X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:23:44 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-m21.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.2] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.3) with ESMTP id 1336763 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 05:30:02 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.137.2; envelope-from=PJHWFD@aol.com Received: from PJHWFD@aol.com by imo-m21.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r7.6.) id q.be4.2de4757 (39331) for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 05:29:18 -0400 (EDT) From: PJHWFD@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 05:29:18 EDT Subject: Re: [LML] MT vs. Hartzell prop for the Legacy? X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1155893358" X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5125 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1155893358 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I would like to add a small set of data points concerning the Legacy. My plane originally had a stock IO-550 with an Aerocomposites prop. At 8000 ft my aircraft shows: TAS 218kt MAP 23.3 RPM 2500 EGT1350 Fuel Flow19.8 this is using a GPS triangle, ROP with ram air. My CG is toward the forward end. Needless to say these are not great numbers and I asked Tim Ong to take a look at my plane to get some insight on speeding up my plane. He pointed out a few aerodynamic problems. Tape on the wing gaps, canopy fit most of which have been addressed. The two big ones were my Aeocomposites prop which he has data to show it is slower that the Hartzell and my aftermarket exhaust from Forsling Aviation which he tried and performed worse that there factory exhaust. Not long after Oshkosh last year accually middle of September I had a prop Strike on Takeoff. This could fill a whole new e-mail but I don't type fast enough. Suffice it to say that it was the perfect storm of builder and pilot error that I must take full responsiblity for. I decided I would turn lemons into lemonade and see if I could improve the Performance. I quickly sent my engine of to Performance Engines and was told expect it back around the holidays. What holiday is March 25? The new MT prop nobody could explain but it finally showed up April 20. Now that's what I call lead time. Forget SnF. Flight testing did not go well and after a lot of phone calls and trouble shooting ended up with a bad coil and bad power diode in the electronic ignition. First smooth flight July 28. Forget Oshkosh. New numbers with Performance's tuned exhaust at 8000 ft: TAS 218kts MAP 23.5 RPM 2500 EGT 1310 fuel flow 18.1 All this great stuff and not a single knot faster! What I didn't do was call the factory and ask. What makes a Legacy go fast. ladies and gentlemen they have the largest pool of data, they like fast airplanes, they are honest, and they have never given me bad advice when I asked for it. As a small aside I am worried that all the businesses that have profited from Lancair success may end up being cancers that weaken the parent. Wouldn't a symbiotic relationship make a better business model? Would the people that are seeing 240 kts please share their knowledge? Still enjoying my not the fastest Legacy. Peter Hebert N23PH LEG2/G pjhwfd@aol.com -------------------------------1155893358 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I would like to add a small set of data points concerning the Legacy.&n= bsp; My plane originally had a stock IO-550 with an Aerocomposites prop. At=20= 8000 ft my aircraft shows:

TAS 218kt MAP 23.3 RPM 2500 EGT1350 Fuel Flow19.8

this is using a GPS triangle, ROP with ram air. My CG is toward the for= ward end. Needless to say these are not great numbers and I asked Tim Ong to= take a look at my plane to get some insight on speeding up my plane. =20= He pointed out a few aerodynamic problems. Tape on the wing gaps, cano= py fit most of which have been addressed. The two big ones were my Aeo= composites prop which he has data to show it is slower that the Hartze= ll and my aftermarket exhaust from Forsling Aviation which he tried and perf= ormed worse that there factory exhaust. Not long after Oshkosh last ye= ar accually middle of September I had a prop Strike on Takeoff. T= his could fill a whole new e-mail but I don't type fast enough. Suffice it t= o say that it was the perfect storm of builder and pilot error that I must t= ake full responsiblity for. I decided I would turn lemons into lemonade= and see if I could improve the Performance. I quickly sent my en= gine of to Performance Engines and was told expect it back around the holida= ys. What holiday is March 25? The new MT prop nobody could expla= in but it finally showed up April 20. Now that's what I call lead time= . Forget SnF. Flight testing did not go well and after a lot of phone=20= calls and trouble shooting ended up with a bad coil and bad power diode in t= he electronic ignition. First smooth flight July 28. Forget Oshk= osh. New numbers with Performance's tuned exhaust at 8000 ft:

TAS 218kts MAP 23.5 RPM 2500 EGT 1310 fuel flow 18.1

All this great stuff and not a single knot faster! What I didn't=20= do was call the factory and ask. What makes a Legacy go fast. la= dies and gentlemen they have the largest pool of data, they like fast airpla= nes, they are honest, and they have never given me bad advice when I asked f= or it. As a small aside I am worried that all the businesses that have profi= ted from Lancair success may end up being cancers that weaken the parent.&nb= sp; Wouldn't a symbiotic relationship make a better business model?&nbs= p; Would the people that are seeing 240 kts please share their knowledge?

Still enjoying my not the fastest Legacy.

Peter Hebert
N23PH LEG2/G
pjhwfd@aol.com

-------------------------------1155893358--