Hartzell--Top Prop conversion kit

NINER FOUR FOUR GOLF

NINER FOUR FOUR GOLF

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
1
Display Name
Display name:
David
Hey all
i am considering a Hartzell top prop conversion kit for my 1970 182N - it says better take off and climb- but only says -same or slightly better cruise- has anyone replaced their 2 blade McCauley with the 3 blade Hartzell Top Prop conversion and seen an increase in all performance or can a person expect the same cruise speeds ? thank you
 
Last edited:
I replaced the 2 blade McCaulley props on my B55 Baron with Hartzel Top Prop 3 blade models when one of the original hubs cracked. At first it seemed that I lost a couple knots of TAS but later I found that by increasing my RPM from 2300 to 2400 I gained those lost knots back and a couple more (same LOP FF). I can't say they climb any better because I didn't do any extensive before/after testing. I also can't say for sure that the 2 blades wouldn't also have gone faster at the higher RPM.
 
gismo said:
I replaced the 2 blade McCaulley props on my B55 Baron with Hartzel Top Prop 3 blade models when one of the original hubs cracked. At first it seemed that I lost a couple knots of TAS but later I found that by increasing my RPM from 2300 to 2400 I gained those lost knots back and a couple more (same LOP FF). I can't say they climb any better because I didn't do any extensive before/after testing. I also can't say for sure that the 2 blades wouldn't also have gone faster at the higher RPM.
Click to expand...

One interesting question (that we'll never know the answer to) is what would the 2-bladed props have done at 2400 RPM and that same LOP FF.

3-bladed props are typically quieter (smaller diameter), have more ground clearance (same), and do improve takeoff and climb with what is typically a couple kts lost in cruise, but not much. I personally like Hartzells better than McCauleys, and when the McCauleys on the 310 are ready for replacement, we'll be looking to do an upgrade to Hartzells.
 
I declined the 3 blade "upgrade" on the Mooney several years ago when it became available.

Counter to mfg. claims, the user feedback generally derided it as being slower in cruise, heavier, no ground clearance advantage (same diameter) and often perceived as noisier due to some odd harmonics with the 4 cyl 200HP engines.

It did have a better climb rate.

You may want to dig around one of the Cessna forums for actual feedback of that prop on your engine.

On my 200HP engine, it was more eye candy than realized performance.
 
Last edited:
There are a number of variables, and that sounds like an instance of a poor propeller selection.

The 3-bladed McCauley prop available for the Comanche 180 is actually quieter, smaller diameter, etc.

The 4-bladed props on the Panther Navajo are the same.

But I do agree fully to see what actual owners are saying.
 
ElPaso Pilot said:
I declined the 3 blade "upgrade" on the Mooney several years ago when it became available.

Counter to mfg. claims, the user feedback generally derided it as being slower in cruise, heavier, no ground clearance advantage (same diameter) and often perceived as noisier due to some odd harmonics with the 4 cyl 200HP engines.

It did have a better climb rate.

You may want to dig around one of the Cessna forums for actual feedback of that prop on your engine.

On my 200HP engine, it was more eye candy than realized performance.
Click to expand...

Likewise. I remained at 2 blades after doing the W-n-B calculation using the additional weight of the 3 blade prop at the front of the plane, for essentially no significant change in performance. It would have been eye candy.... at a bit more cost & more weight at the front end of the curve.
 
DavidWhite said:
Winner winner chicken dinner!

My DPE actually asked me that on my checkride. I didn't have an answer for him.
Click to expand...

Well, it does say it on the sticker they put on every one of their props. At least every one I've seen. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top