$2750. Excellent condition. ~260 hours since new. No damage.
Andrew
$2750. Excellent condition. ~260 hours since new. No damage.
Andrew
I had the 80x50 for a while and then went with a Catto 84x42.5. Take-off performance is better/shorter and cruise didn't seem be to be much slower. I put a belly pod on around the same time and was told I might see an increase in speed because of the pod so maybe it was a wash. They say the pod cleans up the air flow around the cabane and gear and that improves cruise speed. The bottom line is I did see a noticeable improvement in take off and very little decrease in cruise.
Flying Carbon Cub EX #11 since 2011
Dan
what are your cruise speeds at rpm settings and fuel burns? I got some real good numbers on my 80-50 yesterday morning at sunrise, no wind at all. I keep thinking about the 82-42 and sure would like to try one. I know our pal Chuck is sold on them, and my conversation with Nicole Catto tells me that the longer prop is more efficent, and bumping the rpm up 100 gets you back to exact speed and fuel burn, but with a shorter ground roll.
Did Kevin Quinn use a whirlwind on his new girl?
jim
Pretty sure both carbon cubs at the stol demo at osh had the whirlwind. And the Cessna cub. They were all changing the pitch after they got to osh
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Here are some comments I made about the 84x42.5 prop last year in another thread:
Re: A different Catto prop?I’m on my third Catto. The second one was the 80x50. After going to the trade show in Alaska in 2016 and talking to Craig Catto there I bought his 84x42.5. Craig told me it would reduce take offs but be a little slower in cruise. But he said because the 84x42.5 is flatter it pulls less manifold pressure at the same rpm as the 80x50. So it burns less fuel. But bumping up the rpm by 100 gets the cruise speed and fuel burn back where it was.
So how much shorter does it get off? About a third less. I almost always take off from the sod in front of my hangar parallel to the runway at our airport going the same direction. I’m hangar two so there isn’t a lot of room between my turnaround point and my taxiway. With the 80x50 I was always off about 50’ on the far side. Now I’m always off before the taxiway.
Its a a fooler though. My static rpm is just 2350. When I first put it on they told me I was thinking with a Borer prop mindset and that their props are different. They told me I was getting more thrust and that’s what mattered. They were right. And once the plane is on the roll the rpm comes up quickly.
This prop has also had a vibration survey on the O-340. That’s an important test.
For me it was a win-win.
With the 80x50 I was seeing close to 95 mph cruise at 2300 rpm. Now I see a little over 90 at the same rpm. But manifold pressure is lower and so is fuel flow.
I have 31s on my EX and Baby Bushwheel, long step and a belly pod.
Flying Carbon Cub EX #11 since 2011
Looking at a note I had in the plane, all three props I’ve had on this plane yielded 115 mph +/- 1 mph at wide open throttle and all were 2800 rpm straight and level.
Last edited by Dan L; 08-19-2018 at 06:02 PM. Reason: Changed nose to note.
Flying Carbon Cub EX #11 since 2011