I'm loving all the upgrades you're bringing to the plane, first of all (let's admit it) the paintjob/polish, and then the stol kit and now the ignition
As a shop teacher who has taught sewing and other home ec. courses, i super enjoy the cooking and the builds. You impressed me with the cold smoker and donair roaster - what you've learned and taught us here is invaluable and priceless! 😎👍👍🙏🙏🎉🎉🎉
Once you get past light single engine aircraft, ignition keys are very, very rare. The other issue is that the locks/keys are a joke, they are very simple locks with very few unique key bitting sequences and as old as most of these locks are, almost any key will work. At a company I formerly worked for, any of the 5 keys would open any of 5 different airplanes (older Cessna 340), and no they weren't keyed the same, they were just worn out locks. I used a Cessna 175 key (my parent's airplane) to open the 340's...
Yeah using a key tumbler/switch is pretty silly on a aircraft. If anyone is sophisticated enough to know how to fly, they are going to be plenty sophisticated enough to figure out how to defeat those simple key switches. Yes there are modern key switches that are much more resistant to picking but I just don't see the point of using one on aircraft.
The key was pretty much always hanging off the mixture knob anyway - the pilots door on this plane doesn't have a lock, so I could never lock it up either.
Zip ties will eventually vibrate enough to begin to cut through the wire housing after many hours. I would suggest Grip Lock Ties that are rubber lined to prevent this specific issue. Great video!
We added one to our Cessna 182S last spring that has the IO 540, and it has been FANTASTIC!!!, ...much easier hot starts and better overall performance by far!!
After about 10 hours of flying, I'm really happy with the results. Still logging data, but we're saving about 1 - 1.3 gallons per hour on fuel burn. Which for a lower power engine like the 0-300 seems pretty good.
I also have Electroair installed in my airplane and the performance was absolutely horrible to the point after two months it had to be removed and discarded. It was a dual electronic ignition system and I lost about $6,000 on it and it possibly cause a damage to my engine. Suffice to say, a simple climb from the ground to traffic pattern caused severe engine overheat with CHTs going as high as 440F to just climb 1,000 ft - before the upgrade you would see 375F at most. As it wasn't enough, at higher elevations like 10,000 the aircraft was climbing 200 fpm when both electronic ignition were running, and additional 300 fpm if one of them disabled. That means the aircraft had much better performance when flying on one ignition disabled than if flying on both. In fact, the RPM would drop when on both. Additionally, the company did not provide sufficient assistance, they didn't return calls - so if something doesn't go well, you will be on your own with no support. If anything, they provide a phone number to some independent installers that made recommendations that not only didn't work but also were in direct contradiction with the installation manual and simply illegal to do. When I faced Electroair why they recommend corrective actions that are specifically prohibited by the installation manual, I got no answer other that I can return the product. While the product was returned, the labor to install was non-refundable, and even the refund on hardware took two months and phone calls. Email were also not answered by Electroair. So if you wish to have it installed, it may work or you may get scammed like I was. If this product damages your engine, good luck with a overhaul cost. After reverting back to magnetos, I can finally fly aircraft again, and it actually flies better than on Electroair.
I've had none of those issues, and it sounds like the initial installation was botched. Really badly. At this point I've flown just over 100 hours with this ignition system; better fuel economy, cleaner burn (no more exhaust marks down the side of the plane), cleaner cylinders / valves, and performance is better overall.
I will be looking forward to the number you're going to get out of this. I don't recall if it's Electro-Aire or SureFly, but I think one of those companies now has FAA approval for complete replacement of ALL the mags in certain aircraft. Really, this should be coming out of the factory for all current and new aircraft. Why we are living with 100 year old tech in the piston fleet is beyond me.
Because the FAA stymies innovation. Just look how long it took to get GPS or electric gyros onto panels. I flew across the country many times with handheld GPS just running on batteries. Airplanes came from the factory with generators on into the 1970's because the FAA deemed alternators as some kind of suspect new technology.
Really curious to hear the results, ive also got a 1960 172b with a 0300, although my mags only have 40hrs on them since overhaul id love a hp improvement
I think your viewers would love to have a recap of all the things that you have done. And How much you have now invested. Is there any way to make it go faster
Very cool! Cleaner/more complete burn for more efficiency is great of course. Another positive is that I assume this system takes less maintenance than the mag that was removed. But is there a way to quantify an increase in reliability/decrease in likelihood of failure in flight?
In regards to the questionable use of the white nylon wire ties, what about the use of performance automotive plug wire seperaraters. Available through speed equipment suppliers like Jeg's or Summit Racing?
Lightning? Why was he flying a small plane so close to a storm system? If the lightning strike knocked out the fuel flow (pump) how was he able to keep the engine running? So many questions about this comment.
Excuse the ignorance if this a dumb question and I’m basing this question on the assumption that before you started, your dual ignitions had dual magneto’s. Other than cost, is there any reason you wouldn’t change out both mags for electronic ignition’s?
Fair question- cost is a factor for sure. The electronic system is certified to replace both magnetos, but for this low power engine one electronic ignition is overkill. Plus in order to replace both I would need a backup power source (more cost weight and complexity). So leaving the one traditional magneto as a backup / failsafe seemed like the best option.
A little thought from Debbie Downer. I was watching a u tube about a Cessna that had a total electrical failure due to a shorted cable. The plane was able to fly and land because of the old school mags. So is this a safety upgrade?
Thanks Debbie! That's why aircraft have multiple redundant systems. In this case the EIS uses 'ship' power to operate and the remaining old school magneto operates independently. BUT I could have replaced both old school magnetos, and in that case I would need to install a backup battery system that would operate the engine for approx 2 hours of flight if ship's power was lost. More than enough time to get safely on the ground.
Great upgrade, Glen. I'm glad you're getting some fuel savings, as expected. Do you have some thoughts on the pros/cons of the ElectroAir vs. Surefly? (other than the fact Surefly wasn't compatible with MVU)
They both have advantages / disadvantages Electroair wins because it's compatible with my engine Sure-fly isn't. I like that Electroair moves the sensitive electronic parts into the cabin, away from excessive heat and vibration. Electroair also has a higher voltage stronger, longer spark.
Are you allowed to change both mags out for a certified air frame? I don't know too much about the rules but I have seen on some planes in the US you needed to leave the factory mag on one bank to keep it certified.
@@GlensHangar Ah, makes sense. We should get you a lithium iron phosphate battery in there at some point. Or maybe one of the ceramic batteries my company makes......hmm, maybe not on a certified airframe
@@GlensHangarvery much looking forward to the next vid with your fuel burn numbers. Ignition improvements are often discounted or overlooked performance/efficiency mods in internal combustion engines but they’re some of the most effective as well.
Purposefully didn't mention cost, because it will vary over time and which system / aircraft you have. I would suggest you contact the manufacturer: www.electroair.net
![[Watch Party] RoV Pro League 2024 Winter | ( Bacon Time Vs FS )](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/lD6z1BugdZw/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm loving all the upgrades you're bringing to the plane, first of all (let's admit it) the paintjob/polish, and then the stol kit and now the ignition
As a shop teacher who has taught sewing and other home ec. courses, i super enjoy the cooking and the builds. You impressed me with the cold smoker and donair roaster - what you've learned and taught us here is invaluable and priceless! 😎👍👍🙏🙏🎉🎉🎉
I replaced the old key ignition/mag switch on my Cessna 180 with an Electroair push button switch a year ago. Love it!
I installed ElectroAir’s system in my ‘67 Beechcraft Musketeer. Loved it.
Once you get past light single engine aircraft, ignition keys are very, very rare. The other issue is that the locks/keys are a joke, they are very simple locks with very few unique key bitting sequences and as old as most of these locks are, almost any key will work. At a company I formerly worked for, any of the 5 keys would open any of 5 different airplanes (older Cessna 340), and no they weren't keyed the same, they were just worn out locks. I used a Cessna 175 key (my parent's airplane) to open the 340's...
Yeah using a key tumbler/switch is pretty silly on a aircraft. If anyone is sophisticated enough to know how to fly, they are going to be plenty sophisticated enough to figure out how to defeat those simple key switches. Yes there are modern key switches that are much more resistant to picking but I just don't see the point of using one on aircraft.
The key was pretty much always hanging off the mixture knob anyway - the pilots door on this plane doesn't have a lock, so I could never lock it up either.
Wait till you find out about heavy equipment keys
Zip ties will eventually vibrate enough to begin to cut through the wire housing after many hours. I would suggest Grip Lock Ties that are rubber lined to prevent this specific issue. Great video!
Really good stuff here Glen. Thanks for sharing with us !! Your going to love it.
We added one to our Cessna 182S last spring that has the IO 540, and it has been FANTASTIC!!!, ...much easier hot starts and better overall performance by far!!
This is a terrific archive of data for when I do this at some point. Thank you
Will be very curious to get your opinion on these after you’ve used them awhile.
After about 10 hours of flying, I'm really happy with the results. Still logging data, but we're saving about 1 - 1.3 gallons per hour on fuel burn. Which for a lower power engine like the 0-300 seems pretty good.
Agreed!
I also have Electroair installed in my airplane and the performance was absolutely horrible to the point after two months it had to be removed and discarded. It was a dual electronic ignition system and I lost about $6,000 on it and it possibly cause a damage to my engine. Suffice to say, a simple climb from the ground to traffic pattern caused severe engine overheat with CHTs going as high as 440F to just climb 1,000 ft - before the upgrade you would see 375F at most. As it wasn't enough, at higher elevations like 10,000 the aircraft was climbing 200 fpm when both electronic ignition were running, and additional 300 fpm if one of them disabled. That means the aircraft had much better performance when flying on one ignition disabled than if flying on both. In fact, the RPM would drop when on both. Additionally, the company did not provide sufficient assistance, they didn't return calls - so if something doesn't go well, you will be on your own with no support. If anything, they provide a phone number to some independent installers that made recommendations that not only didn't work but also were in direct contradiction with the installation manual and simply illegal to do. When I faced Electroair why they recommend corrective actions that are specifically prohibited by the installation manual, I got no answer other that I can return the product. While the product was returned, the labor to install was non-refundable, and even the refund on hardware took two months and phone calls. Email were also not answered by Electroair. So if you wish to have it installed, it may work or you may get scammed like I was. If this product damages your engine, good luck with a overhaul cost. After reverting back to magnetos, I can finally fly aircraft again, and it actually flies better than on Electroair.
I've had none of those issues, and it sounds like the initial installation was botched. Really badly.
At this point I've flown just over 100 hours with this ignition system; better fuel economy, cleaner burn (no more exhaust marks down the side of the plane), cleaner cylinders / valves, and performance is better overall.
Great episode, Glen. Exciting to see all these upgrades to bring the plane into the modern world.
I will be looking forward to the number you're going to get out of this. I don't recall if it's Electro-Aire or SureFly, but I think one of those companies now has FAA approval for complete replacement of ALL the mags in certain aircraft. Really, this should be coming out of the factory for all current and new aircraft. Why we are living with 100 year old tech in the piston fleet is beyond me.
Because the FAA stymies innovation. Just look how long it took to get GPS or electric gyros onto panels. I flew across the country many times with handheld GPS just running on batteries. Airplanes came from the factory with generators on into the 1970's because the FAA deemed alternators as some kind of suspect new technology.
Fascinating episode 👍
Love having my electronic ignition. Starts are much easier.
Really curious to hear the results, ive also got a 1960 172b with a 0300, although my mags only have 40hrs on them since overhaul id love a hp improvement
G,day Glen from Sydney Australia. WOW... I didn't know Case© mags were fitted to planes. Bendix was the main player. Nevertheless great improvement to engine performance and reliability, with expert knowledge on the installation. I'd like to see if 'higher voltage to the plug "burns off" the piston deposits on the surface.
⚡🕳️💥
DUDE! Have we talked about my emags yet? I'm with you. It's game changing!
So far it's been great - noticeable reduction in fuel burn, and a little better power on takeoff.
Glens 172B is already so much nicer then mine, I'm jealous lol
That guy with the ‘beanie’ hat ,the man who changed your No.6 cylinder - where have I seen him before? Is he into motorcycles?
I did the ElectroAir dual on my 182 and have had a horrible experience. I hope yours works better.
Can you expand on this ?
Nice work!
I think your viewers would love to have a recap of all the things that you have done. And How much you have now invested. Is there any way to make it go faster
Very cool! Cleaner/more complete burn for more efficiency is great of course. Another positive is that I assume this system takes less maintenance than the mag that was removed. But is there a way to quantify an increase in reliability/decrease in likelihood of failure in flight?
In regards to the questionable use of the white nylon wire ties, what about the use of performance automotive plug wire seperaraters. Available through speed equipment suppliers like Jeg's or Summit Racing?
Chris and I changed to those after the 'company' installer was done.
My neighbor suffered a lighting strike. It knocked out the e ignition and fuel flow. The remaining Slick mag got him back to the a/p.
Lightning? Why was he flying a small plane so close to a storm system? If the lightning strike knocked out the fuel flow (pump) how was he able to keep the engine running?
So many questions about this comment.
Excuse the ignorance if this a dumb question and I’m basing this question on the assumption that before you started, your dual ignitions had dual magneto’s. Other than cost, is there any reason you wouldn’t change out both mags for electronic ignition’s?
Fair question- cost is a factor for sure. The electronic system is certified to replace both magnetos, but for this low power engine one electronic ignition is overkill. Plus in order to replace both I would need a backup power source (more cost weight and complexity). So leaving the one traditional magneto as a backup / failsafe seemed like the best option.
Makes sense, thanks Glen.
A little thought from Debbie Downer. I was watching a u tube about a Cessna that had a total electrical failure due to a shorted cable. The plane was able to fly and land because of the old school mags. So is this a safety upgrade?
Thanks Debbie!
That's why aircraft have multiple redundant systems. In this case the EIS uses 'ship' power to operate and the remaining old school magneto operates independently. BUT I could have replaced both old school magnetos, and in that case I would need to install a backup battery system that would operate the engine for approx 2 hours of flight if ship's power was lost. More than enough time to get safely on the ground.
So you ended up mounting ignition coils on the engine mount as opposed to the firewall?
Yes - there was too much computer equipment on the inside of the firewall to give us a clear mounting point.
Is it possible to the same with
A 210T 2967 I’d like to upgrade to
Glass E ignition etc..the A/C
Based in Deer valley..
I really don't know anything about the 210 - you'd have to ask Electroair, or your maintenance group.
Great upgrade, Glen. I'm glad you're getting some fuel savings, as expected. Do you have some thoughts on the pros/cons of the ElectroAir vs. Surefly? (other than the fact Surefly wasn't compatible with MVU)
They both have advantages / disadvantages
Electroair wins because it's compatible with my engine Sure-fly isn't.
I like that Electroair moves the sensitive electronic parts into the cabin, away from excessive heat and vibration.
Electroair also has a higher voltage stronger, longer spark.
Glen, That leaves the upper set of plugs on a magneto right? Do you plan on keeping that way or will you upgrade that set as well?
Until the magneto reaches end of life , I’ll leave it in service.
Are you allowed to change both mags out for a certified air frame?
I don't know too much about the rules but I have seen on some planes in the US you needed to leave the factory mag on one bank to keep it certified.
@@Ammoniummetavanadate Most systems allow you to replace both mags if you have a second power source (battery or alternator)
@@GlensHangar Ah, makes sense.
We should get you a lithium iron phosphate battery in there at some point.
Or maybe one of the ceramic batteries my company makes......hmm, maybe not on a certified airframe
How much does removing the old mag change the Weight and Balance numbers or move the CofG?
Zero change
@@GlensHangarvery much looking forward to the next vid with your fuel burn numbers. Ignition improvements are often discounted or overlooked performance/efficiency mods in internal combustion engines but they’re some of the most effective as well.
More like 1975 technology. Every General Motors car had HEI electronic ignition by 1975, and many had it a few years before that.
I hope you hid this from Lyle so he doesn’t see you cutting holes in the panel he designed for you!
Nice
How much does such an excellent device cost?
Purposefully didn't mention cost, because it will vary over time and which system / aircraft you have. I would suggest you contact the manufacturer: www.electroair.net