Jump to content

E-Props ...who has first hand experience with these


Recommended Posts

Hi Mark - BE FOREWARNED! it seems to be open season (in this Forum) on anyone who might be trying to sell an aviation product - no matter how objective your advice or how good your product.

 

How did you manage to take my post as been against Mark as the agent.

I wrapped he is and will be looking into getting one in the future.

Mark has posted true experiences from people who have test flowen with these props, not just taken convenient figures off some website.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 182
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Gday, Finally the results of testing the EProp in comparison to Bolly and Kool (Luga), using manifold pressure to set engine power exactly equal for each. Once again surprising results that

First tests with the variable pitch propeller     

All CSU (I gather thats what your commenting on Bruce) are expensive. I personally dont think they are worth the cost for the performance for our type of aircraft.   Posted above is the std

Posted Images

How did you manage to take my post as been against Mark as the agent.

I wrapped he is and will be looking into getting one in the future.

Mark has posted true experiences from people who have test flowen with these props, not just taken convenient figures off some website.

My apologies - my reading of the post (s) referring to Mark, suggested to me, that he is the agent for E-Props - my mistake. Oh! & by the way, I too only quote, my own experience or other reliable source figures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this thread is titled Eprop so is pretty specific. I didnt start the thread but I am posting real world examples of specs. Not pushing them per say just putting the info that was requested by the topic

If someone wants one then they know how to contact me or contact the factory and they will pass you onto me.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

How did you guess that Marty? :roflmao:

 

Yes Its a funny story actually but basically I stumbled into it. Its turned out to be something much bigger than I had anticipated..a new product that actually works and beats the pants off anything else around.

I was looking for something better than the Bolly that I was using and I know a lot of people around the world and was told to check them out and was given the lead to the boss there by someone who uses them exclusively now for their factory built aircraft. I couldnt believe the difference when I tried the first one which was to be for me. The issue was the Eprop arrived the week after I sold the GF so I asked Danny to try it...then he wouldnt take it off until I got him one

 

When I started this thread, I had also stumbled across E-props propellers on line. I got the impression that E-props is one of those "quiet achiever" products: no fanfare, just an efficient propeller for light aircraft.

 

There were a number of propeller reviews (some in French) but not a lot of Real World Experiences ...and/or comparisons. It is lovely to see some being posted in this thread!!

  • Winner 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

JG's Stolspeed website has a section on prop comparisons, carried out quite precisely. There with very little to choose between them at that time, if I remember rightly.

My thought is that it would be really informative to get JG to test an E-prop.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I spoke with JG last week he was in here at my work. He is going to do a comparison for me. I will get another prop soon its in production now and it will be a demo prop. The one doing the rounds now is my own prop. JG runs a Luga prop at the moment and I will give him a Bolly and also the Eprop and he will do the comparison as he has already done a lot on this

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I spoke with JG last week he was in here at my work. He is going to do a comparison for me.

I look forward to that, Mark. I do know that big improvements have been made in recent years in some areas of industrial fan design: maybe we have something similar here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I look forward to that, Mark. I do know that big improvements have been made in recent years in some areas of industrial fan design: maybe we have something similar here.

Big improvements are in the resin type, and the allowable prop design / shape it then allows. These epoxies aren’t brittle and hold shape. I’ve been amazed on how they hold up in service in the past 15 years, and always getting better.

  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I never thought I would see the size of these improvements to be what they are. When JG did his first prop tests there really wasnt much between the props but I think you will see a pretty dramatic jump in the data.

 

The guy with the trike has got his prop now and I look forward to seeing his numbers as it being a pusher. Interesting that Eprop recommend he run a extension to get the prop further away from the engine as the airflow past the engine on a pusher is quite disturbed and you get a good benefit from the prop being further away.

 

Danny did some further testing today in tandem with another aircraft that has his ASI well calibrated as the sav with the crappy static port often doesnt give a true reading so to confirm the readings he had he matched the speed with Roger at 5200 rpm in cruise he is doing 92kts in level flight as the picture shows and Danny can get 5500 rpm at WOT in flight...That is incredible for a VG

 

118787745_10220240961947074_7002418847832048656_n.jpg.5dd266bc322135e3ca3e42a22e1e3055.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kyle - any first hand experience with the E-Prop performance improvements, when fitted to more "slippery" aircraft ? - existing economic cruise 100-110 knots @ 12.5-13.5 L/H - max cruise 120 knots @ 17-18 L/H

Link to post
Share on other sites

Post #89 has the specs recorded for a CTSW which is a high performance aircraft. They didnt supply any fuel specs. To be quite honest my opinion on the fuel is that it doesnt matter...in the schemem of things you get so many nm per dollar spent the difference is the airframe which determines the fuel consumption..drag is the measure for fuel consumption. It takes a certain amount of fuel to power the engine at a speed..the prop load will make a difference .... but really a litre extra or less in an hour does that really make a difference. If the fuel consumption was really 20% or greater worse then you would be seriously thinking

Link to post
Share on other sites

The eprop appears to be able to mimic a constant speed propeller which is great, the manufacturer states there can be as little as 100rpm difference between static, climb and cruise. Without a manifold pressure gauge it is impossible to know what power is being produced in a constant speed prop aircraft. Comparison with other propellers on rpm alone might be a little unfair.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well when I get my prop over to Blair he will take off his airmaster on his savannah and try the Eprop and tell me what he thinks..besides dropping 10kg off the nose of the aircraft I am very interested in seeing how close it performs to his airmaster...which he loves so we will see. Rogers prop should arrive late this week or early next then I can get my prop off his aircraft and give it to Blair to try

Link to post
Share on other sites

Post #89 has the specs recorded for a CTSW which is a high performance aircraft. They didnt supply any fuel specs. To be quite honest my opinion on the fuel is that it doesnt matter...in the schemem of things you get so many nm per dollar spent the difference is the airframe which determines the fuel consumption..drag is the measure for fuel consumption. It takes a certain amount of fuel to power the engine at a speed..the prop load will make a difference .... but really a litre extra or less in an hour does that really make a difference. If the fuel consumption was really 20% or greater worse then you would be seriously thinking

 

Thanks Kyle - no offence to anyone/aircraft but 89's CTWS figures do not seem to be much of an improvement on the specifications I found on Flight Design web page or on Wikipedia.

 

As you say - fuel consumption at a given air speed & rpm is a measure of energy needed to deliver the performance quoted. As such it is a valuable "tool" in assessing performance. When comparing like aircraft I think it would be fair to say fuel consumption will indicate,

to some extent,the ability of the propeller to convert the fuel energy to forward motion

Link to post
Share on other sites

The prop on the CTSW was originally a factory supplied and setup neuform. They had a prop strike and were looking for another prop they could put on and as the Eprop has ASTM approval for CT aircraft they decided to replace it with this one. The improvement on what they were actually getting from a factory aircraft certainly has pleased them So regardless of what the spec says on a website real world figures are always the best to rely on.

Murray did say they have to put the spinner on and also the sealing tape so this could according to him add maybe another close to 5 kts on top of what they have now....What I like to see are the words "These results vastly exceed anything seen with the previous Neuform. At times, with 2-up, we were battling to hit 105kts in good conditions." and "VERY pleased with the results. The system definitely exceeds our expectations"

 

That is what gives me the warm fuzzy feeling :) and the guy is very happy....winner winner chicken dinner

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Skippy this is from The Eprop site just two of so many testamonials I think there are 4 or 5 for the Faeta but thought of you immediately

DURANDAL-3

ATEC FAETA 321

On my Faeta, I had an Fiti propeller that vibrated a lot. I tried an E-Prop and I'm very happy.

I don't have any vibration anymore, and I gained more than 10 kt in cruising.

This E-Prop is also very responsive.

I'm going to tell all my friends about it. Thank you for your good work.

A.F. (2020-03-22)

 

DURANDAL-3

ATEC FAETA 321

The new e-prop propeller I've fitted is fabulous! Takeoff as short as with the FITI, it goes up to the trees, cruising speed: increased by at least 20 km/h! I couldn't believe my eyes: I went from 190 to 210 km/h at 5000 rpm. You can physically feel that the propeller is super light: no vibrations, reacts very quickly to rpm changes, and no "clank" at engine stop. A killer, absolutely to be recommended!

M.R. (2020-02-20)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Kyle - I dont want to get into a debate based on conjecture but the two "Reviews" you have quoted do not stack up;

 

1. They are not what I would call "first hand experience", or third party independent, being sourced from the E-prop web site

2. Both suggest there were problems with the "tuning" of the existing Fiti propellers, that should have been addressed first. Certainly before making a comparison with another prop.

3. The performance of MR (2020-02-20) Faeta is below expected norms, with both Fiti & E-prop, as to be quit concerning, although the E-prop has made significant improvement - there would seem to be problem with that aircraft.

 

I would like to see an independent review, where the existing prop had been "tuned" (static & dynamic balanced and if adjustable. pitched for best performance) compared with the E-prop similarly treated - performance for both props documented for TO role, Climb, Cruise for close to the same climatic conditions, aircraft weight, etc ie a fair & transparent comparison.

 

I guess the answer to my question #112 is no.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok then well certainly you cant be convinced by anything.

All I can tell you is MY first hand experience with the 2 local aircraft here that there has been a huge improvement over well managed and balanced and "tuned" propeller systems and over a Bolly on both there is a big improvement. The others that have fitted the props to existing aircraft here that they were previously happy with the new prop has made a very big difference and they were all different props than a Bolly...but it seems you seem to not want to look at anything but what the factory supplies. You can lead a horse to water but you cant make them drink I suppose

 

You have to remember I didnt go out to chase the dealership it was handed to me. I went out on recommendations of other "factory" build organisations who had tried them and now only use them and personally its a choice you make yourself once looking at the real world data from others. I bought the first prop on people that I trust recommendations and certainly on this product I like it and with my previous experiences it certainly has been a game changer

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all Kyle - I believe the improvements, on the aircraft you have been "incrementing " with. I just wanted to find out if the same benefits translate to a less draggy air-frame.

 

I hope you will be able to try the E-prop on an aircraft that has similar characteristics to my Zephyr (currently in need of a prop but that's another story).

 

So if you get the chance: around the 300 kg empty weight, Rotax 912 ULS powered, max cruise 120 knots or so, econo cruise 110 -110 knots.

Link to post
Share on other sites

" The performance of MR (2020-02-20) Faeta is below expected norms, with both Fiti & E-prop, as to be quit concerning, although the E-prop has made significant improvement - there would seem to be problem with that aircraft."

 

Maybe they have a calibrated ASI fitted to their aircraft so it differs from the factory spec's.

 

 

(Just been a smartarse)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I never thought I would see the size of these improvements to be what they are. When JG did his first prop tests there really wasnt much between the props but I think you will see a pretty dramatic jump in the data.

 

The guy with the trike has got his prop now and I look forward to seeing his numbers as it being a pusher. Interesting that Eprop recommend he run a extension to get the prop further away from the engine as the airflow past the engine on a pusher is quite disturbed and you get a good benefit from the prop being further away.

 

Danny did some further testing today in tandem with another aircraft that has his ASI well calibrated as the sav with the crappy static port often doesnt give a true reading so to confirm the readings he had he matched the speed with Roger at 5200 rpm in cruise he is doing 92kts in level flight as the picture shows and Danny can get 5500 rpm at WOT in flight...That is incredible for a VG

 

[ATTACH type=full" alt="118787745_10220240961947074_7002418847832048656_n.jpg]56142[/ATTACH]

 

On the surface, 92 knots (IAS) at 5,200 rpm in a VG is remarkable. We are assuming the indicated values shown are all sound!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mark,

Roger Lee from Rotax Owners recommends 5600 to 5650 RPM wide open throttle at your usual altitude, by the look of the eprop they want 5500 max.

Do you know why ?

Could it cause it to go through redline static or on climb at 5650?

 

Kiwi

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...