MT told me they could use any material they want but chose a wood core as it is the only material known that has a near infinite number of flex cycles. It also has a natural ability to dampen vibration and they are very light...I am sure they have other reasons...
It is by far the smoothest propeller I have flown behind. Just don't hit ANYTHING with it and you will be fine.
Has worked flawlessly in rain, sleet snow and the dark of night for me...
Randy Snarr 235/320 N694RS 500 hrs
Sent from my iPad It has seemed obvious to me that the ACI graphite prop is a much better choice for any application where you don’t absolutely need the extra weight of metal at the pointy end of the airplane. I originally put a deposit on an MT prop when they became available, but then changed to the ACI prop after that for reasons in my mind that related to structural integrity and durability. I am aware of one IV driver who had to change the MT prop out after flying fewer than 100 hours off a grass strip. The dirt and gravel munched the thing. Have only a few hours on my airplane ( and ACI prop) now and am wondering if my logic is wrong in some way. Any thoughts? Is the MT better in some way? Thanks, John Barrett From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Robert R Pastusek
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 5:08 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: MT composite prop At 4 years and about 750 hours, I have almost the identical experience with a 4-blade MT prop on my IV-P. The prop is smooth, quiet, and has been maintenance free except for a small grease leak at about 300 hours. This was fixed by the MT prop shop in Deland, FL, and I’ve had no issues since. My prop has been painted once, and needs repainting again…which I consider good service. I don’t think I ever had any noticeable paint erosion in rain…and have flown in rain quite a bit…but sleet or ice crystals are a different matter! This is not something I do intentionally, but even the slightest encounter with sleet will do a sandpaper number to the prop. Even knowing this, I’ll be sticking with the MT, and would chose it again. Bob I have a two blade MT prop on our 320. We have over 2,000 hours on the plane and prop. We operate IFR regularly including flight in rain. We’ve had no operational problems due to rain but it does take the paint off the leading edge eventually. So far the primer has stayed intact. We’ve repainted the prop twice. N6ZQ IV under construction Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 9:40 AM Subject: [LML] MT composite prop Another query for those out there who are already flying. I purchased a partly built L360 kit some time ago, which came with a 3 bladed, constant speed, MT, composite prop. It has never been assembled, and is by now about 20 years old. Now that I am getting closer to completing the project I have been speaking to a couple of propeller shops. As I intend to operate IFR, I asked about durability of the prop when operated in rain. The response has been a little confusing, with statements ranging from “they are not designed for ops in rain” to “ they are approved for ops in rain, but nobody actually does so” to “they are fully designed to operate in rain and will be fine”. I would appreciate any comments from those of you out there who have operated MT composite props, as to their suitability in rain. Thanks again for your input. Rob Stevens Perth, Western Australia
= |