Return-Path: Sender: "Marvin Kaye" To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 19:11:30 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from esmtp.cave.com ([66.35.72.5] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.8) with ESMTP id 655967 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:59:38 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.35.72.5; envelope-from=lancair@ustek.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([66.35.73.227]) by esmtp.cave.com (VisNetic.MailServer.v7.2.4.1) with ESMTP id CQN38002 for ; Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:58:59 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <42013F1A.70009@ustek.com> X-Original-Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:59:06 -0500 From: N301ES Reply-To: lancair@ustek.com Organization: USTEK Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: MT vs Hartzell References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Almost as troublesome as the choice of "Paper or Plastic", is the choice of a prop. For my ES-P I have chosen the 400 hp TSIO550 by Performance Engines. The prop is another issue. Many, perhaps most, of the TSIO500's flying are swinging a Hartzell of some vintage. Their 3-blade scimitar is a good match but a few builders, and Performance Engines, are really enthusiastic about the offerings from MT. Recently MT developed their 4-bladed scimitar and it seems to work well on large engined certificated and experimental aircraft. Could anyone on the LML compare and contrast these two offerings? Robert M. Simon, ES-P N301ES