1.5 GPH per side.
Shorrick_Mk2 wrote:
1.5 GPH per side.
I’m not buying it .
The problem with these “un-controlled” performance tests is there are usually other variables that were not accounted for.
An example would be perhaps the ignition timing was not to spec in the “before” mode.
In the Baron report, I get the impression that it’s just a matter of how aggressively he was leaning before installing the EI
Could be. However the Baron LOP figures are compared to book ROP figures (which are supposed to be computed with on-spec ignition). Is there an engine / airframe setup that delivers the same speed ROP vs LOP?
Ignition timing not to spec happens very often with magnetos. If anything yet another reason to get rid of.
Shorrick_Mk2 wrote:
Ignition timing not to spec happens very often with magnetos. If anything yet another reason to get rid of.
Yes but you can use these wonderful high tech magneto timing testers. I love them. And when you don’t need them anymore, you can use them as a Scientology E-Meter.
Peter wrote:
Lower RPM does work. This chart shows that you can get the same HP for less fuel, by lowering the RPM
Yes, which is why I fly with 2100-2200 RPM generally, at FL150 or so. Another big benefit of having a turbo charger. And you don’t need a headset either.
I think that box should come also in an airborne version. After all, if we can manually adjust mixture better than a computer, why not have the same opportunity with ignition? Imagine the world of opportunities, and the “aggressively advanced vs not advanced” discussions and seminars.
Shorrick_Mk2 wrote:
Is there an engine / airframe setup that delivers the same speed ROP vs LOP?
Not sure what you mean here.
At any rate, the BSFC is never the same ROP vs LOP
What I mean is that the “test” B55 airframe / engine / ignition combination appears to achieve book ROP TAS figures while operating LOP with somewhat of a fuel economy. Is it possible to achieve that with a “standard” airframe / engine / ignition setup?
LOP outputs less power than best power ROP. If you have enough MP available, you can fly the same speed LOP as ROP but with less fuel.
Only those anaemic NA planes need ROP and max RPM to squeeze a few HP out of the engine 
So same MP setting should result in less TAS, oder?
Shorrick_Mk2 wrote:
What I mean is that the “test” B55 airframe / engine / ignition combination appears to achieve book ROP TAS figures while operating LOP with somewhat of a fuel economy. Is it possible to achieve that with a “standard” airframe / engine / ignition setup?
Once again, too many unknown variables .
