cost to install engine analyzer (4 cyl)?

[dlevy[_1_]]

Anyone had a 4 cylinder engine analyzer installed lately? I'm thinking
about an EDM-700 on a Lycoming O-320-E2C in a Beech Musketeer and was
wondering about install costs.

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

dlevy wrote:
> Anyone had a 4 cylinder engine analyzer installed lately? I'm thinking
> about an EDM-700 on a Lycoming O-320-E2C in a Beech Musketeer and was
> wondering about install costs.
>

If you hear off-forum, please post it here.

I'm curious, as mine might be similar, an O-360 in a Sundowner.

Thanks!

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
B A R R Y > wrote:

> dlevy wrote:
> > Anyone had a 4 cylinder engine analyzer installed lately? I'm thinking
> > about an EDM-700 on a Lycoming O-320-E2C in a Beech Musketeer and was
> > wondering about install costs.
> >
>
> If you hear off-forum, please post it here.
>
> I'm curious, as mine might be similar, an O-360 in a Sundowner.
>
> Thanks!

fwiw - a number of years ago an avionics shop charged me about 16 hours of
labor to install in my cherokee 140.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[dlevy[_1_]]

Thanks.... I'll wait a while....

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> B A R R Y > wrote:
>
>> dlevy wrote:
>> > Anyone had a 4 cylinder engine analyzer installed lately? I'm thinking
>> > about an EDM-700 on a Lycoming O-320-E2C in a Beech Musketeer and was
>> > wondering about install costs.
>> >
>>
>> If you hear off-forum, please post it here.
>>
>> I'm curious, as mine might be similar, an O-360 in a Sundowner.
>>
>> Thanks!
>
> fwiw - a number of years ago an avionics shop charged me about 16 hours of
> labor to install in my cherokee 140.
>
> --
> Bob Noel
> Looking for a sig the
> lawyers will hate
>

[Blanche Cohen]

contact either EI or JPI, they can provide reasonable estimates for
labor time. this assumes, of course, that the person(s) doing the
installation are not using your aircraft as a learning experience.
Once you have the estimated hours, X $your shop cost => somewhat of
a reasonable $$ dollar estimate.

Also, check with a couple, three shops in your area (if there are
that many) for their estimate and familiarity with installing
an engine analyzer.

[Blanche Cohen]

Earlier this summer I was seriously considering an EI analyzer and asked
for more details. Here's the answer along with an estimate of labor
hours:

-----------------------------
1. In regards to the UBG-16, the long-term memory of the "Normalized" mode
can be used without the MUX-8A data recorder if you choose to. The
"Normalized" mode is the mode in which you can graphically compare current
operating temps derived from the Lean mode with previous temperatures at the
same configuration. This is extremely useful in identifying trending
temperatures. If a CHT or EGT start to drift from what they were prior you
will immediately spot it and hopefully avoid serious engine damage. The
MUX-8A is an 8 channel "black box" that outputs to a PC or laptop. I feel it
is a worth while install, it's quick, included in the packages, and its
extremely useful.

2. UBG-16 is roughly going to take 4-10 hours, possibly slightly more, for a
typical four cylinder. Installer experience and aircraft specific
challenges are going to be the biggest factor here.

3. Part# UBG-16-4 MEM includes 4-EGT Probes, 4-CHT Probes, Extension
thermocouples, and the MUX-8A data recorder. ( You get a free oil, carb, or
OAT probe as well as a rebate!)

4. Part# FM-FLOW can be ordered free as part of the UBG-16 rebate as well as
the free probe. This will report gal. p/hr. on the UBG-16. If you would
prefer a totalizer instrument with GPS interaction the FP-5L can be
purchased as a rebate for $269.00 (normally $778.00)

5. The UBG-16 is configurable to compliment your existing panel. The unit
is designed to accept up to 16 inputs of your choosing. Or you can simply
run just EGT/CHT on it. It is completely up to you. I see a lot of people
adding RPM, volts/amps, and fuel or oil pressure. The indication on older
equipment just isn't as reliable as what is available today. Plus, any
function you choose to add to the UBG-16 will output to the MUX-8A recorder.
----------------------
Installation would be in an O-360 in a cherokee. Hope this helps.

4-10 hours @ $50-70/hr becomes $200-700 for the install.

[Ray Andraka]

Bob Noel wrote:

> In article >,
> B A R R Y > wrote:
>
>
>>dlevy wrote:
>>
>>>Anyone had a 4 cylinder engine analyzer installed lately? I'm thinking
>>>about an EDM-700 on a Lycoming O-320-E2C in a Beech Musketeer and was
>>>wondering about install costs.
>>>
>>
>>If you hear off-forum, please post it here.
>>
>>I'm curious, as mine might be similar, an O-360 in a Sundowner.
>>
>>Thanks!
>
>
> fwiw - a number of years ago an avionics shop charged me about 16 hours of
> labor to install in my cherokee 140.
>

It took me about 20 hours to install an EDM-700 with EGT,CHT,oil temp,
and carb temp probes on my Cherokee Six. It isn't hard work, just very
time consuming. If you are at all handy, I'd suggest you find a
mechanic that will let you do the install under his supervision. You'll
get it in the way you want it, learn stuff about your plane and save
some money (well if you don't count the value of your time anyway).

[Ray Andraka]

Ray Andraka wrote:


>>
>
> It took me about 20 hours to install an EDM-700 with EGT,CHT,oil temp,
> and carb temp probes on my Cherokee Six. It isn't hard work, just very
> time consuming. If you are at all handy, I'd suggest you find a
> mechanic that will let you do the install under his supervision. You'll
> get it in the way you want it, learn stuff about your plane and save
> some money (well if you don't count the value of your time anyway).


I should add, that 20 hours included the time to remove the existing
single cylinder EGT, move the clock, move the autopilot switches and 2
circuit breakers, cut the panel and make a 2-1/4 instrument overlay, and
fabricate and install and wire a new subpanel for the relocated circuit
breakers plus the new one for the monitor. My EDM-700 is installed
where the spare fuses once were, which were replaced by the switches and
breakers when the AP and strikefinder were installed. Without that
panel work, it would probably have been about 12 hours to pull all the
wires, install the sensors, add the circuit breaker and connect it all up.

[houstondan]

i've talked it over with my avionics shop and my general a&p and i'm
budgeting about $3000 turn-key with gas totalizer. that's 6 cylinders.

dan
Blanche Cohen wrote:
> contact either EI or JPI, they can provide reasonable estimates for
> labor time. this assumes, of course, that the person(s) doing the
> installation are not using your aircraft as a learning experience.
> Once you have the estimated hours, X $your shop cost => somewhat of
> a reasonable $$ dollar estimate.
>
> Also, check with a couple, three shops in your area (if there are
> that many) for their estimate and familiarity with installing
> an engine analyzer.

[Denny]

On a low compression, low horsepower, carbureted engine, a fancy
analyzer is only going to waste your money and make you frustrated...

denny

[houstondan]

care to expand on that a bit??

dan
Denny wrote:
> On a low compression, low horsepower, carbureted engine, a fancy
> analyzer is only going to waste your money and make you frustrated...
>
> denny

[Guy Byars]

If you are planning to use it to lean more agressively on a carburated
engine, then I agree, it will not work well for that. I put an EDM-700 on
my Skylane with an O-470R. I still find the best leaning procedure is to
lean until the engine is slightly rough, then richen it up 1/4 turn.

However, an analyizer is a great diagnostic tool. For example, if on runup
you notice one mag is slightly rough, a quick look at the analyzer help you
diagnose the problem. For example, if a single cylinder is not firing, the
analyzer will tell you EXACTLY which cylinder has the bad plug. Or if all
the cylinders are sick on one mag, then the analyizer will clearly show that
too. Also, earlier this year, I had a manifold leak, and saw that the
1-3-5 cylinders were a bit "off". So an inspection of that side of the
engine found a manifold leak.

Guy



"Denny" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On a low compression, low horsepower, carbureted engine, a fancy
> analyzer is only going to waste your money and make you frustrated...
>
> denny
>

[Andrew Gideon]

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 18:58:12 +0000, Guy Byars wrote:

> the engine is slightly rough

Which reminds me of a question I've been developing: what makes the engine
rough while leaning?

- Andrew

[Dan Luke]

"Guy Byars" wrote:

> If you are planning to use it to lean more agressively on a carburated
> engine, then I agree, it will not work well for that.

Depends on the engine.

I use my EDM-700 for leaning my O-360 every time I fly. While climbing, I
use to monitor CHT's so I can lean without overheating. In cruise, I've
used it to find the "sweet spots" where I can run LOP at various altitudes.


> put an EDM-700 on my Skylane with an O-470R. I still find the best
> leaning procedure is to lean until the engine is slightly rough, then
> richen it up 1/4 turn.

Yes; O-470s are notorious for uneven mixture distribution.

>
> However, an analyizer is a great diagnostic tool. For example, if on
> runup you notice one mag is slightly rough, a quick look at the analyzer
> help you diagnose the problem. For example, if a single cylinder is not
> firing, the analyzer will tell you EXACTLY which cylinder has the bad
> plug. Or if all the cylinders are sick on one mag, then the analyizer
> will clearly show that too. Also, earlier this year, I had a manifold
> leak, and saw that the 1-3-5 cylinders were a bit "off". So an inspection
> of that side of the engine found a manifold leak.

Yep. I'd hate to do without it.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Dan Luke]

"Andrew Gideon" wrote:


>
>> the engine is slightly rough
>
> Which reminds me of a question I've been developing: what makes the engine
> rough while leaning?

One or more cylinders wiil get too lean before the others, causing uneven
power production.

[Guy Byars]

>
> Yep. I'd hate to do without it.
>

I forgot to mention the alarm feature. When any cylinder head temp goes
above 400F, my JPI starts flashing a warning light. A very good thing to be
warned about... I can then take immediate corrective action... cowl flaps...
mixture... airspeed... whatever.

It also warns if any other parameters are out of spec. A great safety
feature!!!!

[houstondan]

i fly behind an 0-300 (145 h.p.) continental so i guess that low power,
low compression is accurate but so is safe, steady, smooth and
dependable too. i like it. i don't have any great expectations of huge
operational benefits running l.o.p. but i would like to get the thing
to full t.b.o. and beyond. it's only got 350 hours now so i have the
opportunity to make a big difference in it's operational life. i
think that the main benefit will be in having confidence that i know
whats going on inside the thing and in learning how best to operate it.
given the joys of cessna fuel guages, the genefits of the gas totalizer
are obvious.

given all that, i'm still anxious to hear what denny was talking about
on getting frustrated etc. i'm here to learn.

dan



Guy Byars wrote:
> >
> > Yep. I'd hate to do without it.
> >
>
> I forgot to mention the alarm feature. When any cylinder head temp goes
> above 400F, my JPI starts flashing a warning light. A very good thing to be
> warned about... I can then take immediate corrective action... cowl flaps...
> mixture... airspeed... whatever.
>
> It also warns if any other parameters are out of spec. A great safety
> feature!!!!

[Newps]

Peter wrote:

>
> With a carb engine you may not be able to lean past peak EGT but that
> doesn't matter; virtually the same fuel savings are achieved anywhere
> near the peak point,


Sure it does. I've had a 182 and now a Bonanza. The 182 wouldn't run
LOP as that term is understood. The problem is that in order to run LOP
all cylinders must get to peak at the same time, or very nearly so. If
you can't accomplish that then LOP flying won't work in your engine,
fuel injected or carb'd. As for fuel savings the book flow for my 520
is 9.3 gph at 45%, I can run all day at about 7.5-7.8 That's a big
savings from the guy who can't go LOP in his aircraft.

[Andrew Gideon]

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:33:54 -0500, Dan Luke wrote:

> One or more cylinders wiil get too lean before the others, causing uneven
> power production.

So the rough running is called by cylinders generating different power
levels? Why can't that occur anywhere in the air/fuel mixture curve?

- Andrew

[Ray Andraka]

Denny wrote:
> On a low compression, low horsepower, carbureted engine, a fancy
> analyzer is only going to waste your money and make you frustrated...
>
> denny
>

I disagree. It'll pay for itself the first time your engine hiccups.
Mine paid for itself within the first 20 hours it was installed. I had
a situation (new engine) where the engine would get rough at the top of
the climb as soon as you pulled the throttle back. The engine monitor
showed that the #1 cylinder was going cold when that happened, which
pointed exactly where to look for the problem.

A year later, I had one cylinder that was suddenly getting lean too
quickly. The monitor told me exaclty where to look for an intake leak,
which was found within 10 minutes of pulling off the cowl.

[Dan Luke]

"Andrew Gideon" wrote:


> On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:33:54 -0500, Dan Luke wrote:
>
>> One or more cylinders wiil get too lean before the others, causing uneven
>> power production.
>
> So the rough running is called by cylinders generating different power
> levels? Why can't that occur anywhere in the air/fuel mixture curve?

I guess it does, to some extent. The difference isn't detectable until the
leanest cylinder is about to flame out.

[Newps]

Andrew Gideon wrote:


>
>
> So the rough running is called by cylinders generating different power
> levels? Why can't that occur anywhere in the air/fuel mixture curve?

Assuming the moving metal parts are very close together in weights the
only other thing that will affect noticeable vibration is the cylinders
making different amounts of power. If you can get each cylinder to peak
within about .2 gph you will have a very smooth engine indeed.

[Matt Barrow]

"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:33:54 -0500, Dan Luke wrote:
>
>> One or more cylinders wiil get too lean before the others, causing uneven
>> power production.
>
> So the rough running is called by cylinders generating different power
> levels? Why can't that occur anywhere in the air/fuel mixture curve?
>

Andrew, every question you asked is clearly answered, in depth, in John
Deakin's AvWeb series about engine operations, including graphs and charts.
In color!!

Do your homework, lad!

Matt B.

--
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious, but it cannot
survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable,
for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves
amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through
all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the
traitor
appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and
he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness
that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation,
he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of
the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A
murderer is less to fear. -- Marcus Tullius Cicero

[randall g]

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 17:26:40 -0400, Andrew Gideon >
wrote:

>On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:33:54 -0500, Dan Luke wrote:
>
>> One or more cylinders wiil get too lean before the others, causing uneven
>> power production.
>
>So the rough running is called by cylinders generating different power
>levels? Why can't that occur anywhere in the air/fuel mixture curve?


When you are running at a typical rich setting, the maximum possible
combustion will be occurring in all cylinders. The excess unburned fuel
is blown out the exhaust. Since cylinders are about the same size and
compression, you have very similar powers being developed.

Once you start leaning though, the first cylinders to lean past max
power will begin developing less power while all the others are still at
max. This uneven distribution in power results in roughness. As you
continue leaning the cylinders get more unbalanced.

I have just installed Gamijectors in my engine and am about to receive a
second set. They iterate with you until you get peak power/temperatures
to coincide on all cylinders. Once this is done, you can lean quite
aggressively without unbalancing the power produced.

Read Deakins articles on the subject:
http://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/list.html



randall g =%^)> PPASEL+Night 1974 Cardinal RG
http://www.telemark.net/randallg
Lots of aerial photographs of British Columbia at:
http://www.telemark.net/randallg/photos.htm
Vancouver's famous Kat Kam: http://www.katkam.ca

[Newps]

randall g wrote:


>
> When you are running at a typical rich setting, the maximum possible
> combustion will be occurring in all cylinders.



Not quite. This only happens at a certain mixture setting. Any other
setting reduces power.

[randall g]

On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 19:39:26 -0600, Newps > wrote:

>
>
>randall g wrote:
>
>
>>
>> When you are running at a typical rich setting, the maximum possible
>> combustion will be occurring in all cylinders.
>
>
>
>Not quite. This only happens at a certain mixture setting. Any other
>setting reduces power.
>


Fair enough, but on the rich side of peak the power curve (vs fuel flow)
is fairly flat, so power differences are relatively minor. On the lean
side it drops much more quickly.




randall g =%^)> PPASEL+Night 1974 Cardinal RG
http://www.telemark.net/randallg
Lots of aerial photographs of British Columbia at:
http://www.telemark.net/randallg/photos.htm
Vancouver's famous Kat Kam: http://www.katkam.ca