advice as to planning my return to central california (fresno) to where i can fly that low for the 2 hours...

Mike

[flynengr]

Calling Splashpilot........

Think he had his PPonk done there in MMV as well. Remember the stories of flying it "balls to the wall" back to CA for breakin, between the other salient instruction he gave me on how not to wreck my new-to-me 180.

Interested to see how yours goes. Not sure how far out I am from PPonking mine, but I follow all of these threads very closely. I don't want to put a bunch more weight out on the nose; my latest thought was a C66 prop, but I am not sure. I've been also kicking around the idea of buying a O470L core and sending it to MMV so it's ready when I need it. I'm currently looking at 1400 SMOH but 35 years. It's still running great after a new #1 jug last year, but who knows how long that will last.......

I'm enroute 1O3 to E79 more or less every week; if you know of some places to play in the dirt down your way.....Would be great to meet you somewhere......

Flynengr

[hotrod150]

..... I've been also kicking around the idea of buying a O470L core and sending it to MMV so it's ready when I need it. ....

Who or what is in McMinnville? Steve Knopp is in Camano Island WA-- why not just have him build the engine? Ditto for 182dude- why not pull the engine at home in Fresno & have it shipped to/from Knopp's place?
As far as keeping it at 4000 & below between MMV & Fresno- the Willamette valley is pretty close to sea level. The terrain goes up some getting down toward Grants Pass & Medford, but following I-5 you should easily be able to keep it below 4000. Goes up some more as you go further south toward Mt Shasta but by then you oughta have your 2 hours on it. Esp if you do a local shake-down flight or two (probably a good idea) before striking off for home.
Or you could cross the not-too-high coastal range near MMV & just fly down the coastline.

[flynengr]

No sales tax in OR, which is worth a grand or more to us Californians. The shop in McMinnville (NW Air Repair) is one of PPonk's authorized installers, which gets you the 2000 hr TBO.

Flynengr

[bumper]

[quote="aktahoe1

Hey Russ- He thought it had partial wood but not all wood. As said I have been going back and forth on my new prop. Still confident in the 86" 3 blade MAC after talking with a lot of people. With the bigger engine and Wing X addition, I am feeling pretty good about my decision....I think... [/quote]


The MT prop is *not* all wood. It is wood core that is covered with composite, glass, carbon and with a stainless steel leading edge. The composite overlay provides strength that allows the blades to have a thinner cord and more effecient airfoil than an all wood prop. While the wood core imparts the best of what wood props deliver - - that would be smooth operation, as the prop better absorbs the engine's power pulses, unlimited fatigue life (we're talking just about the wood part, which doesn't fatigue) and lighter weight.

There are other advantages too, one already noted is that in case of a prop strike there's less likelyhood of engine damage. Another is that a prop ding doesn't mean having to file away metal to get rid of a stress riser - some epoxy filler and touch up paint will do. Hartzell has a history of condemming their hubs, MT doesn't. In side-by-side tests on the Husky, the 205cm MT provides a better climb than an 80" Hartzell and slightly faster speed (walk away) for the same power settings. The MT is amazingly effecient when turning slow (1800 to 2000 rpm*), delivering 105 knots burning just under 6 gph at 21" mp and 1900 rpm on my Husky with 26" rubber.

*There are no "avoid continuous operation at" yellow arc rpm restrictions with the MT.

bumper

[G44]

You guy's are really missing the boat when you do not consider the MT prop. The MT is a wonderful prop! I had one on my Husky and if I still had my 185 I would have one on it. Just the weight savings off the nose alone is a big deal. I would give it some serious consideration.

[aktahoe1]

[quote="aktahoe1

Hey Russ- He thought it had partial wood but not all wood. As said I have been going back and forth on my new prop. Still confident in the 86" 3 blade MAC after talking with a lot of people. With the bigger engine and Wing X addition, I am feeling pretty good about my decision....I think...

The MT prop is *not* all wood. It is wood core that is covered with composite, glass, carbon and with a stainless steel leading edge. The composite overlay provides strength that allows the blades to have a thinner cord and more effecient airfoil than an all wood prop. While the wood core imparts the best of what wood props deliver - - that would be smooth operation, as the prop better absorbs the engine's power pulses, unlimited fatigue life (we're talking just about the wood part, which doesn't fatigue) and lighter weight.

There are other advantages too, one already noted is that in case of a prop strike there's less likelyhood of engine damage. Another is that a prop ding doesn't mean having to file away metal to get rid of a stress riser - some epoxy filler and touch up paint will do. Hartzell has a history of condemming their hubs, MT doesn't. In side-by-side tests on the Husky, the 205cm MT provides a better climb than an 80" Hartzell and slightly faster speed (walk away) for the same power settings. The MT is amazingly effecient when turning slow (1800 to 2000 rpm*), delivering 105 knots burning just under 6 gph at[url][/url] 21" mp and 1900 rpm on my Husky with 26" rubber.

*There are no "avoid continuous operation at" yellow arc rpm restrictions with the MT.

bumper[/quote]

No disrespect Bumper but...they really are wood inside. Everything else is a sales pitch. Steve Knopp has one in his shop now and could not beleive it either as he had never seen the inside of one. Also, here is another thread with photo showing the same thing.

http://www.backcountrypilot.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=9811
AND
http://www.steenaero.com/Products/propellers.cfm
AND
http://www.mt-propeller.com/en/entw/blades.htm

Just reposting factual information that has been shown or said by several in terms of the MT....It does seem like a good prop for pavement work but it is WOOD anyway you slice it.

[aktahoe1]

Calling Splashpilot........

Think he had his PPonk done there in MMV as well. Remember the stories of flying it "balls to the wall" back to CA for breakin, between the other salient instruction he gave me on how not to wreck my new-to-me 180.

Interested to see how yours goes. Not sure how far out I am from PPonking mine, but I follow all of these threads very closely. I don't want to put a bunch more weight out on the nose; my latest thought was a C66 prop, but I am not sure. I've been also kicking around the idea of buying a O470L core and sending it to MMV so it's ready when I need it. I'm currently looking at 1400 SMOH but 35 years. It's still running great after a new #1 jug last year, but who knows how long that will last.......

I'm enroute 1O3 to E79 more or less every week; if you know of some places to play in the dirt down your way.....Would be great to meet you somewhere......

Flynengr

Rich (Splashpilot) and I fly together often. He has the O520 (super eagle) conversion with the 3 blade 86" Mac. Knopp did his plane and he loves it. The thing climbs like a rocket ship. My engine is in a crate headed his way on Tuesday. Not certain if I am turning in my core for the conversion or getting a new O520 case or his new O550 that Knopp will have a new STC for in the next few weeks. Will know more this week. Betting I end up getting the conversion to the O520 (SE). Maybe not the best way to decide, but going with whatever will come the quickest and make the most sense. Getting an 86" 3 blade Mac for certain. No question

[182dude]

Bingo!! No tax up there plus knopp highly reccomended us to northwest air repair...the guy Grahm is really easy to work with and he is going to be doing the work for thousands and thats not a typo less than our home shop to do the same thing...

[bumper]

aktahoe1

Please re-read my post, I am not saying that MT does not have a wood core. Anyway I'd slice it (and I won't) I'm sure I'd find good tooth pick material inside. That is a good thing! It's what allows the prop to be both light and run smooth. Traditional wood props, all else being equal, run smoother than metal props. This is due to wood's ability to absorb and smooth out the power pulses from the engine. Also wood does not have a finite fatigue life as does metal.

The problem with wood props, is that in order to have adequate strength, the design blade thickness had to compromise effeciency as compared to metal props. MT gets around that problem by covering the wood blades with glass and carbon. This gives a prop that is effecient, smooth running, long lasting, easy to repair, and way cool.

Believe it or not, there are composite props with foam cores, and some, like the carbon blades used on the Stemme, are simply hollow (air core!) - - the majority of the strength comes from the outer surface, a "monocoque" structure if you will. In the case of the MT, it has all the strength of it's composite covering combined with the excellent wood qualities of its wood core. I know I'm reiterating here, but WOOD is a plus and not a liability in this case.

bumper
not affiliated with MT in any way, just have one and know it to be an excellent prop - - (after destroying an 80" Hartzell way before its time).