Is six point egt worth it on an O-470

C_Parker

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Messages
142
Display Name

Display name:
x
I'm contemplating some panel upgrades, and trying to decide on how far I want to go on an engine analyzer. As much as I want a sweet $6,500 JP analyzer, I just don't think it's a smart investment for my aircraft. What I want the most is a fuel computer, the rest I'm fine with steam gauges.

That being said, I have a single EGT now. For an O-470 with it's terrible distribution, does having EGT on all cylinder really provide any value?

If I was looking for an instrument which provided fuel computing, what do you guys recommend?
 
Last edited:
As far as I know engine analyzer is very smart investment. It talks to you, you have to learn how to interpret it.
 
Its not like you can do much if it shows you some goofiness on one of the EGTs. With a 'I' you can start monkeying with the injectors, with a 'O' all you can do is wonder.
 
An engine monitor is very smart. You want something that logs data and shows CHTs/EGTs with a 470. CHTs are really important
 
With all respect to the advice above, don't forget that it's a solid o-470. Lean it 'til it stumbles, and richen back to smooth and you're good. They've been flown like that forever without adverse consequences. Sure, you can add a fancy digital analyzer, and maybe it'll save you a wee-bit of fuel and optimize engine performance: but will you ever save the $6500 you said it would cost? Contrary opinions and facts are invited and welcomed, but I humbly suggest that the upgrade is dubious, at best.
 
Last edited:
I think the analyzer will save aggravation when something goes wrong, like a stuck valve or a fouled plug. You will see an egt anomaly for the offending cylinder. Now the question is if it is worth the money for the system to you? Only you can answer that.
 
With all respect to the advice above, don't for get that it's a solid o-470. Lean it 'til it stumbles, and richen back to smooth and you're good. They've been flown like that forever without adverse consequences. Sure, you can add a fancy digital analyzer, and maybe it'll save you a wee-bit of fuel and optimize engine performance: but will you ever save the $6500 you said it would cost? Contrary opinions and facts are invited and welcomed, but I humbly suggest that the upgrade is dubious, at best.
I'm trying to edumacate myself on the O-470. So basically, same advice as an O-200 and O-300? I'm surprised to hear that. What's real life fuel burn treating it like that?
 
In my experience with my own O-470/O-520? The 6 point CHT-EGT is far more useful than my FS-450 fuel flow instrument. If I had to choose between one or the other I’d choose the engine monitor.
 
I'm trying to edumacate myself on the O-470. So basically, same advice as an O-200 and O-300? I'm surprised to hear that. What's real life fuel burn treating it like that?

I would say, yes. What all those engines have in common is that they are carbureted, rather than injected; they aren't designed to be run lean of peak particularly well. So, maybe an engine monitor would help in the early detection of a problem if one was pushing the engine the wrong way. Flying a 182Q with an o-470, I would plan 13gph block-to-block, but I'm sure that leaned-out at 8000 feet or so, the fuel flow would probably fall to less than 12 gph (only a guess, absent a fuel flow gauge.). This is my experience and opinion only, your proper edumacation will rely on your ability to distill the input of others and synthesizing your knowledge from that. Be blessed
 
1D007D72-F01F-4EF2-8F78-F1072EBF74A6.jpeg View attachment 73876
I'm contemplating some panel upgrades, and trying to decide on how far I want to go on an engine analyzer. As much as I want a sweet $6,500 JP analyzer, I just don't think it's a smart investment for my aircraft. What I want the most is a fuel computer, the rest I'm fine with steam gauges.

That being said, I have a single EGT now. For an O-470 with it's terrible distribution, does having EGT on all cylinder really provide any value?

If I was looking for an instrument which provided fuel computing, what do you guys recommend?
What instrument are you looking at for $6500.00? You can buy a JPI 711 with STCd primary for CHT and EGT and add fuel flow and carb temp for about half what you’re thinking. Lots of guys are going with the EI CGR-30 that includes the other engine functions like rpm, MP, oil, etc and that’s not in the $6K range, either. My panel update was 10 years ago so not state of the art these days but I get all the info I need. I still prefer the tach and MP directly in front of me. Oil, fuel, and engine temps on the right side works for me. My FS-450 fuel scanner is on the left. Given the experience of what my temps do with different flows I can set my flow with the fuel scanner as I change power settings. I wouldn’t use the fuel scanner that way without knowing what my temps were doing. The notion that because it has a carb you don’t have control is incorrect. When my monitor was first installed my cylinder temps were all over the place. It took work to level them out. Ignorance is not bliss when it comes to my engine.
 
[Ravioli's bad advice starts]

If you're normally aspirated the 'extra data' of the engine analyzer is just extra data. 1 EGT and 1 CHT is fine. It's not like you're going to run LOP with a carb.

Injected engine, analyzer is worth it. (Unless it's a Duke because they are pigs and cannot run LOP)

[Ravioli's bad advice ends]
 
[Ravioli's bad advice starts]

If you're normally aspirated the 'extra data' of the engine analyzer is just extra data. 1 EGT and 1 CHT is fine. It's not like you're going to run LOP with a carb.

Injected engine, analyzer is worth it. (Unless it's a Duke because they are pigs and cannot run LOP)

[Ravioli's bad advice ends]

This is where I'm at. I get everyone's advice that it's nice to have a full analyzer, but in my mind it doesn't make sense (cost/benefit) in this application.

View attachment 73877 View attachment 73876
What instrument are you looking at for $6500.00? You can buy a JPI 711 with STCd primary for CHT and EGT and add fuel flow and carb temp for about half what you’re thinking. Lots of guys are going with the EI CGR-30 that includes the other engine functions like rpm, MP, oil, etc and that’s not in the $6K range, either. My panel update was 10 years ago so not state of the art these days but I get all the info I need. I still prefer the tach and MP directly in front of me. Oil, fuel, and engine temps on the right side works for me. My FS-450 fuel scanner is on the left. Given the experience of what my temps do with different flows I can set my flow with the fuel scanner as I change power settings. I wouldn’t use the fuel scanner that way without knowing what my temps were doing. The notion that because it has a carb you don’t have control is incorrect. When my monitor was first installed my cylinder temps were all over the place. It took work to level them out. Ignorance is not bliss when it comes to my engine.

EDM 900
 
I would not spend $5600 on a analyzer for an O-470.
 
That guys with no applicable experience say it isn’t important comes as no surprise. The better question is how many guys who added an engine monitor subsequently removed them because they didn’t prove worthwhile?
 
Guys, to give a little bit of background, the plane gave me a few surprises after I bought it so between purchase price and restoration I'm already upside down vs. book value. I intend to upgrade to a newer 182 or a 206 in a couple years so I want to be smart on how I spend money on it. I'm going to build my own panels with assistance from my A&P to save money.

Right now I'm leaning towards keeping my RPM and MP instruments and using the other hole on the right side for a CGR30 with all the other instruments. It can display ten values so I'm thinking of this layout:

L Fuel R Fuel
Oil P Oil T
EGT Fuel Flow
CHT Carb Temp
Volts OAT
 
That guys with no applicable experience say it isn’t important comes as no surprise. The better question is how many guys who added an engine monitor subsequently removed them because they didn’t prove worthwhile?

What's the applicable experience standard you are applying?

I've owned (in whole or part) 2 IO's and 1 O. One of the IO's always had all cylinders on the the analyzer. The other we added it and it was great. My O doesn't seem to be suffering from the lack of info, but it's only been 4 years.

Are you looking for someone to come along and say "I spent a **** pot of money and got no value from it?" Unlikely to get that confession.
 
O-470, one plane, with and without a monitor. You thinking it doesn’t matter is a total guess since you have to info to substantiate it. O-470s are famous for developing induction leaks, cracking balance tubes, carbs set too lean, and having bad E valves. Monitors catch it early. Any of you ever add a winter front to an 0-470? Add a monitor and I bet you stop.
 
O-470, one plane, with and without a monitor. You thinking it doesn’t matter is a total guess since you have to info to substantiate it. O-470s are famous for developing induction leaks, cracking balance tubes, carbs set too lean, and having bad E valves. Monitors catch it early. Any of you ever add a winter front to an 0-470? Add a monitor and I bet you stop.

Okay, Pepsi Challenge time. You owned the plane. Operated for x years and maintenance was y dollars per year. You spent the cash for the analyzer. Your maintenance per year went to z dollars per year. What's the ROI for that analyzer?
 
The CGR-30 is an excellent choice. You can get the basic which will give you fuel flow, EGT/CHT, OAT, RPM, etc. The higher level gives you MP and some other options. It's an excellent instrument. Total cost mostly depends on your shops familiarity and therefore labor time. Also no need to cut new holes.
 
That’s a very narrow point of view. It may serve your position but being that I’ve identified the conditions described above before they became bigger problems? My return on investment has been excellent.

Here’s a thread to review. Take what you want from it. Or take nothing. I have no reason to argue with anyone about my choices. https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/com...me-burned-exhaust-valves.116588/#post-2718904
 
With all respect to the advice above, don't forget that it's a solid o-470. Lean it 'til it stumbles, and richen back to smooth and you're good. They've been flown like that forever without adverse consequences. Sure, you can add a fancy digital analyzer, and maybe it'll save you a wee-bit of fuel and optimize engine performance: but will you ever save the $6500 you said it would cost? Contrary opinions and facts are invited and welcomed, but I humbly suggest that the upgrade is dubious, at best.
I have had my engine analyzer warn me when my voltage regulator failed and I got it fixed before taking off again.. On my old Cessna with a rock solid O360, it warned me when my CHTs started climbing and I knew to look at my baffling. And it warned me when my oil pressure and temp shot up on a flight to Jekyll Island. Of course, that time it was too late to do anything but land on a highway, but at least I had time to find a highway instead of landing in the trees.

So maybe in an "O", a 6 cylinder egt might not be that important, but in general, I would not own an airplane without an engine analyzer for long before I added one.
 
Okay, Pepsi Challenge time. You owned the plane. Operated for x years and maintenance was y dollars per year. You spent the cash for the analyzer. Your maintenance per year went to z dollars per year. What's the ROI for that analyzer?
What is your ROI with insurance?
 
This is where I'm at. I get everyone's advice that it's nice to have a full analyzer, but in my mind it doesn't make sense (cost/benefit) in this application.



EDM 900
That's your answer the, doesn't make sense. Nice to have though.
 
I have two O470's (C-310).

Insight G4 monitor.

So far I have diagnosed, fouled #6 plug. Induction leak in connection between the #5 intake riser and the balance tube. A bad (intermittent) mag.

The G4 has exhaust valve monitoring as well as vibration in addition to the normal functions.

LOP ops, not really. Diagnosis of problems early, yes.

Personally, I would not own an airplane without an engine monitor.

Just my $.02

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 
No one seems to be addressing the fact the OP intends to sell the plane in 24 months. He would be fortunate to receive a 20% return on the cost of the analyzer.

In the meantime, paying a mechanic to find a fouled plug or induction leak would cost a lot less than $6,500.
 
Do not do it.

We did a JPI 830 with our O-470 1975 C182P and there is no data that I use that makes it worth the money. You can lean within 1 gallon an hour in the 182 with a single EGT monitor to be the same as the 830 gives you using 6.

We currently have a bad probe that is going to be replaced and we have to pay the labor. Parts are covered under the warranty. Another $200 in labor costs down the drain.

I have a PA-46 TSIO-550 with the same JPI 830 and it pays for itself as I can run LOP, saving 4-5 gallons per hour, and get all of the data needed. 4 gallons an hour times 2000 TBO is worth the cost.

Do the math and make your decision. I would not do it again in the 182.
 
Well, it's frankly patriotic for these fidgety, electronics-tinkering types to spend that kind of money on such short ownership tenures. The US consumer economy (....and China) thank you.:D

giphy.gif
 
The pendulum of opinions on this discussion ultimately represents your personality / preferences. I'm analytical; thus (and not really surprising) I very much appreciate the data / information my EDM730 provides. Take a look at the [attached] pictures - perhaps it will provide some good perspective for your decision... (For full context, I am operating an O-470-R in a 1963 C182F. Also, the vintage CHT gauge was rendered INOP with the 730.)

I'm analytical, which also means I'll try to quantify my perspective for you to draw your own opinion rather than just projecting my opinions unsolicited and without data for reference. I immediately eliminate the trite arguments about ROP vs.LOP operations and fuel savings. I operate my engine at lower altitudes in warm weather to temperature references for performance because the 730 allows me to do that. I can choose to prioritize fuel burn or go-fast. F*** fuel savings arguments as basis to spend thousands of $$; we fly airplanes and if you were worried about saving fuel you'd be in a Prius with all the people sitting in traffic below you.

(1) The ability to understand all 6 cylinders' performance at any stage of operation gives me interesting context at times I haven't expected it. For example, inspect #5 cylinder on a cold morning in the first picture. My personal preferences determined I wasn't willing to go full-throttle until it's operations came up to a temperature that met my expectations.

(2) In the second picture, note the left tank fuel level from the 1963-vintage gauge to the right of my 730. I was flying with fuel selector on "both". Compare that to the amount of fuel used (just over 1/2 of capacity) and it is obvious I had an accuracy issue. My 50+ year old gauges are failing - in this case, the "left" fuel gauge started reading "empty" at 1/2 tank and the comparison to my 730 identified it PLUS provided the data necessary to validate this condition when I refueled.

(2a) I also have 2 IFD540s, which can utilize the data validating my flight plan calculations in real time. You can see this on #2 display's data tab expanded on the right. If you spend most of your time within short distance of your home base, this may not be important. If you (like me) frequently do trips of ~750+nm in a single day, this information is excellent.

(3) Determine whether you want to pay for PRIMARY instrumentation. Your budget of $6,500 is woefully inaccurate if you are paying an installer. I'm currently looking at the 930 as my other cluster is dying (reference #2) and I don't want to pay to replace '60s era gauges with used '60s era gauges (again, personal preference). The installation cost (labor) for 900-series systems is going to be minimum 40 hours of labor on top, which means it's a ~$10k investment.

I understand budgetary concerns. My 730 came with my purchase. I have four kids going through college, so when I purchase upgrades I go for refurb'd options and pursue every avenue to get better information without the "brand new" premium that drains my budget.

ZaUxIDDYxQoNoHxfXhh7vYn3CbTl-yVhsv8m5R3O501yU8LzYNQoa3qZkLLBQ9kL_7t03yswG8h77hZN-3vrpSC-U-bekiAnDpdadr59GJ6uyrI1PCZs7GaQGbADNrXRfpIzGGCQFAp6r6Z4nmsq4vB4MdNLtyUm8B2C7crRQEaCNaMaZbhuQAg1VXcrfzmedUh7zynpVK3yVCzGDhPjcOgM0Xv5RTxLqNgYk7eIW2gEsA1ElNNyEG0WDiA9aejXBRWmFlKbM3llRdb0yCf-1veMRMFEO-jZxqNJ5tVfDhVdCVS54bn75v2TiOv3HD2OaJd9cLwn2lSOj74f1M-N4WHqyFi6VmFWVSDlOz9Ht10EYf12IUilGSLceaGAo9-k1eqjA-hAmY_cS76liNPuRf5UvzXMCiR0qfeG79Bi79M0mf0LuDSm1n3kBfUrCPxMxApTRCvvzb8gxbLh8pfzEa_HZJa5_DnyBN4AzrO_0TNEbOkhuRGhlcxXdv224wSouc4cSSHic9TJvgUdYEPFX7EDPDwQoJ0nqXIGORP2Ib5OmeWUJxE78AL0JXbQncCh1n3noBB-W-7f4PYto_PT-6S1R2F4sAGN1VYAMNFUIB2f0lWQjIiWVMS6ju5nxEo63JN5rI8PlZ23ehMHmcz_uo7F6w9K7fw=w1988-h1490-no


l_D0E7J4PGfSEaiwrtgwTIF6zIu58JOn3ao5hkUVyH7vGHwZojUzSADm9PY945m1sSIVxklNN3j48tStptcsDM_l29UuNB1MOInxGAFC2gJUrgxDGpevWXbapEBlgzBTka7M5lO_Ki-vrRRSVDdF0WfvbNVsN1W7HP6a2yv-KyXSYvK6OiNSG8bh7sCrCuVL9OFAvj126t8m1xg4tcl49q3MUv08KtKEut1wfW5mVsJhRZ78qwxG1OxgI-kgJFejcZ97CyE-vvKVqDpLXUkNTtxUEkVT8IraTVw2fYzUHGlktMXrYhwdNtACCcaukzfiLMwyrVfkZioqqg1CEnpSu6tItv8V3S_hgShaKJfyHpUGqV9lPCyASXJjW520Dhh2Yf9Y75wMf2K-E1MnQ3ejAqiATMl1DpkX1rVJNL4SpVaoY8rtfICzHBJmdlLgn9_EZnaSjHLojjuEsTqJhEbs8Zk9QOPOmjRk4V-3Tm-Bx_T-7J4UTkVYlLBBfoaoRZW0y5QFnI_DC9iD2t759j7tVtRDAXj080BaACgJfj3C1OsqlZW2-75N5YY3Jyla0wDxfPNBea3lvIb3bhjPnm1LSGA9DiUERofZrN6C66BZPxEX0QwbmZoCXJXDAgqFZJOY-BhxqXFCbXlGojIxiCNiS1Er5-d_9fg=w1988-h1490-no


One final and, admittedly, self-serving note: if you are interested in an option that will be more in line with the resultant increase in value at selling time, I happen to be upgrading to a 930 and will be selling my 730. You'll get a far better ROI for your budget, and get the data/context you may desire as well. Feel free to contact me directly to discuss.
 
Last edited:
No one seems to be addressing the fact the OP intends to sell the plane in 24 months. He would be fortunate to receive a 20% return on the cost of the analyzer.

In the meantime, paying a mechanic to find a fouled plug or induction leak would cost a lot less than $6,500.
I did miss this.... Selling in 24 months.... Probably not.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 
The pendulum of opinions on this discussion ultimately represents your personality / preferences. I'm analytical; thus (and not really surprising) I very much appreciate the data / information my EDM730 provides. Take a look at the [attached] pictures - perhaps it will provide some good perspective for your decision... (For full context, I am operating an O-470-R in a 1963 C182F. Also, the vintage CHT gauge was rendered INOP with the 730.)

I'm analytical, which also means I'll try to quantify my perspective for you to draw your own opinion rather than just projecting my opinions unsolicited and without data for reference. I immediately eliminate the trite arguments about ROP vs.LOP operations and fuel savings. I operate my engine at lower altitudes in warm weather to temperature references for performance because the 730 allows me to do that. I can choose to prioritize fuel burn or go-fast. F*** fuel savings arguments as basis to spend thousands of $$; we fly airplanes and if you were worried about saving fuel you'd be in a Prius with all the people sitting in traffic below you.

(1) The ability to understand all 6 cylinders' performance at any stage of operation gives me interesting context at times I haven't expected it. For example, inspect #5 cylinder on a cold morning in the first picture. My personal preferences determined I wasn't willing to go full-throttle until it's operations came up to a temperature that met my expectations.

(2) In the second picture, note the left tank fuel level from the 1963-vintage gauge to the right of my 730. I was flying with fuel selector on "both". Compare that to the amount of fuel used (just over 1/2 of capacity) and it is obvious I had an accuracy issue. My 50+ year old gauges are failing - in this case, the "left" fuel gauge started reading "empty" at 1/2 tank and the comparison to my 730 identified it PLUS provided the data necessary to validate this condition when I refueled.

(2a) I also have 2 IFD540s, which can utilize the data validating my flight plan calculations in real time. You can see this on #2 display's data tab expanded on the right. If you spend most of your time within short distance of your home base, this may not be important. If you (like me) frequently do trips of ~750+nm in a single day, this information is excellent.

(3) Determine whether you want to pay for PRIMARY instrumentation. Your budget of $6,500 is woefully inaccurate if you are paying an installer. I'm currently looking at the 930 as my other cluster is dying (reference #2) and I don't want to pay to replace '60s era gauges with used '60s era gauges (again, personal preference). The installation cost (labor) for 900-series systems is going to be minimum 40 hours of labor on top, which means it's a ~$10k investment.

I understand budgetary concerns. My 730 came with my purchase. I have four kids going through college, so when I purchase upgrades I go for refurb'd options and pursue every avenue to get better information without the "brand new" premium that drains my budget.

ZaUxIDDYxQoNoHxfXhh7vYn3CbTl-yVhsv8m5R3O501yU8LzYNQoa3qZkLLBQ9kL_7t03yswG8h77hZN-3vrpSC-U-bekiAnDpdadr59GJ6uyrI1PCZs7GaQGbADNrXRfpIzGGCQFAp6r6Z4nmsq4vB4MdNLtyUm8B2C7crRQEaCNaMaZbhuQAg1VXcrfzmedUh7zynpVK3yVCzGDhPjcOgM0Xv5RTxLqNgYk7eIW2gEsA1ElNNyEG0WDiA9aejXBRWmFlKbM3llRdb0yCf-1veMRMFEO-jZxqNJ5tVfDhVdCVS54bn75v2TiOv3HD2OaJd9cLwn2lSOj74f1M-N4WHqyFi6VmFWVSDlOz9Ht10EYf12IUilGSLceaGAo9-k1eqjA-hAmY_cS76liNPuRf5UvzXMCiR0qfeG79Bi79M0mf0LuDSm1n3kBfUrCPxMxApTRCvvzb8gxbLh8pfzEa_HZJa5_DnyBN4AzrO_0TNEbOkhuRGhlcxXdv224wSouc4cSSHic9TJvgUdYEPFX7EDPDwQoJ0nqXIGORP2Ib5OmeWUJxE78AL0JXbQncCh1n3noBB-W-7f4PYto_PT-6S1R2F4sAGN1VYAMNFUIB2f0lWQjIiWVMS6ju5nxEo63JN5rI8PlZ23ehMHmcz_uo7F6w9K7fw=w1988-h1490-no


l_D0E7J4PGfSEaiwrtgwTIF6zIu58JOn3ao5hkUVyH7vGHwZojUzSADm9PY945m1sSIVxklNN3j48tStptcsDM_l29UuNB1MOInxGAFC2gJUrgxDGpevWXbapEBlgzBTka7M5lO_Ki-vrRRSVDdF0WfvbNVsN1W7HP6a2yv-KyXSYvK6OiNSG8bh7sCrCuVL9OFAvj126t8m1xg4tcl49q3MUv08KtKEut1wfW5mVsJhRZ78qwxG1OxgI-kgJFejcZ97CyE-vvKVqDpLXUkNTtxUEkVT8IraTVw2fYzUHGlktMXrYhwdNtACCcaukzfiLMwyrVfkZioqqg1CEnpSu6tItv8V3S_hgShaKJfyHpUGqV9lPCyASXJjW520Dhh2Yf9Y75wMf2K-E1MnQ3ejAqiATMl1DpkX1rVJNL4SpVaoY8rtfICzHBJmdlLgn9_EZnaSjHLojjuEsTqJhEbs8Zk9QOPOmjRk4V-3Tm-Bx_T-7J4UTkVYlLBBfoaoRZW0y5QFnI_DC9iD2t759j7tVtRDAXj080BaACgJfj3C1OsqlZW2-75N5YY3Jyla0wDxfPNBea3lvIb3bhjPnm1LSGA9DiUERofZrN6C66BZPxEX0QwbmZoCXJXDAgqFZJOY-BhxqXFCbXlGojIxiCNiS1Er5-d_9fg=w1988-h1490-no


One final and, admittedly, self-serving note: if you are interested in an option that will be more in line with the resultant increase in value at selling time, I happen to be upgrading to a 930 and will be selling my 730. You'll get a far better ROI for your budget, and get the data/context you may desire as well. Feel free to contact me directly to discuss.

Nice panel. How much do you have into it? $60,000? How much is the plane worth? I’d love to do that to my Bonanza but the numbers don’t work and I wouldn’t be flying anywhere any differently than I do now.

Dan
 
Nice panel. How much do you have into it? $60,000? How much is the plane worth? I’d love to do that to my Bonanza but the numbers don’t work and I wouldn’t be flying anywhere any differently than I do now.

Dan

How much is it worth depends on the person. Some people put in avionics because they want to and enjoy it, some people don’t find it useless. It’s a personal preference. There is no point financially justifying this hobby, I don’t need a plane in the first place let alone putting thousands into the panel. Ultimately OP has to decide, but if he is selling the plane in short order, might not be worth it to him. And no one puts a engine analyzer in a carb engine to save gas either.
 
Although it's a much better tool than a fuel flow instrument, and that was part of the original question.
 
Back
Top