Forum

Notifications
Clear all

This Forum is a place for Piper Comanche pilots to communicate and discuss technical issues

If you join or reset a password, please check your Spam Email box for emails from Admin at ComancheTechTalk.com

Please put your questions on the forum as well so everyone can read and respond. Someone else might be having similar questions.

All questions or topics on the Forums automatically get sent to the Tech team as well.

ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

1 Posts
1 Users
0 Reactions
650 Views
Admin
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1162
Topic starter  

ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Zach Grant L1011jock » Thu Feb 09, 2012 6:12 pm

All,
I am almost done with my "heart transplant" on my 180. After the debacle of an overhaul that started back in Sept., and had to be redone in January, I am very excited to get reaquanted with a new and improved old friend. So far this has been REALLY expensive vs what it should cost (I will address this in a separate post), but I figured, whats another 3 AMUs at this point, so I ordered the ElectroAir STC'd Electronic Ignition.

This is a HIGH QUALITY KIT!!!! The only complaint is that the supplied thumb drive that had all of the documentation on it crashed after the first use, but they have all of the documents online at their website so no big deal. The only additional things needed to complete the install are a 2 amp and 10 amp breaker, a toggle switch, and plumbing fittings to tap into the MP line. It has four main components. The trigger mounts in lieu of the rt mag, the brain box and MP sensor mount under the panel, and the coil box mounts to the firewall. My biggest issue was finding space behind my panel to mount the brain box and MP sensor (I have lots of remote mounted stuff behind the panle already). Otherwise, it is very straightforward, but I would say an average install on a Comanche is probably more like 8-10 hrs, not the 4-6 they quote. I haven't fired the engine yet, but should be able to when I get back home next week.

In case you haven't been following, this is the first fully STC'd electronic ignition available for the certified fleet. It is essentially the Jeff Rose ignition system that has flown thousands of hours in many experimental applications, holding several altitude and speed records in aircraft ranging from EZ types to RV types and others. It is now available for the 4 cyl lycoming powered singles primerily. For us, it is now approved for all PA-24-180s regardless of the prop installed (recent amendment to the STC adding Hartzell Props). The system still keeps the existing left mag as backup in the event of total electrical failure. The EI has a spark advance authority up to 40 degrees before TDC, so as the charge density in the combustion chamber becomes less, it advances the timing so that the peak pressure matches closer to the start of the power stroke, not after the stroke is partially completed, which is what happens with the fixed timing setup we have used for so many years. This more optimized spark translates into more power at altitude and greater efficiency. As all of you know, this follows my eternal quest that I embarked on over 6 years ago of maximizing the performance and efficiency of the 180. I hope this adds to the efficiency of this fine aircraft.

I will post again when I have some real flight results on this system. Lets hope it is all it is cracked up to be.

-Zach

"Keep it above 5 feet and don't do nuthin dumb!"
User avatar
Zach Grant L1011jock
Technical Advisor
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
Location: Indianapolis KEYE

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Zach Grant L1011jock » Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:17 pm

154kts true at 9000 feet. Altimeter30.06, temp +2c...on 65% power 20.3"/2300rpm, 8.8 gph. Although I am still working on a few issues, the EI is very noticable in its performance gains. So far so good! Im happy with the Electoair system. 10.5 hrs and counting!
"Keep it above 5 feet and don't do nuthin dumb!"
User avatar
Zach Grant L1011jock
Technical Advisor
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
Location: Indianapolis KEYE

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Mark Anderson » Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:08 am

Matt, that is impressive. How much speed do you think it netted you? Does it seem to run smother? Do they have plans to get one approved for a 540?

Thanks

Mark

User avatar
Mark Anderson
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 12:24 am
Location: Huntsville , AL

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby 9089P » Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:42 am

Hi Zach,

Nice! Any chance the 6 cylinder crowd will be able to join in the fun, ie approval for the O/IO 540's?

Thanks, Don

9089P
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 426
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 7:01 am

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Zach Grant L1011jock » Wed Feb 29, 2012 7:53 pm

Guys,
I don't know what the future holds for the 6 cyl STC'd version. They do have experimental kits for the 6 cyl Lycs and Cont. A quick call to them might shed some light on that. They are great folks to talk too and they were very good at helping me through a couple of minor issues.
-Zach
"Keep it above 5 feet and don't do nuthin dumb!"
User avatar
Zach Grant L1011jock
Technical Advisor
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
Location: Indianapolis KEYE

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby 9089P » Wed Feb 29, 2012 9:43 pm

Hi Zach,

Thank you for your suggestion. I contacted Electroair and they are working on an STC for the 6 cyl market. They hope to have it by Oshkosh time. I have gotten on their email list to receive updates and will provide any meaningful updates to this forum.

9089P
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 426
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 7:01 am

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby MULEFLY » Wed Feb 29, 2012 11:23 pm

Zach, I realize that it is not approved for the IO-320s at this time... is there any reason that you might be aware of why that couldn't eventually happen?

Thanks
Jim

MULEFLY
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2000 1:34 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Zach Grant L1011jock » Thu Mar 01, 2012 4:27 pm

Jim,
It is approved for some 320s already. I would call them and ask about adding the pa30 to the STC. I don't know if the VR would give the unit fits, but the can probably set it up for one.

Zach

"Keep it above 5 feet and don't do nuthin dumb!"
User avatar
Zach Grant L1011jock
Technical Advisor
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
Location: Indianapolis KEYE

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby T210DRVR » Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:49 pm

Those are amazing numbers for a Comanche 180 though I know yours benefits from a number of enhancements. From a purely economic point of view, what is the cost benefit? Under the same conditions what was your fuel burn before the install? I'm really interested in the system because my typical flight is 585 nm and I generally run at 9,500 ft or higher because of the terrain involved.

If I recall, a similar system called Lasar was never an economic success because fuel economy improvement was marginal.

User avatar
T210DRVR
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 4:31 am
Location: So. Oregon

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby T210DRVR » Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:05 am

Zach, have you seen increased lead fouling with the electronic ignition? I'm running all the bottom plugs off of the electronic ignition as they recommend. They also suggest no fine wire plugs. If I use the standard heat range plugs in the bottom they start fouling in 25-30 hrs. At that point they all look ugly with lead and are beginning to fail. If I use the hotter plugs on the bottom I can get at least 50 hrs before they foul but have found I really need to clean and gap the plugs at each oil change (30-40 hrs) to ensure I can make it to the next oil change to avoid fouling. I'm running the gaps at .030 as directed on the massive's and I'm running Tempest plugs. ???

Jim

User avatar
T210DRVR
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 4:31 am
Location: So. Oregon

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Zach Grant L1011jock » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:30 pm

Jim,
I have not had any issues. 180+ hrs now and no issues. I am running the recommended REM37BY plugs (tempest brand) with the crab claw electrodes. They are all on the bottom plug positions and I am running fine wires on the top powered by the mag. I do run lean and the engine is tight, but my lead deposits are no more than they were with two mags, which is to say minimal.I usually operate in the 9-12K altitude area, and turn 2200 RPM so power settings are not real high. All my CHT's are in the optimum range of 370-400 on 99% of all flights except on the coldest of high altitude letdowns. I really don't see how the spark advance would add to a lead fouling issue but stranger things have happened.
-Zach
"Keep it above 5 feet and don't do nuthin dumb!"
User avatar
Zach Grant L1011jock
Technical Advisor
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
Location: Indianapolis KEYE

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby T210DRVR » Sun Nov 25, 2012 1:37 am

Your CHT's are interesting. I presume that they are that high because of the speed mods. Most of mine run 325-330 DF. Do you have Dave's cowl? I'm running Tempest Massives. I haven't seen the claw design you refer to.

My top plugs are standard Tempest Massives and rarely require cleaning. I like to run at the same altitudes but 2400 RPM.

The cleaning is so easily done that I consider it a minor annoyance. Now that I've gone electronic I'm not going back. I like the high altitude performance and economy too much.

User avatar
T210DRVR
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 4:31 am
Location: So. Oregon

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby MULEFLY » Sun Nov 25, 2012 2:03 am

T210... not sure what your CHTs were before the Electro aire... I assume the same. Zach is a obviously a 180, and I'm a twin, but with about the best baffles that time and effort can produce, I'm closer to his temps than yours and I was before I put the LoPresti cowls on. Typically, I run 350 to 380F... just another data point.

All the best!
Jim

MULEFLY
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2000 1:34 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Terry Rawlins » Sun Nov 25, 2012 12:21 pm

There is discussion on the other Forum about Electro Air Ignition and the newly granted STC for the twin.

A question: If the single can have both magnetos replaced by a dual Electro Air Ignition system, why does the twin have only one magneto replaced om each engine?

I have long thought that the time had come to get rid of antiquated magnetos so I am pleased about this STC. From the reports the engine does seem to run smoother with this mod.

Terry

Nihil Illigitimae carborundum
Terry Rawlins
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 7:59 am
Location: France

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Zach Grant L1011jock » Sun Nov 25, 2012 12:56 pm

Terry,
The singles only have one mag replaced. The left mag remains as a backup as the electronic ignition is not self generating in the event of an electrical failure. I still like the system very much!
Zach
"Keep it above 5 feet and don't do nuthin dumb!"
User avatar
Zach Grant L1011jock
Technical Advisor
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
Location: Indianapolis KEYE

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Zach Grant L1011jock » Sun Nov 25, 2012 1:06 pm

Jim,
My CHTs were lower with my old engine. It was a Lyc factory overhaul that only lasted 1380 hours before the bottom end was found to be worn out. My new limits rebuild runs a bit hotter cht wise, but cooler oil temp wise. It has new Lyc cyl. And my plane does have Daves cowl, but when I put it on, I didnt see any real change in CHTs from where they were. The old engine would run 340-380 on all cyl on all but the most arduous hot climbs, or extended cold letdowns.
Zach
"Keep it above 5 feet and don't do nuthin dumb!"
User avatar
Zach Grant L1011jock
Technical Advisor
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
Location: Indianapolis KEYE

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Terry Rawlins » Sun Nov 25, 2012 2:51 pm

Zach,

If on the single the Left remains as a back up in case of Electrical Failure, I assume the same is the case for the Twin. So as the engine runs smoother on the Electronic System, on both the Single and the Twin is the Left Mag kept switched off during flight and only switched on in an emergency?

Terry

Nihil Illigitimae carborundum
Terry Rawlins
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 7:59 am
Location: France

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Zach Grant L1011jock » Sun Nov 25, 2012 4:58 pm

Terry,
The system is the same single or twin. The mag stays on as normal, but it is basically firing for not as the electronic spark advances beyond the set timing of the mag. If the electronic goes off line, the engine just reverts to the mag sparks with the resultant loss of performance and smoothness.
Zach
"Keep it above 5 feet and don't do nuthin dumb!"
User avatar
Zach Grant L1011jock
Technical Advisor
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
Location: Indianapolis KEYE

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby N3322G » Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:42 pm

Zach,

Any chance this will support an LIO engine?

Pat

Patricia Jayne (Pat) Keefer ICS 08899
PA-39 #10 Texas

User avatar
N3322G
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 1911
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 1:58 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas area

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby MULEFLY » Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:53 pm

Pat... I spoke with Electroair a few months back... yes... LIO was to be included.... Their website electroair.net shows a Oct '12 revision to the STC ... but the tech guy told me at that time that the LIO was in the pipeline with the twico authorization that has since been achieved. I haven't confirmed it but that was the way that they were approaching the IO/LIO issue. I'm about 50 hours away from having 500 hours on my mags and intend to install when we get close to the 500 hour mark.

Jim

BTW... the units are $3,400 on the Electroair site... $2,890 at Aircraft Spruce.

Last edited by MULEFLY on Sun Nov 25, 2012 7:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MULEFLY
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2000 1:34 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Zach Grant L1011jock » Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:55 pm

I dont see any reason why not. I think all that would be needed is a reindexing of the trigger by the folks at electroair. Might be worth a call to them.
Zach
"Keep it above 5 feet and don't do nuthin dumb!"
User avatar
Zach Grant L1011jock
Technical Advisor
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
Location: Indianapolis KEYE

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby N3322G » Sun Nov 25, 2012 7:17 pm

Thanks Jim and Zach,

I'm a bit away from 500 hours but had the same thought as Jim so - early in the project - maybe 2013 annual or 2014 more likely. I've been following this enhancement with great interest. Thanks for breaking new ground Zach.

Pat

Patricia Jayne (Pat) Keefer ICS 08899
PA-39 #10 Texas

User avatar
N3322G
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 1911
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 1:58 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas area

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Christopher Hufnagel » Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:54 am

Hi Zach,
I am preparing to overhaul my IO320 C1A's on my twin comanche in about a month.
One of the upgrades I am considering it the Electroair ignition. Any suggestions or comments since the last post here on your satisfaction with it now that its been on your plane for a few years?

Thanks, Chris

Christopher Hufnagel
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 6:01 am

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby MULEFLY » Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:20 am

Chris... I have had family illness issues that have not allowed me to put the hours on the airplane that others have with this system... my early indication is "YES DO IT!"

At altitude with little wind effect, I saw as much as 14 NMPG flying WEST to Portland. I'll go back out there this weekend to retrieve it after 5 months with John van Bladeren... my goal is to have an airplane that can go non-stop from WI to Ft. Meyers, FL non-stop... with nacelle tanks and the EI... if the wind gods are good... should have an hour in reserve.

Good system... phenomenal preliminary results.
Jim

MULEFLY
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2000 1:34 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Christopher Hufnagel » Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:31 am

Thank you, Jim.
It is great to hear that you have been so happy and highly recommend EI.
I am almost certain I am going to add it to my Twin this summer during overhaul.
I hope family things are improving for you and you are able to get back in the air soon.
Best,
chris
Christopher Hufnagel
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 6:01 am

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Zach Grant L1011jock » Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:20 am

Chris,
If you have C1As I'm guessing you are turboed. If so, you won't see significant gains while your MP is over 24", but you will see a hotter spark and no flashover at higher altitudes. It will also start easier and run smoother at all rpms. If you don't run with much boost, you should see some serious gains in efficiency/power at lower power settings. I still love mine, and several friends have put them on their Comanches and love the results as well. Great system that has been all but trouble free since working the bugs out after installation. Put the 1300$ it costs to overhaul your left mag towards the EI system and the price starts to look a bit more reasonable. Add in the performance gains and fuel savings and you will quickly pay for the system based on operational savings alone.

Zach

"Keep it above 5 feet and don't do nuthin dumb!"
User avatar
Zach Grant L1011jock
Technical Advisor
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
Location: Indianapolis KEYE

Re: ElectroAir Electronic Ignition project

Postby Christopher Hufnagel » Sat Apr 15, 2017 5:43 am

Zach,
Thanks for the reply and thoughts. You are correct, my plane is turbo and I have not heard the comment on the fuel savings being significantly less for the turbos at altitude. We typically fly between 10k and 17k so I appreciate your sharing that. It still sounds like a good system to add. I appreciate both your comments and Jim's. I think I am going to proceed with the upgrade... I'm looking forward to seeing the results!

Fly safe-
chris

Christopher Hufnagel
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 6:01 am

   
Quote
Share: