Im thinking in the next couple years doing a prop conversion on my plane. I have an Lyc O-360 with a Hartzell 74" CS prop. Im thinking of doing one of three conversions.

1) MT composit Prop
2)hartzells 80" Top Prop
3)Stoots' 80" Hartzell

I think the 80" hartzells are very similiar and not sure of the differences. As for the MT, Id be interested in knowing others thoughts on it. Im going to be using it as a floatplane/STOL aircraft.

I like the time proven Aluminum Hartzell, but from what I understand the Composit props performance is great. The Composit is also significantly lighter. Im concerned about the Composit's life span and its maintenance.

Anybody out there got experience with these???

Stoots has commented on his Hartzell STC here before. It might be a good idea to look through some of the other topics and see what he had to say. I believe he has options for longer props than the 80 inch Hartzell offers. He's a member of the 175 club so you can contact him through the personal messenger or he's posted his number for anyone to call.

I've looked at both the MT and the Hartzell. Both require a HD nose fork and a 6x6 nose tire. However I have applied for a field approval to retain the original nose fork and tire as there is plenty of clearance without converting to the larger tire.

I was told just last week that the field approval has been approved pending clarification on ICA's but don't have the paperwork yet. Should be here shortly. Now that it's been approved, anyone should be able to reference the approval number and get approval easily for themselves.

I have also spent some time looking at the MT Prop. The obvious advantage is the 26 LBS reduced weight. They also claim better performance as compared to the Hartzell Top Prop. I was somewhat concerned at first about these being composite as compared to the solid aluminum. I am told they also have a stainless leading edge which extends the lifespan greatly. They are also able to make minor repairs to the composite which sometimes is not possible with aluminum.

I talked to Baumann Floats some time ago about the MT Prop. They are very happy with the performance they get from theirs. They are members of the 175 club so you can contact them through the personal messenger or call them direct. They are very nice to talk to.

The obvious drawback for me was the cost. The MT is several thousands more to purchase than the Hartzell Top Prop.

I am giving serious thought to the MT Prop. I'm really not sure which way I will go but the price is currently the only thing holding me back from the MT Prop. If the cost were dollar for dollar, I'd go the MT route without question.

Jim

Jim,
Thanks for the reply. I have talked with Both stoots and Birkmeyer. Nothing against either of them, but of coarse they say theirs is the best. Im just looking for someone who might have looked at both, like you have and come to their own conclusion.

Myself, Im leaning toward the MT prop as I really like the idea of better performance with less wieght. Especially on the nose, as my plane is nose heavy. Adding a larger hartzell prop would only aggrivate the sitution.

Looking forward to hearing that you get your approval on the nose fork. Please send a copy to Kris, as I would definitely like to do the same thing. For me, I plan to spend most of my hours on floats and for the few hours on wheels in the winter a year, it doesnt make sense to go with the larger Nose Fork.

Let me know what you decide and why on the Prop.

Craig

The ad below is from the GlaStar builder list:
Stan

Propeller trade
Would like to trade 3-blade MT simitar prop -72"- MTV-12B/187-17(150 hrs. on prop) for a 2-blade MT (72" or 80") or Hartzel Prop (74") compatable with Lic. 0-360A1F6 engine.

I was talking to a guy familiar with composites, this is what he told me:

The MT Props are not true composite props, they are essentially a wooden core with composite material built around the wood, and the stainless edge or whatever added. This simplifies the FAA certification process because wooden props do not have to meet the same standards as metal props.

I would personally consider things such as cold temperature shear strength, long term water exposure longevity, and thrust versus blade length before I made my decision. Hartzell and MT should be able to provide static thrust values for their blade types.

Just my 2cents worth....

Craig,

Karl S....on this forum has a top prop...You might want to get w/him as to the ins & outs.

Regards,

Darth

Craig,

I happened across this website today and thought it would be very interesting regarding this topic. I thought about copy and pasting the information but it just didn't seam like the right thing to do so here is the link.

http://www.propilotsinc.com/faq.html

Jim

Cool stuff, here is a tip speed calculator as well:

http://www.pponk.com/HTML%20PAGES/propcalc.html


Don't forget to read their thrust comparisons on bigger props:

http://www.pponk.com/HTML%20PAGES/propellers.html

Its interesting that the MT prop only outperformed the Aluminum prop in take off. It was also much lighter of course. Other than that the Aluminum prop was either beat or equalled the MT (Thrust, climb etc). I saw this talked about on the Supercub.org website. If you havent looked at this site, its got some good info.

Im going to pull down the specs on the props used in this comparision and see if how similiar the props were.

Craig

In reading the MT brochure one could come to the conclusion the MT was far superior in every aspect. However as most comparisons I've seen reveal the two props are very similar in comparison.

I don't know if either material is of significant superiority when it comes to life expectancy or overhaul methods. I'd like to find out more about that.

The major difference other than price appears to be the 24 lbs difference in weight. The MT price is about $4,500 more than the Top Prop. That's $187.50 per pound. Not sure it's worth the money for me.

On another note, we are getting very close on my field approval to retain the standard nose gear when converting to the Hartzell Top Prop STC. In fact so close I've been told it's approved and we're just waiting for the final paperwork.

This is great news for anyone wanting to upgrade to the top prop and not looking to change their nose fork or wheel. I'll update once I have the papers in hand.

I took a peak at the Cub site. Looks like something to view when I have more time. Thanks for the info!

Jim