 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:09 pm Post subject: Powerflow |
 |
|
Hey Gary,
What is your best deal on a powerflow short stack right now? Is the ceramic tip worth it? What is the point of the ceramic tip?
Brock
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aa5_driver(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Call garner at Fletchair for great pricing. Support them as they are the primary supporters of the fleet.
Kevin
On Jul 9, 2013, at 7:08 PM, Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Hey Gary,
What is your best deal on a powerflow short stack right now? Is the ceramic tip worth it? What is the point of the ceramic tip?
Brock
|
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:16 am Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Brock,
Power Flow for $3400. The ceramic coating is to resist discoloring due to heat. Not sure if it's worth it.
Gary
From: Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com>
To: "teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com" <teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 5:08 PM
Subject: Powerflow
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)>
Hey Gary,
What is your best deal on a powerflow short stack right now? Is the ceramic tip worth it? What is the point com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/= --> [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:42 pm Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
[quote]Brock,
Power Flow for $3400. The ceramic coating is to resist discoloring due to heat. Not sure if it's worth it.
Gary
From: Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)>
To: "teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)" <teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)>
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 5:08 PM
Subject: Powerflow
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)>
Hey Gary,
What is your best deal on a powerflow short stack right now? Is the ceramic tip worth it? What is the point com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/= -->
| Quote: |
===================================
courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
===================================
cs.com
===================================
matronics.com/contribution
===================================
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dmwhite(at)e3ra.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 9:39 pm Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
I've done both - Powerflow then electronic ignition. The electronic ignition seemed to do more.
FWIW, I like my ceramic coating on the Powerflow.
Dean White (Tiger N81166)
Edmonds, WA
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brock
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:42 PM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Powerflow
I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
012345678901234567
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BARRY CHECK 6
Joined: 15 Mar 2011
Posts: 738
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 1:33 am Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Brock:
Best bang for the buck and without catchings AIDS/HIV or the CRABS...
The Electronic Ignition.
Why?
1 - You are already paying for the fuel - you might as well burn it more efficiently.
2 - Less fouled plugs and NO fouled plugs if you are using REM37BY or a fine wire plug.
3 - If you go for the exhaust ($3400 Plus install) and if you get an improvement in HP - What are you going to do with it? You then need to repitch your prop IF if can be repitched. If NOT then $3200 for a new prop Plus Install.
$6600!!!!
4 - So next is - Do you care if the exhaust discolors? If you than you do the ceramic coat ... What is that Plus $100?
$6700!!!!
5 - You now just took your standard cowl and cut a ugly hole in it to fit the new exhaust - Which may have ruined your cooling airflow, SO now you need or want the better cowl... How much is that I don't recall but lets say another $3500, Plus Shipping ($250) Plus Install ($3500) Plus Paint ($500) Plus Extra Parts ($200)... So that equals === $7950
WHAT $7950!!!! !!!!
Don't forget to add it to the other costs $6700 + $$7950 =$14650...
Big BANG - Big Bucks and NO KISS
6 - And now the plane is down for another month of no flying...
Don't believe my numbers collect your own.
Oh! How much gas will $14K buy you? Or even $10K? ! ! ! !
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
[quote] I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | Brock,
Power Flow for $3400. The ceramic coating is to resist discoloring due to heat. Not sure if it's worth it.
Gary
From: Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)>
To: "teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)" <teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)>
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 5:08 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)>
Hey Gary,
What is your best deal on a powerflow short stack right now? Is the ceramic tip worth it? What is the point com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/= -->
|
| Quote: |
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tscott165(at)centurylink.
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 5:53 am Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Which electronic ignition and how much?
On Jul 11, 2013, at 3:33 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote:
[quote]Brock:
Best bang for the buck and without catchings AIDS/HIV or the CRABS...
The Electronic Ignition.
Why?
1 - You are already paying for the fuel - you might as well burn it more efficiently.
2 - Less fouled plugs and NO fouled plugs if you are using REM37BY or a fine wire plug.
3 - If you go for the exhaust ($3400 Plus install) and if you get an improvement in HP - What are you going to do with it? You then need to repitch your prop IF if can be repitched. If NOT then $3200 for a new prop Plus Install.
$6600!!!!
4 - So next is - Do you care if the exhaust discolors? If you than you do the ceramic coat ... What is that Plus $100?
$6700!!!!
5 - You now just took your standard cowl and cut a ugly hole in it to fit the new exhaust - Which may have ruined your cooling airflow, SO now you need or want the better cowl... How much is that I don't recall but lets say another $3500, Plus Shipping ($250) Plus Install ($3500) Plus Paint ($500) Plus Extra Parts ($200)... So that equals === $7950
WHAT $7950!!!! !!!!
Don't forget to add it to the other costs $6700 + $$7950 =$14650...
Big BANG - Big Bucks and NO KISS
6 - And now the plane is down for another month of no flying...
Don't believe my numbers collect your own.
Oh! How much gas will $14K buy you? Or even $10K? ! ! ! !
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aa5_driver(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:30 am Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Call Garner at Fletchair. They have good prices and support the fleet. Electro air is the brand. Depending on your location, Ken Blackman, Gary Vogt, Excel Air, Bob Steward, Roscoe Rosche, Barry, or one of the others can help you with install.
Kevin
On Jul 11, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Scott Boyce <tscott165(at)centurylink.net (tscott165(at)centurylink.net)> wrote:
[quote]Which electronic ignition and how much?
On Jul 11, 2013, at 3:33 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote:
| Quote: | Brock:
Best bang for the buck and without catchings AIDS/HIV or the CRABS...
The Electronic Ignition.
Why?
1 - You are already paying for the fuel - you might as well burn it more efficiently.
2 - Less fouled plugs and NO fouled plugs if you are using REM37BY or a fine wire plug.
3 - If you go for the exhaust ($3400 Plus install) and if you get an improvement in HP - What are you going to do with it? You then need to repitch your prop IF if can be repitched. If NOT then $3200 for a new prop Plus Install.
$6600!!!!
4 - So next is - Do you care if the exhaust discolors? If you than you do the ceramic coat ... What is that Plus $100?
$6700!!!!
5 - You now just took your standard cowl and cut a ugly hole in it to fit the new exhaust - Which may have ruined your cooling airflow, SO now you need or want the better cowl... How much is that I don't recall but lets say another $3500, Plus Shipping ($250) Plus Install ($3500) Plus Paint ($500) Plus Extra Parts ($200)... So that equals === $7950
WHAT $7950!!!! !!!!
Don't forget to add it to the other costs $6700 + $$7950 =$14650...
Big BANG - Big Bucks and NO KISS
6 - And now the plane is down for another month of no flying...
Don't believe my numbers collect your own.
Oh! How much gas will $14K buy you? Or even $10K? ! ! ! !
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | Brock,
Power Flow for $3400. The ceramic coating is to resist discoloring due to heat. Not sure if it's worth it.
Gary
From: Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)>
To: "teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)" <teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)>
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 5:08 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)>
Hey Gary,
What is your best deal on a powerflow short stack right now? Is the ceramic tip worth it? What is the point com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/= -->
|
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
===================================
t">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
===================================
cs.com
===================================
matronics.com/contribution
===================================
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jim(at)powerflowsystems.c
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:13 am Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Hello,
I think it’s great that Grumman owners have so many options for upgrading and improving the performance on these fine aircraft.
Since it is obvious that not every option is right for each individual and his aircraft, accurate information is a key requirement enabling each individual to determine which and how many (if any) of the different products available make sense for him or her. With that in mind, I’d like to shed a little additional light on the topics raised by Brock, Dean and Barry:
#1.) Yes, you are already paying for fuel – AND - Both the Electronic Ignition and the Tuned Exhaust allow you to burn it more efficiently. The fine folks at Electroair state their gains in percent (a 10% - 15% improvement) while we at Power Flow state our gains in gph (a reduction in fuel burn of 1.0 – 2.0 gph). For most GA aircraft the effective results are very close to the same and both companies have had these stated gains confirmed by hundreds of Customers.
#2.) Electroair does claim a reduced tendency for plug fowling as a benefit of their system and I have no reason to doubt their claims. I can also state that there have never been any reports suggesting an increase in plug fowling as a result of an upgrade to the Power Flow System.
#3.) Both companies claim increased horsepower as a main benefit and again, based on each companies track record (3,800+ total Systems installed / 300+ AA5 Systems installed since 1999 for Power Flow, 2,500+ total systems installed since 1992 for Electroair), there is no longer any credible reason to doubt either company’s claims.
The pricing for each system is also remarkably similar: As Barry pointed out: depending on lead times and applicable discounts the Power Flow System for a Tiger will run you about $3,500.00 plus five to seven hours of installation labor. The Electroair costs $3,400.00 plus four to six hours of labor to install.
As to the increase in HP (and if you don’t see it, Power Flow will give you your money back) you by no means need to replace or even re-pitch your prop to take advantage of it. First and foremost you can immediately use it where it does the Grumman’s the most good: in take-off and climb performance. As I said above, these are fine aircraft. But who among us hasn’t been way too up close and personal with the trees at the far end of a slightly too short runway? What is a shorter take-off roll (by about 300’) and a faster rate of climb (by 100 – 150 fpm) worth to you in those situations?
Even at cruise altitude you don’t need to re-pitch or replace the prop to take advantage of the boost in HP provided by the Power Flow – just throttle back and enjoy cruising at your current airspeed while burning 1.0 – 1.5 gph less avfuel. If you’re a real speed demon and crave that last 3 – 5 knots in airspeed, go ahead and take it. Unless you’re already cruising with your engine at redline rpm, the Power Flow System will give you an extra 50 – 100 rpm to play with. Each 100 rpm gets you an extra 5 knots of airspeed, and you don’t have to re-pitch the prop to get it.
We have had a very small minority (well below 10% and typically those who frequently participate in air racing) of our Grumman Customers who are so enamored with the potential for increased speed made possible by the Power Flow System, that they do choose to purchase and install a higher pitched prop to take full advantage of the extra power. This is by no means a requirement, but if you happen to enjoy racing, it is another option available for you.
#4.) We do offer a ceramic coated tailpipe as a $200.00 option, but it IS an option (for those owners who take particular pride in the appearance of their aircraft) and not a required expense. If the discoloration that naturally occurs when stainless steel gets hot doesn’t bother you, there is no need to spend the money. If it does bother you and you don’t mind using a little elbow grease, the discoloration can be easily wiped away with common stainless steel polish.
#5.) Thanks to the dedication and expertise of Power Flow’s many fine Dealers nationwide (including several well-respected “Grumman Guru’s” like FletchAir, ExcelAir and Gary Vogt) there is no reason on earth why a Customer would have to live with an “ugly hole” in their cowling. Yes, our system requires that a new hole be cut for the relocated exhaust pipe exit. Gary, John, or David, or any one of Power Flow’s several hundred Dealer’s nationwide (or even any reasonably competent A&P) can easily make the existing hole all but disappear.
The assertion that relocating the tailpipe “may have ruined your cooling airflow” is groundless. Thanks to Gary Vogt’s tireless efforts and determination, his beautiful “Jaguar” cowling is another excellent upgrade available to Grumman owners in its own right. It is not a requirement for the Power Flow System.
#6.) So to summarize: The Electroair Electronic Ignition will give you more horsepower (particularly at higher altitudes) and a 10% -15% improvement in fuel economy for about $3,400.00 plus 4 – 6 hours of installation labor. The Power Flow Tuned Exhaust System will give you more horsepower (about 10 – 15 more), better take-off and climb performance, and a 1.0 – 2.0 gph improvement in fuel economy for about $3,500.00 plus 5 – 7 hours of installation labor.
I don’t quite see how 7 hours (max) of installation labor can stretch into a month of down time, but maybe that’s just ole’ math challenged me.
Which is the right choice for you? Well, like most things in life, the honest answer seems to be: “It all depends”. I hope the facts outlined above will help those who are interested in improving the performance of their AA5 make that choice based on accurate information.
And, if you find it impossible to decide, keep in mind that, as has Dean, several very happy Customers have installed both STC’d upgrades on their aircraft and gotten the best of both worlds.
All the Best!
- Jim Shafer
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Ph: (877) 693-7356
Fax: (877) 570-9831
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Airport Bum
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 10:30 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
Call Garner at Fletchair. They have good prices and support the fleet. Electro air is the brand. Depending on your location, Ken Blackman, Gary Vogt, Excel Air, Bob Steward, Roscoe Rosche, Barry, or one of the others can help you with install.
Kevin
On Jul 11, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Scott Boyce <tscott165(at)centurylink.net (tscott165(at)centurylink.net)> wrote:
| Quote: |
Which electronic ignition and how much?
On Jul 11, 2013, at 3:33 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote:
Brock:
Best bang for the buck and without catchings AIDS/HIV or the CRABS...
The Electronic Ignition.
Why?
1 - You are already paying for the fuel - you might as well burn it more efficiently.
2 - Less fouled plugs and NO fouled plugs if you are using REM37BY or a fine wire plug.
3 - If you go for the exhaust ($3400 Plus install) and if you get an improvement in HP - What are you going to do with it? You then need to repitch your prop IF if can be repitched. If NOT then $3200 for a new prop Plus Install.
$6600!!!!
4 - So next is - Do you care if the exhaust discolors? If you than you do the ceramic coat ... What is that Plus $100?
$6700!!!!
5 - You now just took your standard cowl and cut a ugly hole in it to fit the new exhaust - Which may have ruined your cooling airflow, SO now you need or want the better cowl... How much is that I don't recall but lets say another $3500, Plus Shipping ($250) Plus Install ($3500) Plus Paint ($500) Plus Extra Parts ($200)... So that equals === $7950
WHAT $7950!!!! !!!!
Don't forget to add it to the other costs $6700 + $$7950 =$14650...
Big BANG - Big Bucks and NO KISS
6 - And now the plane is down for another month of no flying...
Don't believe my numbers collect your own.
Oh! How much gas will $14K buy you? Or even $10K? ! ! ! !
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
012345
678901
23456789 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
0 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
1
courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
2 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
3 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
4 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
5 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
6 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
7 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
8 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
9012345678901
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BILL9725(at)AOL.COM
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 1:27 pm Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
HI Jim
I have been going over the Powerflow option with you for a couple of years and just wanted you to know you will soon be having another customer. I am having Gary do a Cowling and Powerflow for my tiger in the next month or so and look forward to the great combination. The cowling is really a work of are, know how precise Gary it I could not pass up the idea.
By the way I recently installed the fine wire plugs with the standard mags and they saved almost 1.00 gallon a hour for the same exhaust temps and of course the engine runs a major % smoother. Although expensive, they really could make up their cost in improved results.
But my question to you is, I don`t expect to still realize the Powerflow fuel savings on top of this should I? My engine is a low time millennium engine done just before they went under and is very strong even before we ad the Powerflow, I can be well over 10,000 ft and still have throttle left compared to the original engine where full in at 9,000 in most cases. So of course I am considering re pitching the prop to take advantage of the Powerflow and already strong engine. Any feed back on that combination of the re pitch prop and powerlfow?
Thanks and am glad to say I am finally getting to do the Powerflow, I very much look forward to it getting done!.
Thanks
Bill Stigile
In a message dated 7/11/2013 9:13:50 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jim(at)powerflowsystems.com writes:
| Quote: |
Hello,
I think it’s great that Grumman owners have so many options for upgrading and improving the performance on these fine aircraft.
Since it is obvious that not every option is right for each individual and his aircraft, accurate information is a key requirement enabling each individual to determine which and how many (if any) of the different products available make sense for him or her. With that in mind, I’d like to shed a little additional light on the topics raised by Brock, Dean and Barry:
#1.) Yes, you are already paying for fuel – AND - Both the Electronic Ignition and the Tuned Exhaust allow you to burn it more efficiently. The fine folks at Electroair state their gains in percent (a 10% - 15% improvement) while we at Power Flow state our gains in gph (a reduction in fuel burn of 1.0 – 2.0 gph). For most GA aircraft the effective results are very close to the same and both companies have had these stated gains confirmed by hundreds of Customers.
#2.) Electroair does claim a reduced tendency for plug fowling as a benefit of their system and I have no reason to doubt their claims. I can also state that there have never been any reports suggesting an increase in plug fowling as a result of an upgrade to the Power Flow System.
#3.) Both companies claim increased horsepower as a main benefit and again, based on each companies track record (3,800+ total Systems installed / 300+ AA5 Systems installed since 1999 for Power Flow, 2,500+ total systems installed since 1992 for Electroair), there is no longer any credible reason to doubt either company’s claims.
The pricing for each system is also remarkably similar: As Barry pointed out: depending on lead times and applicable discounts the Power Flow System for a Tiger will run you about $3,500.00 plus five to seven hours of installation labor. The Electroair costs $3,400.00 plus four to six hours of labor to install.
As to the increase in HP (and if you don’t see it, Power Flow will give you your money back) you by no means need to replace or even re-pitch your prop to take advantage of it. First and foremost you can immediately use it where it does the Grumman’s the most good: in take-off and climb performance. As I said above, these are fine aircraft. But who among us hasn’t been way too up close and personal with the trees at the far end of a slightly too short runway? What is a shorter take-off roll (by about 300’) and a faster rate of climb (by 100 – 150 fpm) worth to you in those situations?
Even at cruise altitude you don’t need to re-pitch or replace the prop to take advantage of the boost in HP provided by the Power Flow – just throttle back and enjoy cruising at your current airspeed while burning 1.0 – 1.5 gph less avfuel. If you’re a real speed demon and crave that last 3 – 5 knots in airspeed, go ahead and take it. Unless you’re already cruising with your engine at redline rpm, the Power Flow System will give you an extra 50 – 100 rpm to play with. Each 100 rpm gets you an extra 5 knots of airspeed, and you don’t have to re-pitch the prop to get it.
We have had a very small minority (well below 10% and typically those who frequently participate in air racing) of our Grumman Customers who are so enamored with the potential for increased speed made possible by the Power Flow System, that they do choose to purchase and install a higher pitched prop to take full advantage of the extra power. This is by no means a requirement, but if you happen to enjoy racing, it is another option available for you.
#4.) We do offer a ceramic coated tailpipe as a $200.00 option, but it IS an option (for those owners who take particular pride in the appearance of their aircraft) and not a required expense. If the discoloration that naturally occurs when stainless steel gets hot doesn’t bother you, there is no need to spend the money. If it does bother you and you don’t mind using a little elbow grease, the discoloration can be easily wiped away with common stainless steel polish.
#5.) Thanks to the dedication and expertise of Power Flow’s many fine Dealers nationwide (including several well-respected “Grumman Guru’s” like FletchAir, ExcelAir and Gary Vogt) there is no reason on earth why a Customer would have to live with an “ugly hole” in their cowling. Yes, our system requires that a new hole be cut for the relocated exhaust pipe exit. Gary, John, or David, or any one of Power Flow’s several hundred Dealer’s nationwide (or even any reasonably competent A&P) can easily make the existing hole all but disappear.
The assertion that relocating the tailpipe “may have ruined your cooling airflow” is groundless. Thanks to Gary Vogt’s tireless efforts and determination, his beautiful “Jaguar” cowling is another excellent upgrade available to Grumman owners in its own right. It is not a requirement for the Power Flow System.
#6.) So to summarize: The Electroair Electronic Ignition will give you more horsepower (particularly at higher altitudes) and a 10% -15% improvement in fuel economy for about $3,400.00 plus 4 – 6 hours of installation labor. The Power Flow Tuned Exhaust System will give you more horsepower (about 10 – 15 more), better take-off and climb performance, and a 1.0 – 2.0 gph improvement in fuel economy for about $3,500.00 plus 5 – 7 hours of installation labor.
I don’t quite see how 7 hours (max) of installation labor can stretch into a month of down time, but maybe that’s just ole’ math challenged me.
Which is the right choice for you? Well, like most things in life, the honest answer seems to be: “It all depends”. I hope the facts outlined above will help those who are interested in improving the performance of their AA5 make that choice based on accurate information.
And, if you find it impossible to decide, keep in mind that, as has Dean, several very happy Customers have installed both STC’d upgrades on their aircraft and gotten the best of both worlds.
All the Best!
- Jim Shafer
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Ph: (877) 693-7356
Fax: (877) 570-9831
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Airport Bum
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 10:30 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
Call Garner at Fletchair. They have good prices and support the fleet. Electro air is the brand. Depending on your location, Ken Blackman, Gary Vogt, Excel Air, Bob Steward, Roscoe Rosche, Barry, or one of the others can help you with install.
Kevin
On Jul 11, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Scott Boyce <tscott165(at)centurylink.net (tscott165(at)centurylink.net)> wrote:
| Quote: |
Which electronic ignition and how much?
On Jul 11, 2013, at 3:33 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote:
Brock:
Best bang for the buck and without catchings AIDS/HIV or the CRABS...
The Electronic Ignition.
Why?
1 - You are already paying for the fuel - you might as well burn it more efficiently.
2 - Less fouled plugs and NO fouled plugs if you are using REM37BY or a fine wire plug.
3 - If you go for the exhaust ($3400 Plus install) and if you get an improvement in HP - What are you going to do with it? You then need to repitch your prop IF if can be repitched. If NOT then $3200 for a new prop Plus Install.
$6600!!!!
4 - So next is - Do you care if the exhaust discolors? If you than you do the ceramic coat ... What is that Plus $100?
$6700!!!!
5 - You now just took your standard cowl and cut a ugly hole in it to fit the new exhaust - Which may have ruined your cooling airflow, SO now you need or want the better cowl... How much is that I don't recall but lets say another $3500, Plus Shipping ($250) Plus Install ($3500) Plus Paint ($500) Plus Extra Parts ($200)... So that equals === $7950
WHAT $7950!!!! !!!!
Don't forget to add it to the other costs $6700 + $$7950 =$14650...
Big BANG - Big Bucks and NO KISS
6 - And now the plane is down for another month of no flying...
Don't believe my numbers collect your own.
Oh! How much gas will $14K buy you? Or even $10K? ! ! ! !
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
012345
678901
2345678901
courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
23456789012345678901
2 |
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dsavarese0812(at)bellsout
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:01 pm Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Of all the Grumman's that could benefit the most from the Powerflow exhaust, it would be the O235 powered AA1x's. I for one would be THE first to order it if it were available. I would even volunteer my airplane for design and testing if Powerflow would consider building the exhaust for O235's.
The Powerflow exhaust would provide the performance that caused many people to decide to make the engine upgrade to the O320. The detriment of the O320 upgrade is, after the upgrade, with only 22 gallons of useable fuel, the range is decreased due to the increase in fuel burn over the O235. But more importantly (and this is why I did not buy an O320 powered AA1A that I REALLY wanted. It was BEAUTIFUL and well maintained airplane).....the useful load was reduced to 433 lbs with the O320 upgrade. With full fuel (22 gallons), it was a 1 and 1/2 person airplane. Not only is the engine heavier, but the prop is heavier, the nose strut is heavier because it must be changed as well and a larger/heavier battery is also required.
A PowerFlow exhaust would dramatically change the dynamics of any AA1x that had it installed AND for a minimal amount of money compared to the O320 engine upgrade and STC costs. And we would get to keep our useful load pretty close to what it is presently. That is another major benefit.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
'74 AA1B 08A
On 7/11/2013 11:09 AM, Jim Shafer wrote:
[quote] v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} <![endif]-->
Hello,
I think it’s great that Grumman owners have so many options for upgrading and improving the performance on these fine aircraft.
Since it is obvious that not every option is right for each individual and his aircraft, accurate information is a key requirement enabling each individual to determine which and how many (if any) of the different products available make sense for him or her. With that in mind, I’d like to shed a little additional light on the topics raised by Brock, Dean and Barry:
#1.) Yes, you are already paying for fuel – AND - Both the Electronic Ignition and the Tuned Exhaust allow you to burn it more efficiently. The fine folks at Electroair state their gains in percent (a 10% - 15% improvement) while we at Power Flow state our gains in gph (a reduction in fuel burn of 1.0 – 2.0 gph). For most GA aircraft the effective results are very close to the same and both companies have had these stated gains confirmed by hundreds of Customers.
#2.) Electroair does claim a reduced tendency for plug fowling as a benefit of their system and I have no reason to doubt their claims. I can also state that there have never been any reports suggesting an increase in plug fowling as a result of an upgrade to the Power Flow System.
#3.) Both companies claim increased horsepower as a main benefit and again, based on each companies track record (3,800+ total Systems installed / 300+ AA5 Systems installed since 1999 for Power Flow, 2,500+ total systems installed since 1992 for Electroair), there is no longer any credible reason to doubt either company’s claims.
The pricing for each system is also remarkably similar: As Barry pointed out: depending on lead times and applicable discounts the Power Flow System for a Tiger will run you about $3,500.00 plus five to seven hours of installation labor. The Electroair costs $3,400.00 plus four to six hours of labor to install.
As to the increase in HP (and if you don’t see it, Power Flow will give you your money back) you by no means need to replace or even re-pitch your prop to take advantage of it. First and foremost you can immediately use it where it does the Grumman’s the most good: in take-off and climb performance. As I said above, these are fine aircraft. But who among us hasn’t been way too up close and personal with the trees at the far end of a slightly too short runway? What is a shorter take-off roll (by about 300’) and a faster rate of climb (by 100 – 150 fpm) worth to you in those situations?
Even at cruise altitude you don’t need to re-pitch or replace the prop to take advantage of the boost in HP provided by the Power Flow – just throttle back and enjoy cruising at your current airspeed while burning 1.0 – 1.5 gph less avfuel. If you’re a real speed demon and crave that last 3 – 5 knots in airspeed, go ahead and take it. Unless you’re already cruising with your engine at redline rpm, the Power Flow System will give you an extra 50 – 100 rpm to play with. Each 100 rpm gets you an extra 5 knots of airspeed, and you don’t have to re-pitch the prop to get it.
We have had a very small minority (well below 10% and typically those who frequently participate in air racing) of our Grumman Customers who are so enamored with the potential for increased speed made possible by the Power Flow System, that they do choose to purchase and install a higher pitched prop to take full advantage of the extra power. This is by no means a requirement, but if you happen to enjoy racing, it is another option available for you.
#4.) We do offer a ceramic coated tailpipe as a $200.00 option, but it IS an option (for those owners who take particular pride in the appearance of their aircraft) and not a required expense. If the discoloration that naturally occurs when stainless steel gets hot doesn’t bother you, there is no need to spend the money. If it does bother you and you don’t mind using a little elbow grease, the discoloration can be easily wiped away with common stainless steel polish.
#5.) Thanks to the dedication and expertise of Power Flow’s many fine Dealers nationwide (including several well-respected “Grumman Guru’s” like FletchAir, ExcelAir and Gary Vogt) there is no reason on earth why a Customer would have to live with an “ugly hole” in their cowling. Yes, our system requires that a new hole be cut for the relocated exhaust pipe exit. Gary, John, or David, or any one of Power Flow’s several hundred Dealer’s nationwide (or even any reasonably competent A&P) can easily make the existing hole all but disappear.
The assertion that relocating the tailpipe “may have ruined your cooling airflow” is groundless. Thanks to Gary Vogt’s tireless efforts and determination, his beautiful “Jaguar” cowling is another excellent upgrade available to Grumman owners in its own right. It is not a requirement for the Power Flow System.
#6.) So to summarize: The Electroair Electronic Ignition will give you more horsepower (particularly at higher altitudes) and a 10% -15% improvement in fuel economy for about $3,400.00 plus 4 – 6 hours of installation labor. The Power Flow Tuned Exhaust System will give you more horsepower (about 10 – 15 more), better take-off and climb performance, and a 1.0 – 2.0 gph improvement in fuel economy for about $3,500.00 plus 5 – 7 hours of installation labor.
I don’t quite see how 7 hours (max) of installation labor can stretch into a month of down time, but maybe that’s just ole’ math challenged me.
Which is the right choice for you? Well, like most things in life, the honest answer seems to be: “It all depends”. I hope the facts outlined above will help those who are interested in improving the performance of their AA5 make that choice based on accurate information.
And, if you find it impossible to decide, keep in mind that, as has Dean, several very happy Customers have installed both STC’d upgrades on their aircraft and gotten the best of both worlds.
All the Best!
- Jim Shafer
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Ph: (877) 693-7356
Fax: (877) 570-9831
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of Airport Bum
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 10:30 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
Call Garner at Fletchair. They have good prices and support the fleet. Electro air is the brand. Depending on your location, Ken Blackman, Gary Vogt, Excel Air, Bob Steward, Roscoe Rosche, Barry, or one of the others can help you with install.
Kevin
On Jul 11, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Scott Boyce <tscott165(at)centurylink.net (tscott165(at)centurylink.net)> wrote:
| Quote: |
Which electronic ignition and how much?
On Jul 11, 2013, at 3:33 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote:
Brock:
Best bang for the buck and without catchings AIDS/HIV or the CRABS...
The Electronic Ignition.
Why?
1 - You are already paying for the fuel - you might as well burn it more efficiently.
2 - Less fouled plugs and NO fouled plugs if you are using REM37BY or a fine wire plug.
3 - If you go for the exhaust ($3400 Plus install) and if you get an improvement in HP - What are you going to do with it? You then need to repitch your prop IF if can be repitched. If NOT then $3200 for a new prop Plus Install.
$6600!!!!
4 - So next is - Do you care if the exhaust discolors? If you than you do the ceramic coat ... What is that Plus $100?
$6700!!!!
5 - You now just took your standard cowl and cut a ugly hole in it to fit the new exhaust - Which may have ruined your cooling airflow, SO now you need or want the better cowl... How much is that I don't recall but lets say another $3500, Plus Shipping ($250) Plus Install ($3500) Plus Paint ($500) Plus Extra Parts ($200)... So that equals === $7950
WHAT $7950!!!! !!!!
Don't forget to add it to the other costs $6700 + $$7950 =$14650...
Big BANG - Big Bucks and NO KISS
6 - And now the plane is down for another month of no flying...
Don't believe my numbers collect your own.
Oh! How much gas will $14K buy you? Or even $10K? ! ! ! !
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
| Quote: |
Brock,
Power Flow for $3400. The ceramic coating is to resist discoloring due to heat. Not sure if it's worth it.
Gary
From: Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)>
To: "teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)" <teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)>
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 5:08 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)>
Hey Gary,
What is your best deal on a powerflow short stack right now? Is the ceramic tip worth it? What is the point com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/= -->
0
|
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 0 1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2
========== |
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
6 [b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jim(at)powerflowsystems.c
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 12, 2013 7:38 am Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Very good (and accurate) points, Mr. Smith. To avoid monopolizing the list, I was trying to condense my post as much as possible.
Some other factors in the “it all depends” category would be the type of flying you typically do:
If you normally operate out of an airport with long, paved runways and/or do a lot of cross country flights at higher altitudes, I’d have to say that (absent an unlimited budget, as Brent points out), you’d probably be better served by doing the Electroair upgrade first.
If you fly out of a short, rough strip with crummy approaches or you do a lot of “puddle jumping” at low altitudes, I would make getting the Power Flow System a priority.
Of course, Gary’s cowl will look, work and fly great no matter what type of flying you do!
All the Best!
- Jim Shafer
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Ph: (877) 693-7356
Fax: (877) 570-9831
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of boxereighty(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 10:52 AM
To: n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Powerflow
aI am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, o
r electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes
more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for
the buck, exhaust or ignition?
I have both the PowerFlow (since 2006) and the ElectroAir (since last November). IMHO by and large the claims by their manufacturers are true. A power flow rep/expert just listed the high points of a power flow installation here yesterday. I wouldn't willingly go back to an OEM exhaust OR dual magneto system now but none of that is the crux of Brock's question. The question he poses is which ONE to buy with limited resources.
If an exhaust system was blown out or a mag was bad at inspection it would make it simple to chose. I wouldn't replace or repair a failed OEM exhaust system with another OEM unit while at the same time replacing a good magneto with an ElectroAir -- if I was on a budget. It just wouldn't make sense. And if both were in apparent good health now and I was going to chose which upgrade to do NOW I would probably chose the ElectroAir just because that mag could fail on the next flight while the exhaust system will more than likely last to a normal demise.
Barry covered some of the additional expenses for a PF installation and some of the same "hidden cost" issues exist for the ElectroAir installation. When you install the E-A, in addition to installing the supplied kit you will want to the point of need at least 4 and maybe 8, new plugs, a modified or replaced ignition switch, and rerouted ignition harness for the remaining mag. None of this is real expensive but will add a few bucks to the bang/buck analysis.
Bottom line, I would make a decision, exhaust or ignition, on which system I felt would need major maintenance next - and upgrade that system. If I thought both were absolutely equal in that evaluation I'd go with the ElectroAir upgrade just because I have had more unplanned mag problems develop overnight than exhaust problems.
If I misunderstood the question and budget isn't an issue get both next week and throw in an MT prop and Gary's cowl while your at it - you'll have the whole package.
Brent Smith
N28386/1N1
| Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
0123456789
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Discover
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 429
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 12, 2013 9:01 am Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Hey Brock,
I gots all dem upgrades and daes is all very goot. Use's next grade up ought be a IFR rating! It's cheaper den any dem udders and will give u more faster time in d air den de udders....
So get kracken 2day and get dat rating started today!
Your hangar maitee
Ned
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 12, 2013 2:33 pm Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
I would have the problem you do, KEEPING CURRENT!!!
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 12, 2013, at 12:01 PM, 923te(at)att.net wrote:
| Quote: |
Hey Brock,
I gots all dem upgrades and daes is all very goot. Use's next grade up ought be a IFR rating! It's cheaper den any dem udders and will give u more faster time in d air den de udders....
So get kracken 2day and get dat rating started today!
Your hangar maitee
Ned
|
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BARRY CHECK 6
Joined: 15 Mar 2011
Posts: 738
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 5:41 am Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Jim:
I would purchase a PF System in very short order and I'm planning to, as long as two things existed:
a> I needed a new muffler - I just can't see removing a working muffler to replace it with a working muffler.
b> I had/have the excess cash to to the job.
From these statements you should surely surmise I am not free flowing with cash and I made my suggestions/statements from the question posted in the email. The question was: "Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition?"
This indicates to me the fellow also holds his money in deep regard and is not too frivolous - We all are frivolous to a small extent, just because we have planes - But that does not mean we have to have MMTB (More Money Than Brains). And...
b> What truly will give the most for the investment.
The PF System is an EXTRA it is not a Safety Investment nor is it something that will stop one from flying.
If it is 22:00 Hrs (DARK) and you are at an airport that has no services avail what is your major concern - OTHER THAN WEATHER ... WILL THE ENGINE START?
A PF System does nothing to ensure that.
A electronic ignition SURE DOES!
> It gives you a hotter spark.
| Quote: | It gives you cleaner plugs. <-- And that is whether you use the REM40's, the Better REM37BY's or the Best Fine Wire. An upgrade in plugs is NOT required, but sure will help. I was misstated by someone that had the idea I was making it a mandatory action to upgrade spark plugs because of the electronic ignition.
> It gives you a TIMED spark especially at altitude where the Mag efficiency drops off. <-- Electronic Ignition has Vacuum Advance.
|
I have flown behind the ElectroAir EXPERIMENTAL system for years and the system and support of the company has always been phenomenal. I am NOT pushing ElectroAir is it just the company I have experience with; both as a company and the product. Let me also add I do not have ANY experience with the STC version of their product. I sure hope it is as good as the Experimental version and if it is - - - FINALLY - - - A tested and proven product for us GA Aircraft owners - That I know to work.
Now to address your items:
Your #1 - They give Percentage - PF gives Usage. It is your advertizing that stinks not the product. How can PF say it gives you 1 to 2 GPH savings when you don't know the engine being used?
Example; An O-320 which is rated at 150 HP and on mine shows 8 GPH in S&L in full rich at 2400 RPM at an altitude around 2500 to 3000 Ft... With your numbers I would be burning 1 to 2 GPH less... That is 6 GPH to 7 GPH at the same settings. Now here is where we have to get a little scientific and I hope this does not turn people away.
There is a basic term that is used engine industry wide and is Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC). Here is a link for explaination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption
What you want to look at is the formula: Lbs/Hr/HP
Which is Pounds of fuel burned / Per Hours / Per Horsepower of the engine.
There is a range for the number of pounds AND remember it is in pounds so for most users (US), for it to make sense the Lbs has to converted to GPH.
The range is 0.4 to 0.5Lbs/Hr/HP - - - So split the difference and use 0.45... 0.45x1Hrx150HPx75% Power = 8.4375 GPH pretty damn close to what I am reading on my FP5L fuel flow gauge. So working backwards my 8 GPH equates to 0.4375
the differance between 8 GPH and 8.4375 GPH is 0.4375 GPH or 56 ounces which is 0.9333 ounces per minute
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
"The reason Benjamin Franklin was such a great inventor was everything lay before him. The reason why we don't have great inventors today is, everyone is trying to reinvent the wheel"
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Jim Shafer <jim(at)powerflowsystems.com (jim(at)powerflowsystems.com)> wrote:
[quote]
Hello,
I think it’s great that Grumman owners have so many options for upgrading and improving the performance on these fine aircraft.
Since it is obvious that not every option is right for each individual and his aircraft, accurate information is a key requirement enabling each individual to determine which and how many (if any) of the different products available make sense for him or her. With that in mind, I’d like to shed a little additional light on the topics raised by Brock, Dean and Barry:
#1.) Yes, you are already paying for fuel – AND - Both the Electronic Ignition and the Tuned Exhaust allow you to burn it more efficiently. The fine folks at Electroair state their gains in percent (a 10% - 15% improvement) while we at Power Flow state our gains in gph (a reduction in fuel burn of 1.0 – 2.0 gph). For most GA aircraft the effective results are very close to the same and both companies have had these stated gains confirmed by hundreds of Customers.
#2.) Electroair does claim a reduced tendency for plug fowling as a benefit of their system and I have no reason to doubt their claims. I can also state that there have never been any reports suggesting an increase in plug fowling as a result of an upgrade to the Power Flow System.
#3.) Both companies claim increased horsepower as a main benefit and again, based on each companies track record (3,800+ total Systems installed / 300+ AA5 Systems installed since 1999 for Power Flow, 2,500+ total systems installed since 1992 for Electroair), there is no longer any credible reason to doubt either company’s claims.
The pricing for each system is also remarkably similar: As Barry pointed out: depending on lead times and applicable discounts the Power Flow System for a Tiger will run you about $3,500.00 plus five to seven hours of installation labor. The Electroair costs $3,400.00 plus four to six hours of labor to install.
As to the increase in HP (and if you don’t see it, Power Flow will give you your money back) you by no means need to replace or even re-pitch your prop to take advantage of it. First and foremost you can immediately use it where it does the Grumman’s the most good: in take-off and climb performance. As I said above, these are fine aircraft. But who among us hasn’t been way too up close and personal with the trees at the far end of a slightly too short runway? What is a shorter take-off roll (by about 300’) and a faster rate of climb (by 100 – 150 fpm) worth to you in those situations?
Even at cruise altitude you don’t need to re-pitch or replace the prop to take advantage of the boost in HP provided by the Power Flow – just throttle back and enjoy cruising at your current airspeed while burning 1.0 – 1.5 gph less avfuel. If you’re a real speed demon and crave that last 3 – 5 knots in airspeed, go ahead and take it. Unless you’re already cruising with your engine at redline rpm, the Power Flow System will give you an extra 50 – 100 rpm to play with. Each 100 rpm gets you an extra 5 knots of airspeed, and you don’t have to re-pitch the prop to get it.
We have had a very small minority (well below 10% and typically those who frequently participate in air racing) of our Grumman Customers who are so enamored with the potential for increased speed made possible by the Power Flow System, that they do choose to purchase and install a higher pitched prop to take full advantage of the extra power. This is by no means a requirement, but if you happen to enjoy racing, it is another option available for you.
#4.) We do offer a ceramic coated tailpipe as a $200.00 option, but it IS an option (for those owners who take particular pride in the appearance of their aircraft) and not a required expense. If the discoloration that naturally occurs when stainless steel gets hot doesn’t bother you, there is no need to spend the money. If it does bother you and you don’t mind using a little elbow grease, the discoloration can be easily wiped away with common stainless steel polish.
#5.) Thanks to the dedication and expertise of Power Flow’s many fine Dealers nationwide (including several well-respected “Grumman Guru’s” like FletchAir, ExcelAir and Gary Vogt) there is no reason on earth why a Customer would have to live with an “ugly hole” in their cowling. Yes, our system requires that a new hole be cut for the relocated exhaust pipe exit. Gary, John, or David, or any one of Power Flow’s several hundred Dealer’s nationwide (or even any reasonably competent A&P) can easily make the existing hole all but disappear.
The assertion that relocating the tailpipe “may have ruined your cooling airflow” is groundless. Thanks to Gary Vogt’s tireless efforts and determination, his beautiful “Jaguar” cowling is another excellent upgrade available to Grumman owners in its own right. It is not a requirement for the Power Flow System.
#6.) So to summarize: The Electroair Electronic Ignition will give you more horsepower (particularly at higher altitudes) and a 10% -15% improvement in fuel economy for about $3,400.00 plus 4 – 6 hours of installation labor. The Power Flow Tuned Exhaust System will give you more horsepower (about 10 – 15 more), better take-off and climb performance, and a 1.0 – 2.0 gph improvement in fuel economy for about $3,500.00 plus 5 – 7 hours of installation labor.
I don’t quite see how 7 hours (max) of installation labor can stretch into a month of down time, but maybe that’s just ole’ math challenged me.
Which is the right choice for you? Well, like most things in life, the honest answer seems to be: “It all depends”. I hope the facts outlined above will help those who are interested in improving the performance of their AA5 make that choice based on accurate information.
And, if you find it impossible to decide, keep in mind that, as has Dean, several very happy Customers have installed both STC’d upgrades on their aircraft and gotten the best of both worlds.
All the Best!
- Jim Shafer
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Ph: [url=tel:%28877%29%20693-7356](877) 693-7356[/url]
Fax: [url=tel:%28877%29%20570-9831](877) 570-9831[/url]
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of Airport Bum
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 10:30 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
Call Garner at Fletchair. They have good prices and support the fleet. Electro air is the brand. Depending on your location, Ken Blackman, Gary Vogt, Excel Air, Bob Steward, Roscoe Rosche, Barry, or one of the others can help you with install.
Kevin
On Jul 11, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Scott Boyce <tscott165(at)centurylink.net (tscott165(at)centurylink.net)> wrote:
| Quote: |
Which electronic ignition and how much?
On Jul 11, 2013, at 3:33 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote:
Brock:
Best bang for the buck and without catchings AIDS/HIV or the CRABS...
The Electronic Ignition.
Why?
1 - You are already paying for the fuel - you might as well burn it more efficiently.
2 - Less fouled plugs and NO fouled plugs if you are using REM37BY or a fine wire plug.
3 - If you go for the exhaust ($3400 Plus install) and if you get an improvement in HP - What are you going to do with it? You then need to repitch your prop IF if can be repitched. If NOT then $3200 for a new prop Plus Install.
$6600!!!!
4 - So next is - Do you care if the exhaust discolors? If you than you do the ceramic coat ... What is that Plus $100?
$6700!!!!
5 - You now just took your standard cowl and cut a ugly hole in it to fit the new exhaust - Which may have ruined your cooling airflow, SO now you need or want the better cowl... How much is that I don't recall but lets say another $3500, Plus Shipping ($250) Plus Install ($3500) Plus Paint ($500) Plus Extra Parts ($200)... So that equals === $7950
WHAT $7950!!!! !!!!
Don't forget to add it to the other costs $6700 + $$7950 =$14650...
Big BANG - Big Bucks and NO KISS
6 - And now the plane is down for another month of no flying...
Don't believe my numbers collect your own.
Oh! How much gas will $14K buy you? Or even $10K? ! ! ! !
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
01 2 34 5
67 8 9 0 1
23 45 67 89 01
courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
23 456
7 890 123 4
5
[b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jim(at)powerflowsystems.c
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 7:55 am Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Hello Barry,
Thank you for the feedback, I do appreciate hearing your opinions on these issues. As is often the case between pilots, any five of us will have at least seven firmly held opinions on any given topic!
So, here’s my two cents worth on the points you raised in you most recent post:
a.) IF the Power Flow System were just another working muffler, I wouldn’t recommend buying it at all, given the premium price. If you are looking to add another 10 – 20 hp worth of performance to your AA5, then our system offers a very economical, well-proven and STC’d means of doing so.
b.) As we discussed before, the Power Flow System, installed, will set you back roughly the same amount as the electronic ignition. Either of these options costs a great deal less than any other means of increasing your usable horsepower by a similar amount, PLUS they are both STC’d, which none of the other options (such as an I/O engine) are.
So, if you just want to replace one power-robbing, gas-guzzling OEM style muffler with another one of the same design, you can do that for a minimal up-front outlay. But, if you want to improve both your fuel economy and the performance of your AA5, you WILL be spending some extra cash to do the job. Where you personally choose to spend that extra cash is obviously up to you.
b. / #2) Safety, like beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder. If it’s zero dark thirty and the engine in my aircraft won’t start, I personally would want to have it checked-out before launching into that darkness – no matter what modifications have or haven’t been added to the aircraft.
Does a shorter take-off roll improve your margin of safety? How about an extra 100 – 150 fpm rate of climb? Or a significant improvement in performance at high density altitudes? Or if an increase in fuel economy effectively extends your range &/or endurance – will that help?
Don’t worry, Barry, answering “yes” to any of the above will not mean you are not allowed to personally prefer the ElectroAir unit. As I made clear in my original post, they are a fine company making a fine product. I also agree with you that any company that invests the time, money and effort to develop and produce genuine improvements for the legacy GA fleet is worthy of all the support we can all give them.
As far as our advertising goes: It is very easy for us to say, accurately, that you will save 1 – 2 gph in fuel burn, because we DO know what engine is being used: Our systems are only STC’d for aircraft powered by four very similar engines: The Lycoming O-320, O-360, I/O-360 and I/O-390. In the course of getting those STC’s approved, we have conducted more than 10 exhaustive (pardon the pun) series of before and after flight tests measuring fuel flow and aircraft performance on a wide variety of airframes (from the experimental Glastar, to the Cardinal 177RG).
Yes, believe it or not, we have actually heard of Brake Specific Fuel Consumption before. And, yes, the BSFC of the engine does change with the addition of the Power Flow. It gets lower. It is literally off the Lycoming charts, because the BSFC from Lycoming is computed based upon a neutral stack engine, not the OEM exhaust that the Grumman has and certainly not computed with a Power Flow.
Look at our dyno numbers (outlined below) from a C172. Yes, I know it is a C172, but it is the same Lycoming O-320 you will find in a 160 hp upgraded Traveler or Cheetah:
Stock exhaust: 2563 RPM, computed HP: 133.8, fuel flow of 98.4 #/hr. (16.4 gph). BSFC (full rich): 0.755 Torque: 274.7
Power Flow exhaust: 2665 RPM, computed HP: 157.1, fuel flow of 100.9 (16.81 gph). BSFC (full rich): 0.649, Torque: 307.7.
See how the BSFC went DOWN? Despite the large increase in both torque and RPM? Look in your Lycoming engine book. You can’t create 23 HP for only 0.4 GPH more. That had to come from improved engine efficiency.
Hot rodders have known for years that a more effective exhaust will scavenge the cylinder more completely. A tuned exhaust is designed to empty the cylinder more effectively by shifting the pressure and suction pulses around to create a suction at the start of the exhaust valve opening. It’s not magic and it’s not rocket science.
With a Power Flow Tuned Exhaust, at your given example of 8 GPH and 2400 RPM, you would save 0.7 to 1.0 gph when leaning ROP at the same RPM. That is a savings in fuel burn of approximately 10 to 15%.
And, while you may not find our advertising particularly appealing, it may be helpful to the general discussion to hear what a few folks who have read that advertising and then actually spent some of their hard-earned dollars on a Power Flow System have to say on the subject:
I was happy you don't make false claims, everybody else claims 5 to 10 kts on every little fairing and piece of plastic they sell, I think PowerFlow accurately claimed the actual performance gains. I went from 8.5 to 8.1 gph fuel flow at 2500 rpm leaned, and my acceleration and climb performance went up as advertised. My IA and I installed the system in June, it was 93 degrees on the ramp, and we took off in less than 900 ft ground roll and were climbing at over 800 fpm, and we both are over 220 lbs each. - Mr. Thomas Hunter / N8354L / Cessna 172-I with O-320
Had the Cherokee out for a $100 hamburger over in Winter Haven today with the wife. I'm happy to say that all of the stated performance gains with the Power Flow Exhaust are there, and I'm very pleased with the result. The new exhaust is the perfect solution to the issues that had developed on my 140, and I feel good knowing that I've got a totally new exhaust system, instead of a patch on that ancient, old thing. I saw my VSI hit 1000 FPM today - in climb, not descent!.. That's something new for this plane. I'm going to put in some new spark plugs and wires and go for total nirvana! - Mr. Jeff Booker / N1805J / 1968 PA28-140 / O-320
One of the best products, Performance/$ ratio I have ever applied on an aircraft. Nice job guys! 6000' msl take off. Identical aircraft. Mine had a power flow. 800ft higher coming around the pattern at the take off roll end of runway than stock exhaust.
We all hear about the "10% increase in power claims." After modifying automotive engines for years, most of us think this is baloney because anyone who makes a piece of plastic to smooth out your air intake claims it! Well, I bet the PowerFlow exhaust on my aircraft has increased the power at least 10% . . . Where this really hits home is my increased climb capability, living on the front range of the Rocky Mountains. - Mr. Jeff Bursik / N29379 / 1968 C-177 / O-320
I recently installed a Power Flow exhaust on my Tiger . . . I have noticed a huge difference in the performance of the airplane, especially with regard to climb.
It has been extremely hot and humid here in the Virginia Tidewater Region, with density altitudes of 2000 feet and more, yet my Tiger took off in a shorter distance (felt like it leaped off the tarmac), and demonstrated a 150+ foot increased rate of climb.
As you know, our planes are not know for being great climbers, and all else being equal, this is not only a big performance improvement, but an major safety factor increase considering taking off with a loaded aircraft and increased density altitudes. Not sure you can quantify or put a price on the safety factor. . . .
With respect to increased maintenance, the mechanic and I discussed the pros and cons before installation, and intend to disassemble and lubricate as recommended at annual time. I think will be a small price to play for the both the increased performance and safety margin. – John Wrenn / AA5B / N74636
All the Best!
- Jim Shafer
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Ph: (877) 693-7356
Fax: (877) 570-9831
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of FLYaDIVE
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 9:41 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
Jim:
I would purchase a PF System in very short order and I'm planning to, as long as two things existed:
a> I needed a new muffler - I just can't see removing a working muffler to replace it with a working muffler.
b> I had/have the excess cash to to the job.
From these statements you should surely surmise I am not free flowing with cash and I made my suggestions/statements from the question posted in the email. The question was: "Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition?"
This indicates to me the fellow also holds his money in deep regard and is not too frivolous - We all are frivolous to a small extent, just because we have planes - But that does not mean we have to have MMTB (More Money Than Brains). And...
b> What truly will give the most for the investment.
The PF System is an EXTRA it is not a Safety Investment nor is it something that will stop one from flying.
If it is 22:00 Hrs (DARK) and you are at an airport that has no services avail what is your major concern - OTHER THAN WEATHER ... WILL THE ENGINE START?
A PF System does nothing to ensure that.
A electronic ignition SURE DOES!
| Quote: | It gives you a hotter spark.
|
| Quote: | It gives you cleaner plugs. <-- And that is whether you use the REM40's, the Better REM37BY's or the Best Fine Wire. An upgrade in plugs is NOT required, but sure will help. I was misstated by someone that had the idea I was making it a mandatory action to upgrade spark plugs because of the electronic ignition.
|
| Quote: | It gives you a TIMED spark especially at altitude where the Mag efficiency drops off. <-- Electronic Ignition has Vacuum Advance.
|
I have flown behind the ElectroAir EXPERIMENTAL system for years and the system and support of the company has always been phenomenal. I am NOT pushing ElectroAir is it just the company I have experience with; both as a company and the product. Let me also add I do not have ANY experience with the STC version of their product. I sure hope it is as good as the Experimental version and if it is - - - FINALLY - - - A tested and proven product for us GA Aircraft owners - That I know to work.
Now to address your items:
Your #1 - They give Percentage - PF gives Usage. It is your advertizing that stinks not the product. How can PF say it gives you 1 to 2 GPH savings when you don't know the engine being used?
Example; An O-320 which is rated at 150 HP and on mine shows 8 GPH in S&L in full rich at 2400 RPM at an altitude around 2500 to 3000 Ft... With your numbers I would be burning 1 to 2 GPH less... That is 6 GPH to 7 GPH at the same settings. Now here is where we have to get a little scientific and I hope this does not turn people away.
There is a basic term that is used engine industry wide and is Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC). Here is a link for explaination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption
What you want to look at is the formula: Lbs/Hr/HP
Which is Pounds of fuel burned / Per Hours / Per Horsepower of the engine.
There is a range for the number of pounds AND remember it is in pounds so for most users (US), for it to make sense the Lbs has to converted to GPH.
The range is 0.4 to 0.5Lbs/Hr/HP - - - So split the difference and use 0.45... 0.45x1Hrx150HPx75% Power = 8.4375 GPH pretty damn close to what I am reading on my FP5L fuel flow gauge. So working backwards my 8 GPH equates to 0.4375
the differance between 8 GPH and 8.4375 GPH is 0.4375 GPH or 56 ounces which is 0.9333 ounces per minute
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
"The reason Benjamin Franklin was such a great inventor was everything lay before him. The reason why we don't have great inventors today is, everyone is trying to reinvent the wheel"
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Jim Shafer <jim(at)powerflowsystems.com (jim(at)powerflowsystems.com)> wrote:
Hello,
I think it’s great that Grumman owners have so many options for upgrading and improving the performance on these fine aircraft.
Since it is obvious that not every option is right for each individual and his aircraft, accurate information is a key requirement enabling each individual to determine which and how many (if any) of the different products available make sense for him or her. With that in mind, I’d like to shed a little additional light on the topics raised by Brock, Dean and Barry:
#1.) Yes, you are already paying for fuel – AND - Both the Electronic Ignition and the Tuned Exhaust allow you to burn it more efficiently. The fine folks at Electroair state their gains in percent (a 10% - 15% improvement) while we at Power Flow state our gains in gph (a reduction in fuel burn of 1.0 – 2.0 gph). For most GA aircraft the effective results are very close to the same and both companies have had these stated gains confirmed by hundreds of Customers.
#2.) Electroair does claim a reduced tendency for plug fowling as a benefit of their system and I have no reason to doubt their claims. I can also state that there have never been any reports suggesting an increase in plug fowling as a result of an upgrade to the Power Flow System.
#3.) Both companies claim increased horsepower as a main benefit and again, based on each companies track record (3,800+ total Systems installed / 300+ AA5 Systems installed since 1999 for Power Flow, 2,500+ total systems installed since 1992 for Electroair), there is no longer any credible reason to doubt either company’s claims.
The pricing for each system is also remarkably similar: As Barry pointed out: depending on lead times and applicable discounts the Power Flow System for a Tiger will run you about $3,500.00 plus five to seven hours of installation labor. The Electroair costs $3,400.00 plus four to six hours of labor to install.
As to the increase in HP (and if you don’t see it, Power Flow will give you your money back) you by no means need to replace or even re-pitch your prop to take advantage of it. First and foremost you can immediately use it where it does the Grumman’s the most good: in take-off and climb performance. As I said above, these are fine aircraft. But who among us hasn’t been way too up close and personal with the trees at the far end of a slightly too short runway? What is a shorter take-off roll (by about 300’) and a faster rate of climb (by 100 – 150 fpm) worth to you in those situations?
Even at cruise altitude you don’t need to re-pitch or replace the prop to take advantage of the boost in HP provided by the Power Flow – just throttle back and enjoy cruising at your current airspeed while burning 1.0 – 1.5 gph less avfuel. If you’re a real speed demon and crave that last 3 – 5 knots in airspeed, go ahead and take it. Unless you’re already cruising with your engine at redline rpm, the Power Flow System will give you an extra 50 – 100 rpm to play with. Each 100 rpm gets you an extra 5 knots of airspeed, and you don’t have to re-pitch the prop to get it.
We have had a very small minority (well below 10% and typically those who frequently participate in air racing) of our Grumman Customers who are so enamored with the potential for increased speed made possible by the Power Flow System, that they do choose to purchase and install a higher pitched prop to take full advantage of the extra power. This is by no means a requirement, but if you happen to enjoy racing, it is another option available for you.
#4.) We do offer a ceramic coated tailpipe as a $200.00 option, but it IS an option (for those owners who take particular pride in the appearance of their aircraft) and not a required expense. If the discoloration that naturally occurs when stainless steel gets hot doesn’t bother you, there is no need to spend the money. If it does bother you and you don’t mind using a little elbow grease, the discoloration can be easily wiped away with common stainless steel polish.
#5.) Thanks to the dedication and expertise of Power Flow’s many fine Dealers nationwide (including several well-respected “Grumman Guru’s” like FletchAir, ExcelAir and Gary Vogt) there is no reason on earth why a Customer would have to live with an “ugly hole” in their cowling. Yes, our system requires that a new hole be cut for the relocated exhaust pipe exit. Gary, John, or David, or any one of Power Flow’s several hundred Dealer’s nationwide (or even any reasonably competent A&P) can easily make the existing hole all but disappear.
The assertion that relocating the tailpipe “may have ruined your cooling airflow” is groundless. Thanks to Gary Vogt’s tireless efforts and determination, his beautiful “Jaguar” cowling is another excellent upgrade available to Grumman owners in its own right. It is not a requirement for the Power Flow System.
#6.) So to summarize: The Electroair Electronic Ignition will give you more horsepower (particularly at higher altitudes) and a 10% -15% improvement in fuel economy for about $3,400.00 plus 4 – 6 hours of installation labor. The Power Flow Tuned Exhaust System will give you more horsepower (about 10 – 15 more), better take-off and climb performance, and a 1.0 – 2.0 gph improvement in fuel economy for about $3,500.00 plus 5 – 7 hours of installation labor.
I don’t quite see how 7 hours (max) of installation labor can stretch into a month of down time, but maybe that’s just ole’ math challenged me.
Which is the right choice for you? Well, like most things in life, the honest answer seems to be: “It all depends”. I hope the facts outlined above will help those who are interested in improving the performance of their AA5 make that choice based on accurate information.
And, if you find it impossible to decide, keep in mind that, as has Dean, several very happy Customers have installed both STC’d upgrades on their aircraft and gotten the best of both worlds.
All the Best!
- Jim Shafer
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Ph: [url=tel:%28877%29%20693-7356](877) 693-7356[/url]
Fax: [url=tel:%28877%29%20570-9831](877) 570-9831[/url]
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of Airport Bum
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 10:30 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
Call Garner at Fletchair. They have good prices and support the fleet. Electro air is the brand. Depending on your location, Ken Blackman, Gary Vogt, Excel Air, Bob Steward, Roscoe Rosche, Barry, or one of the others can help you with install.
Kevin
On Jul 11, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Scott Boyce <tscott165(at)centurylink.net (tscott165(at)centurylink.net)> wrote:
| Quote: |
Which electronic ignition and how much?
On Jul 11, 2013, at 3:33 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote:
Brock:
Best bang for the buck and without catchings AIDS/HIV or the CRABS...
The Electronic Ignition.
Why?
1 - You are already paying for the fuel - you might as well burn it more efficiently.
2 - Less fouled plugs and NO fouled plugs if you are using REM37BY or a fine wire plug.
3 - If you go for the exhaust ($3400 Plus install) and if you get an improvement in HP - What are you going to do with it? You then need to repitch your prop IF if can be repitched. If NOT then $3200 for a new prop Plus Install.
$6600!!!!
4 - So next is - Do you care if the exhaust discolors? If you than you do the ceramic coat .. What is that Plus $100?
$6700!!!!
5 - You now just took your standard cowl and cut a ugly hole in it to fit the new exhaust - Which may have ruined your cooling airflow, SO now you need or want the better cowl... How much is that I don't recall but lets say another $3500, Plus Shipping ($250) Plus Install ($3500) Plus Paint ($500) Plus Extra Parts ($200)... So that equals === $7950
WHAT $7950!!!! !!!!
Don't forget to add it to the other costs $6700 + $$7950 =$14650...
Big BANG - Big Bucks and NO KISS
6 - And now the plane is down for another month of no flying...
Don't believe my numbers collect your own.
Oh! How much gas will $14K buy you? Or even $10K? ! ! ! !
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
012345
678901
23456789 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
0 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
1
courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
2 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
3
| Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
4 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
5 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
6 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
7
| Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
8 | Quote: | | courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
90 1234
56789012345678901234
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:44 am Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Jim,
Did you meant his to come to me? Or send it to Barry?
I generally, as a rule, ignore everything Barry says.
Gary
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 18, 2013, at 8:50 AM, "Jim Shafer" <jim(at)powerflowsystems.com (jim(at)powerflowsystems.com)> wrote:
[quote] v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} <![endif]-->
Hello Barry,
Thank you for the feedback, I do appreciate hearing your opinions on these issues. As is often the case between pilots, any five of us will have at least seven firmly held opinions on any given topic!
So, here’s my two cents worth on the points you raised in you most recent post:
a.) IF the Power Flow System were just another working muffler, I wouldn’t recommend buying it at all, given the premium price. If you are looking to add another 10 – 20 hp worth of performance to your AA5, then our system offers a very economical, well-proven and STC’d means of doing so.
b.) As we discussed before, the Power Flow System, installed, will set you back roughly the same amount as the electronic ignition. Either of these options costs a great deal less than any other means of increasing your usable horsepower by a similar amount, PLUS they are both STC’d, which none of the other options (such as an I/O engine) are.
So, if you just want to replace one power-robbing, gas-guzzling OEM style muffler with another one of the same design, you can do that for a minimal up-front outlay. But, if you want to improve both your fuel economy and the performance of your AA5, you WILL be spending some extra cash to do the job. Where you personally choose to spend that extra cash is obviously up to you.
b. / #2) Safety, like beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder. If it’s zero dark thirty and the engine in my aircraft won’t start, I personally would want to have it checked-out before launching into that darkness – no matter what modifications have or haven’t been added to the aircraft.
Does a shorter take-off roll improve your margin of safety? How about an extra 100 – 150 fpm rate of climb? Or a significant improvement in performance at high density altitudes? Or if an increase in fuel economy effectively extends your range &/or endurance – will that help?
Don’t worry, Barry, answering “yes” to any of the above will not mean you are not allowed to personally prefer the ElectroAir unit. As I made clear in my original post, they are a fine company making a fine product. I also agree with you that any company that invests the time, money and effort to develop and produce genuine improvements for the legacy GA fleet is worthy of all the support we can all give them.
As far as our advertising goes: It is very easy for us to say, accurately, that you will save 1 – 2 gph in fuel burn, because we DO know what engine is being used: Our systems are only STC’d for aircraft powered by four very similar engines: The Lycoming O-320, O-360, I/O-360 and I/O-390. In the course of getting those STC’s approved, we have conducted more than 10 exhaustive (pardon the pun) series of before and after flight tests measuring fuel flow and aircraft performance on a wide variety of airframes (from the experimental Glastar, to the Cardinal 177RG).
Yes, believe it or not, we have actually heard of Brake Specific Fuel Consumption before. And, yes, the BSFC of the engine does change with the addition of the Power Flow. It gets lower. It is literally off the Lycoming charts, because the BSFC from Lycoming is computed based upon a neutral stack engine, not the OEM exhaust that the Grumman has and certainly not computed with a Power Flow.
Look at our dyno numbers (outlined below) from a C172. Yes, I know it is a C172, but it is the same Lycoming O-320 you will find in a 160 hp upgraded Traveler or Cheetah:
Stock exhaust: 2563 RPM, computed HP: 133.8, fuel flow of 98.4 #/hr. (16.4 gph). BSFC (full rich): 0.755 Torque: 274.7
Power Flow exhaust: 2665 RPM, computed HP: 157.1, fuel flow of 100.9 (16.81 gph). BSFC (full rich): 0.649, Torque: 307.7.
See how the BSFC went DOWN? Despite the large increase in both torque and RPM? Look in your Lycoming engine book. You can’t create 23 HP for only 0.4 GPH more. That had to come from improved engine efficiency.
Hot rodders have known for years that a more effective exhaust will scavenge the cylinder more completely. A tuned exhaust is designed to empty the cylinder more effectively by shifting the pressure and suction pulses around to create a suction at the start of the exhaust valve opening. It’s not magic and it’s not rocket science.
With a Power Flow Tuned Exhaust, at your given example of 8 GPH and 2400 RPM, you would save 0.7 to 1.0 gph when leaning ROP at the same RPM. That is a savings in fuel burn of approximately 10 to 15%.
And, while you may not find our advertising particularly appealing, it may be helpful to the general discussion to hear what a few folks who have read that advertising and then actually spent some of their hard-earned dollars on a Power Flow System have to say on the subject:
I was happy you don't make false claims, everybody else claims 5 to 10 kts on every little fairing and piece of plastic they sell, I think PowerFlow accurately claimed the actual performance gains. I went from 8.5 to 8.1 gph fuel flow at 2500 rpm leaned, and my acceleration and climb performance went up as advertised. My IA and I installed the system in June, it was 93 degrees on the ramp, and we took off in less than 900 ft ground roll and were climbing at over 800 fpm, and we both are over 220 lbs each. - Mr. Thomas Hunter / N8354L / Cessna 172-I with O-320
Had the Cherokee out for a $100 hamburger over in Winter Haven today with the wife. I'm happy to say that all of the stated performance gains with the Power Flow Exhaust are there, and I'm very pleased with the result. The new exhaust is the perfect solution to the issues that had developed on my 140, and I feel good knowing that I've got a totally new exhaust system, instead of a patch on that ancient, old thing. I saw my VSI hit 1000 FPM today - in climb, not descent!.. That's something new for this plane. I'm going to put in some new spark plugs and wires and go for total nirvana! - Mr. Jeff Booker / N1805J / 1968 PA28-140 / O-320
One of the best products, Performance/$ ratio I have ever applied on an aircraft. Nice job guys! 6000' msl take off. Identical aircraft. Mine had a power flow. 800ft higher coming around the pattern at the take off roll end of runway than stock exhaust.
We all hear about the "10% increase in power claims." After modifying automotive engines for years, most of us think this is baloney because anyone who makes a piece of plastic to smooth out your air intake claims it! Well, I bet the PowerFlow exhaust on my aircraft has increased the power at least 10% . . . Where this really hits home is my increased climb capability, living on the front range of the Rocky Mountains. - Mr. Jeff Bursik / N29379 / 1968 C-177 / O-320
I recently installed a Power Flow exhaust on my Tiger . . . I have noticed a huge difference in the performance of the airplane, especially with regard to climb.
It has been extremely hot and humid here in the Virginia Tidewater Region, with density altitudes of 2000 feet and more, yet my Tiger took off in a shorter distance (felt like it leaped off the tarmac), and demonstrated a 150+ foot increased rate of climb.
As you know, our planes are not know for being great climbers, and all else being equal, this is not only a big performance improvement, but an major safety factor increase considering taking off with a loaded aircraft and increased density altitudes. Not sure you can quantify or put a price on the safety factor. . . .
With respect to increased maintenance, the mechanic and I discussed the pros and cons before installation, and intend to disassemble and lubricate as recommended at annual time. I think will be a small price to play for the both the increased performance and safety margin. – John Wrenn / AA5B / N74636
All the Best!
- Jim Shafer
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Ph: (877) 693-7356
Fax: (877) 570-9831
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of FLYaDIVE
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 9:41 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
Jim:
I would purchase a PF System in very short order and I'm planning to, as long as two things existed:
a> I needed a new muffler - I just can't see removing a working muffler to replace it with a working muffler.
b> I had/have the excess cash to to the job.
From these statements you should surely surmise I am not free flowing with cash and I made my suggestions/statements from the question posted in the email. The question was: "Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition?"
This indicates to me the fellow also holds his money in deep regard and is not too frivolous - We all are frivolous to a small extent, just because we have planes - But that does not mean we have to have MMTB (More Money Than Brains). And...
b> What truly will give the most for the investment.
The PF System is an EXTRA it is not a Safety Investment nor is it something that will stop one from flying.
If it is 22:00 Hrs (DARK) and you are at an airport that has no services avail what is your major concern - OTHER THAN WEATHER ... WILL THE ENGINE START?
A PF System does nothing to ensure that.
A electronic ignition SURE DOES!
| Quote: | It gives you a hotter spark.
|
| Quote: | It gives you cleaner plugs. <-- And that is whether you use the REM40's, the Better REM37BY's or the Best Fine Wire. An upgrade in plugs is NOT required, but sure will help. I was misstated by someone that had the idea I was making it a mandatory action to upgrade spark plugs because of the electronic ignition.
|
| Quote: | It gives you a TIMED spark especially at altitude where the Mag efficiency drops off. <-- Electronic Ignition has Vacuum Advance.
|
I have flown behind the ElectroAir EXPERIMENTAL system for years and the system and support of the company has always been phenomenal. I am NOT pushing ElectroAir is it just the company I have experience with; both as a company and the product. Let me also add I do not have ANY experience with the STC version of their product. I sure hope it is as good as the Experimental version and if it is - - - FINALLY - - - A tested and proven product for us GA Aircraft owners - That I know to work.
Now to address your items:
Your #1 - They give Percentage - PF gives Usage. It is your advertizing that stinks not the product. How can PF say it gives you 1 to 2 GPH savings when you don't know the engine being used?
Example; An O-320 which is rated at 150 HP and on mine shows 8 GPH in S&L in full rich at 2400 RPM at an altitude around 2500 to 3000 Ft... With your numbers I would be burning 1 to 2 GPH less... That is 6 GPH to 7 GPH at the same settings. Now here is where we have to get a little scientific and I hope this does not turn people away.
There is a basic term that is used engine industry wide and is Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC). Here is a link for explaination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption
What you want to look at is the formula: Lbs/Hr/HP
Which is Pounds of fuel burned / Per Hours / Per Horsepower of the engine.
There is a range for the number of pounds AND remember it is in pounds so for most users (US), for it to make sense the Lbs has to converted to GPH.
The range is 0.4 to 0.5Lbs/Hr/HP - - - So split the difference and use 0.45... 0.45x1Hrx150HPx75% Power = 8.4375 GPH pretty damn close to what I am reading on my FP5L fuel flow gauge. So working backwards my 8 GPH equates to 0.4375
the differance between 8 GPH and 8.4375 GPH is 0.4375 GPH or 56 ounces which is 0.9333 ounces per minute
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
"The reason Benjamin Franklin was such a great inventor was everything lay before him. The reason why we don't have great inventors today is, everyone is trying to reinvent the wheel"
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Jim Shafer <jim(at)powerflowsystems.com (jim(at)powerflowsystems.com)> wrote:
Hello,
I think it’s great that Grumman owners have so many options for upgrading and improving the performance on these fine aircraft.
Since it is obvious that not every option is right for each individual and his aircraft, accurate information is a key requirement enabling each individual to determine which and how many (if any) of the different products available make sense for him or her. With that in mind, I’d like to shed a little additional light on the topics raised by Brock, Dean and Barry:
#1.) Yes, you are already paying for fuel – AND - Both the Electronic Ignition and the Tuned Exhaust allow you to burn it more efficiently. The fine folks at Electroair state their gains in percent (a 10% - 15% improvement) while we at Power Flow state our gains in gph (a reduction in fuel burn of 1.0 – 2.0 gph). For most GA aircraft the effective results are very close to the same and both companies have had these stated gains confirmed by hundreds of Customers.
#2.) Electroair does claim a reduced tendency for plug fowling as a benefit of their system and I have no reason to doubt their claims. I can also state that there have never been any reports suggesting an increase in plug fowling as a result of an upgrade to the Power Flow System.
#3.) Both companies claim increased horsepower as a main benefit and again, based on each companies track record (3,800+ total Systems installed / 300+ AA5 Systems installed since 1999 for Power Flow, 2,500+ total systems installed since 1992 for Electroair), there is no longer any credible reason to doubt either company’s claims.
The pricing for each system is also remarkably similar: As Barry pointed out: depending on lead times and applicable discounts the Power Flow System for a Tiger will run you about $3,500.00 plus five to seven hours of installation labor. The Electroair costs $3,400.00 plus four to six hours of labor to install.
As to the increase in HP (and if you don’t see it, Power Flow will give you your money back) you by no means need to replace or even re-pitch your prop to take advantage of it. First and foremost you can immediately use it where it does the Grumman’s the most good: in take-off and climb performance. As I said above, these are fine aircraft. But who among us hasn’t been way too up close and personal with the trees at the far end of a slightly too short runway? What is a shorter take-off roll (by about 300’) and a faster rate of climb (by 100 – 150 fpm) worth to you in those situations?
Even at cruise altitude you don’t need to re-pitch or replace the prop to take advantage of the boost in HP provided by the Power Flow – just throttle back and enjoy cruising at your current airspeed while burning 1.0 – 1.5 gph less avfuel. If you’re a real speed demon and crave that last 3 – 5 knots in airspeed, go ahead and take it. Unless you’re already cruising with your engine at redline rpm, the Power Flow System will give you an extra 50 – 100 rpm to play with. Each 100 rpm gets you an extra 5 knots of airspeed, and you don’t have to re-pitch the prop to get it.
We have had a very small minority (well below 10% and typically those who frequently participate in air racing) of our Grumman Customers who are so enamored with the potential for increased speed made possible by the Power Flow System, that they do choose to purchase and install a higher pitched prop to take full advantage of the extra power. This is by no means a requirement, but if you happen to enjoy racing, it is another option available for you.
#4.) We do offer a ceramic coated tailpipe as a $200.00 option, but it IS an option (for those owners who take particular pride in the appearance of their aircraft) and not a required expense. If the discoloration that naturally occurs when stainless steel gets hot doesn’t bother you, there is no need to spend the money. If it does bother you and you don’t mind using a little elbow grease, the discoloration can be easily wiped away with common stainless steel polish.
#5.) Thanks to the dedication and expertise of Power Flow’s many fine Dealers nationwide (including several well-respected “Grumman Guru’s” like FletchAir, ExcelAir and Gary Vogt) there is no reason on earth why a Customer would have to live with an “ugly hole” in their cowling. Yes, our system requires that a new hole be cut for the relocated exhaust pipe exit. Gary, John, or David, or any one of Power Flow’s several hundred Dealer’s nationwide (or even any reasonably competent A&P) can easily make the existing hole all but disappear.
The assertion that relocating the tailpipe “may have ruined your cooling airflow” is groundless. Thanks to Gary Vogt’s tireless efforts and determination, his beautiful “Jaguar” cowling is another excellent upgrade available to Grumman owners in its own right. It is not a requirement for the Power Flow System.
#6.) So to summarize: The Electroair Electronic Ignition will give you more horsepower (particularly at higher altitudes) and a 10% -15% improvement in fuel economy for about $3,400.00 plus 4 – 6 hours of installation labor. The Power Flow Tuned Exhaust System will give you more horsepower (about 10 – 15 more), better take-off and climb performance, and a 1.0 – 2.0 gph improvement in fuel economy for about $3,500.00 plus 5 – 7 hours of installation labor.
I don’t quite see how 7 hours (max) of installation labor can stretch into a month of down time, but maybe that’s just ole’ math challenged me.
Which is the right choice for you? Well, like most things in life, the honest answer seems to be: “It all depends”. I hope the facts outlined above will help those who are interested in improving the performance of their AA5 make that choice based on accurate information.
And, if you find it impossible to decide, keep in mind that, as has Dean, several very happy Customers have installed both STC’d upgrades on their aircraft and gotten the best of both worlds.
All the Best!
- Jim Shafer
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Ph: [url=tel:%28877%29%20693-7356](877) 693-7356[/url]
Fax: [url=tel:%28877%29%20570-9831](877) 570-9831[/url]
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of Airport Bum
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 10:30 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
Call Garner at Fletchair. They have good prices and support the fleet. Electro air is the brand. Depending on your location, Ken Blackman, Gary Vogt, Excel Air, Bob Steward, Roscoe Rosche, Barry, or one of the others can help you with install.
Kevin
On Jul 11, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Scott Boyce <tscott165(at)centurylink.net (tscott165(at)centurylink.net)> wrote:
| Quote: |
Which electronic ignition and how much?
On Jul 11, 2013, at 3:33 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote:
Brock:
Best bang for the buck and without catchings AIDS/HIV or the CRABS...
The Electronic Ignition.
Why?
1 - You are already paying for the fuel - you might as well burn it more efficiently.
2 - Less fouled plugs and NO fouled plugs if you are using REM37BY or a fine wire plug.
3 - If you go for the exhaust ($3400 Plus install) and if you get an improvement in HP - What are you going to do with it? You then need to repitch your prop IF if can be repitched. If NOT then $3200 for a new prop Plus Install.
$6600!!!!
4 - So next is - Do you care if the exhaust discolors? If you than you do the ceramic coat .. What is that Plus $100?
$6700!!!!
5 - You now just took your standard cowl and cut a ugly hole in it to fit the new exhaust - Which may have ruined your cooling airflow, SO now you need or want the better cowl... How much is that I don't recall but lets say another $3500, Plus Shipping ($250) Plus Install ($3500) Plus Paint ($500) Plus Extra Parts ($200)... So that equals === $7950
WHAT $7950!!!! !!!!
Don't forget to add it to the other costs $6700 + $$7950 =$14650...
Big BANG - Big Bucks and NO KISS
6 - And now the plane is down for another month of no flying...
Don't believe my numbers collect your own.
Oh! How much gas will $14K buy you? Or even $10K? ! ! ! !
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
012345
678901
2345678901
courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
23
4567
890 1234
5678901234567
8
[b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BARRY CHECK 6
Joined: 15 Mar 2011
Posts: 738
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 19, 2013 12:51 pm Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Sure you do Gary:
Just like you ignored the advice on how to do a repair... You are welcome
or the advice on plating and metal coating... You are welcome. Gee... The
All Great and Wonderful Oz - - Who doesn't realise ALL that HE thinks
admires him and worships him; Only takes pity on him for he does not know
how to say THANK YOU or GEE I WAS WRONG.
Gee... 'Maybe YOU should stick to what you know best...' Oh wait You do
.. Being a First Class Sphincter.
*Barry*
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote] Jim,
Did you meant his to come to me? Or send it to Barry?
I generally, as a rule, ignore everything Barry says.
Gary
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 18, 2013, at 8:50 AM, "Jim Shafer" <jim(at)powerflowsystems.com>
wrote:
Hello Barry,****
** **
Thank you for the feedback, I do appreciate hearing your opinions on these
issues. As is often the case between pilots, any five of us will have at
least seven firmly held opinions on any given topic!****
** **
So, here’s my two cents worth on the points you raised in you most recent
post:****
** **
a.) IF the Power Flow System were just another working muffler, I wouldn’t
recommend buying it at all, given the premium price. If you are looking to
add another 10 – 20 hp worth of performance to your AA5, then our system
offers a very economical, well-proven and STC’d means of doing so. ****
** **
b.) As we discussed before, the Power Flow System, installed, will set you
back roughly the same amount as the electronic ignition. Either of these
options costs a great deal less than any other means of increasing your
usable horsepower by a similar amount, PLUS they are both STC’d, which none
of the other options (such as an I/O engine) are. ****
** **
So, if you just want to replace one power-robbing, gas-guzzling OEM style
muffler with another one of the same design, you can do that for a minimal
up-front outlay. But, if you want to improve both your fuel economy and
the performance of your AA5, you WILL be spending some extra cash to do the
job. Where you personally choose to spend that extra cash is obviously up
to you. ****
** **
b. / #2) Safety, like beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder. If
it’s zero dark thirty and the engine in my aircraft won’t start, I
personally would want to have it checked-out before launching into that
darkness – no matter what modifications have or haven’t been added to the
aircraft. ****
** **
Does a shorter take-off roll improve your margin of safety? How about an
extra 100 – 150 fpm rate of climb? Or a significant improvement in
performance at high density altitudes? Or if an increase in fuel economy
effectively extends your range &/or endurance – will that help? ****
** **
Don’t worry, Barry, answering “yes” to any of the above will not mean you
are not allowed to personally prefer the ElectroAir unit. As I made clear
in my original post, they are a fine company making a fine product. I also
agree with you that any company that invests the time, money and effort to
develop and produce genuine improvements for the legacy GA fleet is worthy
of all the support we can all give them.****
** **
As far as our advertising goes: It is very easy for us to say, accurately,
that you will save 1 – 2 gph in fuel burn, because we DO know what engine
is being used: Our systems are only STC’d for aircraft powered by four very
similar engines: The Lycoming O-320, O-360, I/O-360 and I/O-390. In the
course of getting those STC’s approved, we have conducted more than 10
exhaustive (pardon the pun) series of before and after flight tests
measuring fuel flow and aircraft performance on a wide variety of airframes
(from the experimental Glastar, to the Cardinal 177RG). ****
** **
Yes, believe it or not, we have actually heard of Brake Specific Fuel
Consumption before. And, yes, the BSFC of the engine does change with the
addition of the Power Flow. It gets lower. It is literally off the
Lycoming charts, because the BSFC from Lycoming is computed based upon a
neutral stack engine, not the OEM exhaust that the Grumman has and
certainly not computed with a Power Flow. ****
** **
Look at our dyno numbers (outlined below) from a C172. Yes, I know it is
a C172, but it is the same Lycoming O-320 you will find in a 160 hp
upgraded Traveler or Cheetah:****
** **
Stock exhaust: 2563 RPM, computed HP: 133.8, fuel flow of 98.4 #/hr.
(16.4 gph). BSFC (full rich): 0.755 Torque: 274.7****
** **
Power Flow exhaust: 2665 RPM, computed HP: 157.1, fuel flow of 100.9
(16.81 gph). BSFC (full rich): 0.649, Torque: 307.7. ****
** **
See how the BSFC went DOWN? Despite the large increase in both torque and
RPM? Look in your Lycoming engine book. You can’t create 23 HP for only
0.4 GPH more. That had to come from improved engine efficiency.****
** **
Hot rodders have known for years that a more effective exhaust will
scavenge the cylinder more completely. A tuned exhaust is designed to
empty the cylinder more effectively by shifting the pressure and suction
pulses around to create a suction at the start of the exhaust valve
opening. It’s not magic and it’s not rocket science. ****
** **
With a Power Flow Tuned Exhaust, at your given example of 8 GPH and 2400
RPM, you would save 0.7 to 1.0 gph when leaning ROP at the same RPM. That
is a savings in fuel burn of approximately 10 to 15%. ****
** **
And, while you may not find our advertising particularly appealing, it may
be helpful to the general discussion to hear what a few folks who have read
that advertising and then actually spent some of their hard-earned dollars
on a Power Flow System have to say on the subject:****
** **
*I was happy you don't make false claims, everybody else claims 5 to 10
kts on every little fairing and piece of plastic they sell, I think
PowerFlow accurately claimed the actual performance gains. I went from 8.5
to 8.1 gph fuel flow at 2500 rpm leaned, and my acceleration and climb
performance went up as advertised. My IA and I installed the system in
June, it was 93 degrees on the ramp, and we took off in less than 900 ft
ground roll and were climbing at over 800 fpm, and we both are over 220 lbs
each. - Mr. Thomas Hunter / N8354L / Cessna 172-I with O-320*
** **
** **
Had the Cherokee out for a $100 hamburger over in Winter Haven today with
the wife. I'm happy to say that all of the stated performance gains with
the Power Flow Exhaust are there, and I'm very pleased with the result. The
new exhaust is the perfect solution to the issues that had developed on my
140, and I feel good knowing that I've got a totally new exhaust system,
instead of a patch on that ancient, old thing. I saw my VSI hit 1000
FPM today - in climb, not descent!.. That's something new for this plane.
I'm going to put in some new spark plugs and wires and go for total
nirvana! - Mr. Jeff Booker / N1805J / 1968 PA28-140 / O-320****
** **
* *
*One of the best products, Performance/$ ratio I have ever applied on an
aircraft. Nice job guys! 6000' msl take off. Identical aircraft. Mine
had a power flow. 800ft higher coming around the pattern at the take off
roll end of runway than stock exhaust. *
* *
*We all hear about the "10% increase in power claims." After modifying
automotive engines for years, most of us think this is baloney because
anyone who makes a piece of plastic to smooth out your air intake claims
it! Well, I bet the PowerFlow exhaust on my aircraft has increased the
power at least 10% . . . Where this really hits home is my increased climb
capability, living on the front range of the Rocky Mountains. - Mr. Jeff
Bursik / N29379 / 1968 C-177 / O-320*
* *
I recently installed a Power Flow exhaust on my Tiger . . . I have
noticed a huge difference in the performance of the airplane, especially
with regard to climb.****
** **
It has been extremely hot and humid here in the Virginia Tidewater Region,
with density altitudes of 2000 feet and more, yet my Tiger took off in a
shorter distance (felt like it leaped off the tarmac), and demonstrated a
150+ foot increased rate of climb.****
** **
As you know, our planes are not know for being great climbers, and all
else being equal, this is not only a big performance improvement, but an
major safety factor increase considering taking off with a loaded aircraft
and increased density altitudes. Not sure you can quantify or put a price
on the safety factor. . . .****
** **
With respect to increased maintenance, the mechanic and I discussed the
pros and cons before installation, and intend to disassemble and lubricate
as recommended at annual time. I think will be a small price to play for
the both the increased performance and safety margin. – *John Wrenn /
AA5B / N74636*
* *
* *
** **
All the Best!****
****
** **
- Jim Shafer****
Power Flow Systems, Inc.****
Ph: (877) 693-7356****
Fax: (877) 570-9831****
****
------------------------------
*From:* owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com [
mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com<owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com>]
*On Behalf Of *FLYaDIVE
*Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 9:41 AM
*To:* teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
*Subject:* Re: Powerflow****
** **
Jim:****
** **
I would purchase a PF System in very short order and I'm planning to, as
long as two things existed:****
a> I needed a new muffler - I just can't see* removing a working muffler
to replace it with a working muffler. *****
*b> I had/have the excess cash to to the job.*****
*From these statements you should surely surmise I am not free flowing
with cash and I made my suggestions/statements from the question posted in
the email. **The question was: "*Which do you think gives the best bang
for the buck, exhaust or ignition?"****
This indicates to me the fellow also holds his money in deep regard and is
not too frivolous - We all are frivolous to a small extent, just because we
have planes - But that does not mean we have to have MMTB (More Money Than
Brains). And...****
** **
b> What truly will give the most for the investment.****
** **
The PF System is an EXTRA it is not a Safety Investment nor is it
something that will stop one from flying.****
If it is 22:00 Hrs (DARK) and you are at an airport that has no services
avail what is your major concern - OTHER THAN WEATHER ... WILL THE ENGINE
START?****
A PF System does nothing to ensure that.****
A electronic ignition SURE DOES!****
> It gives you a hotter spark.****
> It gives you cleaner plugs. <-- And that is whether you use the REM40's,
the Better REM37BY's or the Best Fine Wire. An upgrade in plugs is NOT
required, but sure will help. I was misstated by someone that had the idea
I was making it a mandatory action to upgrade spark plugs because of the
electronic ignition. ****
> It gives you a TIMED spark especially at altitude where the
Mag efficiency drops off. <-- Electronic Ignition has Vacuum Advance.****
I have flown behind the ElectroAir EXPERIMENTAL system for years and the
system and support of the company has always been phenomenal. I am NOT
pushing ElectroAir is it just the company I have experience with; both as a
company and the product. Let me also add I do not have ANY experience with
the STC version of their product. I sure hope it is as good as the
Experimental version and if it is - - - FINALLY - - - A tested and proven
product for us GA Aircraft owners - That I know to work.****
** **
Now to address your items:****
Your #1 - They give Percentage - PF gives Usage. It is your advertizing
that stinks not the product. How can PF say it gives you 1 to 2 GPH
savings when you don't know the engine being used?****
Example; An O-320 which is rated at 150 HP and on mine shows 8 GPH in S&L
in full rich at 2400 RPM at an altitude around 2500 to 3000 Ft... With
your numbers I would be burning 1 to 2 GPH less... That is 6 GPH to 7 GPH
at the same settings. Now here is where we have to get a little scientific
and I hope this does not turn people away. ****
There is a basic term that is used engine industry wide and is Brake
Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC). Here is a link for explaination:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption****
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption****
** **
What you want to look at is the formula: Lbs/Hr/HP****
Which is Pounds of fuel burned / Per Hours / Per Horsepower of the engine
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 19, 2013 10:26 pm Post subject: Powerflow |
|
|
Well, Barry, as usual, you're right. I am a sphincter . . . . At times.
It's just that sometimes you go off on topics that, to me, you don't treat fairly. And, rather than offering logical recommendations, all I read is subjective condemnation and opinion. The power flow is one example. Fuel injection is another.
I've had a Power Flow on my plane almost since the day I bought it. I've installed many of them. Do I like everything? No I don't. But I love the way they fit. I love the they're made. I recommend the PFS because, on my plane, the EGT spread went from 150 degrees to 50 degrees compared to the stock muffler. (As a side note, my EGT spread increased back to 150+ degrees with the K&N filter.)
What would I change? The support mount for the muffler is a marginal compromise. I think the instructions to make the pipe stick out the middle of the exit ramp is wrong. I would make the risers shorter to raise the effective rpm band. ....... The EAA had a really good article on exhaust system design with really good charts showing cause and effect for a number of design changes.
I would publish real hp vs rpm comparisons using, for example, an O360-A4K with the stock muffler vs the PFS showing what the difference is. That's a difficult and costly undertaking to duplicate conditions accurately, but, still, it needs to be done.
Thanks for your candor Barry.
Gary
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 19, 2013, at 1:50 PM, FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com (flyadive(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
[quote]Sure you do Gary:
Just like you ignored the advice on how to do a repair... You are welcome or the advice on plating and metal coating... You are welcome. Gee... The All Great and Wonderful Oz - - Who doesn't realise ALL that HE thinks admires him and worships him; Only takes pity on him for he does not know how to say THANK YOU or GEE I WAS WRONG.
Gee... 'Maybe YOU should stick to what you know best...' Oh wait You do ... Being a First Class Sphincter.
Barry
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | Jim,
Did you meant his to come to me? Or send it to Barry?
I generally, as a rule, ignore everything Barry says.
Gary
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 18, 2013, at 8:50 AM, "Jim Shafer" <jim(at)powerflowsystems.com (jim(at)powerflowsystems.com)> wrote:
| Quote: |
Hello Barry,
Thank you for the feedback, I do appreciate hearing your opinions on these issues. As is often the case between pilots, any five of us will have at least seven firmly held opinions on any given topic!
So, here’s my two cents worth on the points you raised in you most recent post:
a.) IF the Power Flow System were just another working muffler, I wouldn’t recommend buying it at all, given the premium price. If you are looking to add another 10 – 20 hp worth of performance to your AA5, then our system offers a very economical, well-proven and STC’d means of doing so.
b.) As we discussed before, the Power Flow System, installed, will set you back roughly the same amount as the electronic ignition. Either of these options costs a great deal less than any other means of increasing your usable horsepower by a similar amount, PLUS they are both STC’d, which none of the other options (such as an I/O engine) are.
So, if you just want to replace one power-robbing, gas-guzzling OEM style muffler with another one of the same design, you can do that for a minimal up-front outlay. But, if you want to improve both your fuel economy and the performance of your AA5, you WILL be spending some extra cash to do the job. Where you personally choose to spend that extra cash is obviously up to you.
b. / #2) Safety, like beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder. If it’s zero dark thirty and the engine in my aircraft won’t start, I personally would want to have it checked-out before launching into that darkness – no matter what modifications have or haven’t been added to the aircraft.
Does a shorter take-off roll improve your margin of safety? How about an extra 100 – 150 fpm rate of climb? Or a significant improvement in performance at high density altitudes? Or if an increase in fuel economy effectively extends your range &/or endurance – will that help?
Don’t worry, Barry, answering “yes” to any of the above will not mean you are not allowed to personally prefer the ElectroAir unit. As I made clear in my original post, they are a fine company making a fine product. I also agree with you that any company that invests the time, money and effort to develop and produce genuine improvements for the legacy GA fleet is worthy of all the support we can all give them.
As far as our advertising goes: It is very easy for us to say, accurately, that you will save 1 – 2 gph in fuel burn, because we DO know what engine is being used: Our systems are only STC’d for aircraft powered by four very similar engines: The Lycoming O-320, O-360, I/O-360 and I/O-390. In the course of getting those STC’s approved, we have conducted more than 10 exhaustive (pardon the pun) series of before and after flight tests measuring fuel flow and aircraft performance on a wide variety of airframes (from the experimental Glastar, to the Cardinal 177RG).
Yes, believe it or not, we have actually heard of Brake Specific Fuel Consumption before. And, yes, the BSFC of the engine does change with the addition of the Power Flow. It gets lower. It is literally off the Lycoming charts, because the BSFC from Lycoming is computed based upon a neutral stack engine, not the OEM exhaust that the Grumman has and certainly not computed with a Power Flow.
Look at our dyno numbers (outlined below) from a C172. Yes, I know it is a C172, but it is the same Lycoming O-320 you will find in a 160 hp upgraded Traveler or Cheetah:
Stock exhaust: 2563 RPM, computed HP: 133.8, fuel flow of 98.4 #/hr. (16.4 gph). BSFC (full rich): 0.755 Torque: 274.7
Power Flow exhaust: 2665 RPM, computed HP: 157.1, fuel flow of 100.9 (16.81 gph). BSFC (full rich): 0.649, Torque: 307.7.
See how the BSFC went DOWN? Despite the large increase in both torque and RPM? Look in your Lycoming engine book. You can’t create 23 HP for only 0.4 GPH more. That had to come from improved engine efficiency.
Hot rodders have known for years that a more effective exhaust will scavenge the cylinder more completely. A tuned exhaust is designed to empty the cylinder more effectively by shifting the pressure and suction pulses around to create a suction at the start of the exhaust valve opening. It’s not magic and it’s not rocket science.
With a Power Flow Tuned Exhaust, at your given example of 8 GPH and 2400 RPM, you would save 0.7 to 1.0 gph when leaning ROP at the same RPM. That is a savings in fuel burn of approximately 10 to 15%.
And, while you may not find our advertising particularly appealing, it may be helpful to the general discussion to hear what a few folks who have read that advertising and then actually spent some of their hard-earned dollars on a Power Flow System have to say on the subject:
I was happy you don't make false claims, everybody else claims 5 to 10 kts on every little fairing and piece of plastic they sell, I think PowerFlow accurately claimed the actual performance gains. I went from 8.5 to 8.1 gph fuel flow at 2500 rpm leaned, and my acceleration and climb performance went up as advertised. My IA and I installed the system in June, it was 93 degrees on the ramp, and we took off in less than 900 ft ground roll and were climbing at over 800 fpm, and we both are over 220 lbs each. - Mr. Thomas Hunter / N8354L / Cessna 172-I with O-320
Had the Cherokee out for a $100 hamburger over in Winter Haven today with the wife. I'm happy to say that all of the stated performance gains with the Power Flow Exhaust are there, and I'm very pleased with the result. The new exhaust is the perfect solution to the issues that had developed on my 140, and I feel good knowing that I've got a totally new exhaust system, instead of a patch on that ancient, old thing. I saw my VSI hit 1000 FPM today - in climb, not descent!.. That's something new for this plane. I'm going to put in some new spark plugs and wires and go for total nirvana! - Mr. Jeff Booker / N1805J / 1968 PA28-140 / O-320
One of the best products, Performance/$ ratio I have ever applied on an aircraft. Nice job guys! 6000' msl take off. Identical aircraft. Mine had a power flow. 800ft higher coming around the pattern at the take off roll end of runway than stock exhaust.
We all hear about the "10% increase in power claims." After modifying automotive engines for years, most of us think this is baloney because anyone who makes a piece of plastic to smooth out your air intake claims it! Well, I bet the PowerFlow exhaust on my aircraft has increased the power at least 10% . . . Where this really hits home is my increased climb capability, living on the front range of the Rocky Mountains. - Mr. Jeff Bursik / N29379 / 1968 C-177 / O-320
I recently installed a Power Flow exhaust on my Tiger . . . I have noticed a huge difference in the performance of the airplane, especially with regard to climb.
It has been extremely hot and humid here in the Virginia Tidewater Region, with density altitudes of 2000 feet and more, yet my Tiger took off in a shorter distance (felt like it leaped off the tarmac), and demonstrated a 150+ foot increased rate of climb.
As you know, our planes are not know for being great climbers, and all else being equal, this is not only a big performance improvement, but an major safety factor increase considering taking off with a loaded aircraft and increased density altitudes. Not sure you can quantify or put a price on the safety factor. . . .
With respect to increased maintenance, the mechanic and I discussed the pros and cons before installation, and intend to disassemble and lubricate as recommended at annual time. I think will be a small price to play for the both the increased performance and safety margin. – John Wrenn / AA5B / N74636
All the Best!
- Jim Shafer
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Ph: [url=tel:%28877%29%20693-7356](877) 693-7356[/url]
Fax: [url=tel:%28877%29%20570-9831](877) 570-9831[/url]
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of FLYaDIVE
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 9:41 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
Jim:
I would purchase a PF System in very short order and I'm planning to, as long as two things existed:
a> I needed a new muffler - I just can't see removing a working muffler to replace it with a working muffler.
b> I had/have the excess cash to to the job.
From these statements you should surely surmise I am not free flowing with cash and I made my suggestions/statements from the question posted in the email. The question was: "Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition?"
This indicates to me the fellow also holds his money in deep regard and is not too frivolous - We all are frivolous to a small extent, just because we have planes - But that does not mean we have to have MMTB (More Money Than Brains). And...
b> What truly will give the most for the investment.
The PF System is an EXTRA it is not a Safety Investment nor is it something that will stop one from flying.
If it is 22:00 Hrs (DARK) and you are at an airport that has no services avail what is your major concern - OTHER THAN WEATHER ... WILL THE ENGINE START?
A PF System does nothing to ensure that.
A electronic ignition SURE DOES!
| Quote: | It gives you a hotter spark.
|
| Quote: | It gives you cleaner plugs. <-- And that is whether you use the REM40's, the Better REM37BY's or the Best Fine Wire. An upgrade in plugs is NOT required, but sure will help. I was misstated by someone that had the idea I was making it a mandatory action to upgrade spark plugs because of the electronic ignition.
|
| Quote: | It gives you a TIMED spark especially at altitude where the Mag efficiency drops off. <-- Electronic Ignition has Vacuum Advance.
|
I have flown behind the ElectroAir EXPERIMENTAL system for years and the system and support of the company has always been phenomenal. I am NOT pushing ElectroAir is it just the company I have experience with; both as a company and the product. Let me also add I do not have ANY experience with the STC version of their product. I sure hope it is as good as the Experimental version and if it is - - - FINALLY - - - A tested and proven product for us GA Aircraft owners - That I know to work.
Now to address your items:
Your #1 - They give Percentage - PF gives Usage. It is your advertizing that stinks not the product. How can PF say it gives you 1 to 2 GPH savings when you don't know the engine being used?
Example; An O-320 which is rated at 150 HP and on mine shows 8 GPH in S&L in full rich at 2400 RPM at an altitude around 2500 to 3000 Ft... With your numbers I would be burning 1 to 2 GPH less... That is 6 GPH to 7 GPH at the same settings. Now here is where we have to get a little scientific and I hope this does not turn people away.
There is a basic term that is used engine industry wide and is Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC). Here is a link for explaination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption
What you want to look at is the formula: Lbs/Hr/HP
Which is Pounds of fuel burned / Per Hours / Per Horsepower of the engine.
There is a range for the number of pounds AND remember it is in pounds so for most users (US), for it to make sense the Lbs has to converted to GPH.
The range is 0.4 to 0.5Lbs/Hr/HP - - - So split the difference and use 0.45... 0.45x1Hrx150HPx75% Power = 8.4375 GPH pretty damn close to what I am reading on my FP5L fuel flow gauge. So working backwards my 8 GPH equates to 0.4375
the differance between 8 GPH and 8.4375 GPH is 0.4375 GPH or 56 ounces which is 0.9333 ounces per minute
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
"The reason Benjamin Franklin was such a great inventor was everything lay before him. The reason why we don't have great inventors today is, everyone is trying to reinvent the wheel"
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Jim Shafer <jim(at)powerflowsystems.com (jim(at)powerflowsystems.com)> wrote:
Hello,
I think it’s great that Grumman owners have so many options for upgrading and improving the performance on these fine aircraft.
Since it is obvious that not every option is right for each individual and his aircraft, accurate information is a key requirement enabling each individual to determine which and how many (if any) of the different products available make sense for him or her. With that in mind, I’d like to shed a little additional light on the topics raised by Brock, Dean and Barry:
#1.) Yes, you are already paying for fuel – AND - Both the Electronic Ignition and the Tuned Exhaust allow you to burn it more efficiently. The fine folks at Electroair state their gains in percent (a 10% - 15% improvement) while we at Power Flow state our gains in gph (a reduction in fuel burn of 1.0 – 2.0 gph). For most GA aircraft the effective results are very close to the same and both companies have had these stated gains confirmed by hundreds of Customers.
#2.) Electroair does claim a reduced tendency for plug fowling as a benefit of their system and I have no reason to doubt their claims. I can also state that there have never been any reports suggesting an increase in plug fowling as a result of an upgrade to the Power Flow System.
#3.) Both companies claim increased horsepower as a main benefit and again, based on each companies track record (3,800+ total Systems installed / 300+ AA5 Systems installed since 1999 for Power Flow, 2,500+ total systems installed since 1992 for Electroair), there is no longer any credible reason to doubt either company’s claims.
The pricing for each system is also remarkably similar: As Barry pointed out: depending on lead times and applicable discounts the Power Flow System for a Tiger will run you about $3,500.00 plus five to seven hours of installation labor. The Electroair costs $3,400.00 plus four to six hours of labor to install.
As to the increase in HP (and if you don’t see it, Power Flow will give you your money back) you by no means need to replace or even re-pitch your prop to take advantage of it. First and foremost you can immediately use it where it does the Grumman’s the most good: in take-off and climb performance. As I said above, these are fine aircraft. But who among us hasn’t been way too up close and personal with the trees at the far end of a slightly too short runway? What is a shorter take-off roll (by about 300’) and a faster rate of climb (by 100 – 150 fpm) worth to you in those situations?
Even at cruise altitude you don’t need to re-pitch or replace the prop to take advantage of the boost in HP provided by the Power Flow – just throttle back and enjoy cruising at your current airspeed while burning 1.0 – 1.5 gph less avfuel. If you’re a real speed demon and crave that last 3 – 5 knots in airspeed, go ahead and take it. Unless you’re already cruising with your engine at redline rpm, the Power Flow System will give you an extra 50 – 100 rpm to play with. Each 100 rpm gets you an extra 5 knots of airspeed, and you don’t have to re-pitch the prop to get it.
We have had a very small minority (well below 10% and typically those who frequently participate in air racing) of our Grumman Customers who are so enamored with the potential for increased speed made possible by the Power Flow System, that they do choose to purchase and install a higher pitched prop to take full advantage of the extra power. This is by no means a requirement, but if you happen to enjoy racing, it is another option available for you.
#4.) We do offer a ceramic coated tailpipe as a $200.00 option, but it IS an option (for those owners who take particular pride in the appearance of their aircraft) and not a required expense. If the discoloration that naturally occurs when stainless steel gets hot doesn’t bother you, there is no need to spend the money. If it does bother you and you don’t mind using a little elbow grease, the discoloration can be easily wiped away with common stainless steel polish.
#5.) Thanks to the dedication and expertise of Power Flow’s many fine Dealers nationwide (including several well-respected “Grumman Guru’s” like FletchAir, ExcelAir and Gary Vogt) there is no reason on earth why a Customer would have to live with an “ugly hole” in their cowling. Yes, our system requires that a new hole be cut for the relocated exhaust pipe exit. Gary, John, or David, or any one of Power Flow’s several hundred Dealer’s nationwide (or even any reasonably competent A&P) can easily make the existing hole all but disappear.
The assertion that relocating the tailpipe “may have ruined your cooling airflow” is groundless. Thanks to Gary Vogt’s tireless efforts and determination, his beautiful “Jaguar” cowling is another excellent upgrade available to Grumman owners in its own right. It is not a requirement for the Power Flow System.
#6.) So to summarize: The Electroair Electronic Ignition will give you more horsepower (particularly at higher altitudes) and a 10% -15% improvement in fuel economy for about $3,400.00 plus 4 – 6 hours of installation labor. The Power Flow Tuned Exhaust System will give you more horsepower (about 10 – 15 more), better take-off and climb performance, and a 1.0 – 2.0 gph improvement in fuel economy for about $3,500.00 plus 5 – 7 hours of installation labor.
I don’t quite see how 7 hours (max) of installation labor can stretch into a month of down time, but maybe that’s just ole’ math challenged me.
Which is the right choice for you? Well, like most things in life, the honest answer seems to be: “It all depends”. I hope the facts outlined above will help those who are interested in improving the performance of their AA5 make that choice based on accurate information.
And, if you find it impossible to decide, keep in mind that, as has Dean, several very happy Customers have installed both STC’d upgrades on their aircraft and gotten the best of both worlds.
All the Best!
- Jim Shafer
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Ph: [url=tel:%28877%29%20693-7356](877) 693-7356[/url]
Fax: [url=tel:%28877%29%20570-9831](877) 570-9831[/url]
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of Airport Bum
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 10:30 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com (teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Powerflow
Call Garner at Fletchair. They have good prices and support the fleet. Electro air is the brand. Depending on your location, Ken Blackman, Gary Vogt, Excel Air, Bob Steward, Roscoe Rosche, Barry, or one of the others can help you with install.
Kevin
On Jul 11, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Scott Boyce <tscott165(at)centurylink.net (tscott165(at)centurylink.net)> wrote:
| Quote: |
Which electronic ignition and how much?
On Jul 11, 2013, at 3:33 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote:
Brock:
Best bang for the buck and without catchings AIDS/HIV or the CRABS...
The Electronic Ignition.
Why?
1 - You are already paying for the fuel - you might as well burn it more efficiently.
2 - Less fouled plugs and NO fouled plugs if you are using REM37BY or a fine wire plug.
3 - If you go for the exhaust ($3400 Plus install) and if you get an improvement in HP - What are you going to do with it? You then need to repitch your prop IF if can be repitched. If NOT then $3200 for a new prop Plus Install.
$6600!!!!
4 - So next is - Do you care if the exhaust discolors? If you than you do the ceramic coat .. What is that Plus $100?
$6700!!!!
5 - You now just took your standard cowl and cut a ugly hole in it to fit the new exhaust - Which may have ruined your cooling airflow, SO now you need or want the better cowl... How much is that I don't recall but lets say another $3500, Plus Shipping ($250) Plus Install ($3500) Plus Paint ($500) Plus Extra Parts ($200)... So that equals === $7950
WHAT $7950!!!! !!!!
Don't forget to add it to the other costs $6700 + $$7950 =$14650...
Big BANG - Big Bucks and NO KISS
6 - And now the plane is down for another month of no flying...
Don't believe my numbers collect your own.
Oh! How much gas will $14K buy you? Or even $10K? ! ! ! !
Barry
“Chop’d Liver”
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Brock <n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com (n2_narcosis(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
I am trying to decide on what my next upgrade should be. Powerflow exhaust, or electronic ignition. The ignition is a little cheaper, but I imagine takes more time to install. Is this correct? Which do you think gives the best bang for the buck, exhaust or ignition? If I get the exhaust I can start saving for the cowling.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Gary L Vogt <teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com (teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:
01 2 34 5
67 8 9 0 1
23 45 67 89 01
courier new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
23
4 5 6 7
89 0 12 3 4
56 789 0 123 456 7
8
cs.com |
9
========== |
0
[b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
