Share Your Feedback On Products And Services With The Rest Of The Gang!
This forum is not the right place for sellers and manufacturers to introduce their product or solicit membership feedback. Posts are closely monitored and will be deleted if unpaid advertising appears here.
Topics/ Items discussed are not
paid advertisings/ endorsements for any specific product and no compensation/ reimbursement has been received to introduce or discuss any product here. If Seaplaneforum.com has received any reimbursement for introducing any product, this will be properly disclaimed in the respective post.
Seller/ Distributor retains all
liability and responsibility for the accuracy, legality and usability of any products. Shared for informational purposes only. All Rights Reserved. Questions/ Concerns? firstname.lastname@example.org
Thank you. J. Baker (Owner/Publisher Seaplaneforum.com)
Wed Dec 11, 2013 5:57 pm
Is anyone here using a power-flow exhaust system and if so, are you suing the long or short version????
Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:58 pm
I had the Long Version on an 0-360 in a C-172 I owned. There was a noticable increase in performance for climb.
Wed Dec 11, 2013 9:03 pm
I am trying to put enough loot away to buy a system.... I have read that the long system gives more power..... BUT I wonder about the stress from the long exhaust hanging under the plane when on floats. Maybe no big deal on a personal plane, but since I instruct on floats, there are days when I make 30-50 water landings... And some of them are not the best with new students.
Thu Dec 12, 2013 8:47 am
Unless they changed it, there is a bracket supporting the end of long exhaust so that it might even have less stress than the short version. Was not pretty looking and i would assume it added drag, but it worked and a 172 is pretty draggy to begin with.
Thu Dec 12, 2013 10:01 am
RKittine wrote:.....a 172 is pretty draggy to begin with.
I BEG YOUR PARDON!
Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:53 pm
Let me help you Tim. Bobs never been in a good one.http://youtu.be/Uw8Vd32y6Jw
Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:40 pm
I'd give him a ride if he ever shows up at Cooperstown.
Fri Dec 13, 2013 12:25 am
Tim McCormack wrote:I'd give him a ride if he ever shows up at Cooperstown.
I think he was looking into buying a Cooperstown club for the front of his chariot
Fri Dec 13, 2013 8:45 am
With Struts, Steps and open slots, there is a lot of drag on a 172. Nothing negative about the plane, I have hundreds of hours in my old N98772 (which I bought brand new in 1985) and over a 1,000 hours of 172 time. My point was there was not a lot of reduction in speed or other performance with the longer exhaust pipe hanging out in the slipstream. According to Power Flow, there is enough added Thrust from the long version that it makes up for any drag increase.
Fri Dec 13, 2013 1:36 pm
I've flown and instructed in several 172's equipped with and without the Power Flow. Without a doubt the ones with out performed the stock exhaust. It always seemed though that the difference was more helpful off the water and not in cruise. If the plane was heavy and at cruise seems like the added performance diminished. May have just been the ones I was flying. Anyone else have same experience?
Fri Dec 13, 2013 1:43 pm
The lakes that I have been using for years with my old Float-Cub are not all that large and have hills or cliffs all around them, so take-off performance is all I am looking to improve...
I wonder how you post a photo here?????
Fri Dec 13, 2013 1:53 pm
My experience too. The performance increase came in climb, where the added drag was not an issue at lower speeds. In cruise, I think the added drag reduced the improvement, though there is still a HP improvement so a prop change could result in higher cruise while giving up some climb performance.
(Tim - I would love to be able to fly a 172 right now. Love them.)
Fri Dec 13, 2013 2:20 pm
I've got a RAM mod, STOL kit, and Powerflow on my 172 and love it. I haven't flown too many other 172s for comparison, but this one is definitely a great performer. I routinely see 1300+ fpm at takeoff from near sea level in cold weather. I think the comments about cruise are right, though - it's not a speed demon by any means, even with the extra HP.
Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:13 pm
Sure beats my Champ in Cruise, even with all the duck tape removed.
Fri Dec 20, 2013 9:48 pm
So short stack or the long exhaust original model for instructing floats ???
ERWEAVER, which type were you using.?
Sun Dec 22, 2013 6:57 pm
Lots of Q&As on the PowerFlow site, though I know that there probably is a lot of marketing hype too.
Mon Dec 23, 2013 4:48 pm
Stock Cessna Exhaust
16.5 pounds at station -26.0
Power Flow Classic (Long Tailpipe) PFS
22.75 pounds at station -21.0
Power flow Short Stack PFS
19.0 pounds at station -24.1
Wed Dec 25, 2013 10:23 am
Eric doesn't surface on this forum much, together with 500 others.
I would be ready to do very frequent inspections of the mounting brackets and check for cracks.
We used Gomolzig power flow/ noise reduction exhausts in primary training 172's and didn't have a lot of issues with the proper checks.
Wed Dec 25, 2013 11:42 am
The inspection is part of the normal 100 hour inspection.
Mon Mar 24, 2014 2:29 pm
Not to revive a dead thread, but the guy we bought our plane from (owner @ Seaplane Services) directed me toward this video:http://www.powerflowsystems.com/news.php?nid=90
"The Force" is my plane. Incidentally, I did my training in the 180hp 172 that also participates in the race. Fun stuff to see, although I wish it were me drag-racing!
It does show an interesting comparison between powerflow and non-powerflow equipped planes. Hard to be all that scientific in nature, though, seeing as the planes are all different in float setup, etc... No real good control...
On top of all that, we do have a STOL kit in The Force, now. Also just did the auto gas STC and added a JPI FS-450. Hooray!
Mon Mar 24, 2014 2:45 pm
I bought my Power Flow exhaust system through the former owner of The Force. Seaplane Services, Inc.http://seaplaneservices.com/default.aspx
That video is what pushed me to finally buy one.
Just trying to get it installed now. My old IA is about ready to have his semi-annual
descent into madness because he takes on too much work. So I am shopping for another before he starts howling at the moon.
What prop pitch does the Force have on her seaplane prop?
Mon Mar 24, 2014 3:24 pm
Awesome! Bob and the guys over there do great work - you could always make a pilgrimage, though I think they're all about to make that float-changeover-fuel descent as well!
You know, I will check on the pitch of the prop. I know I knew when we were looking at it to buy, but now I can't remember.
Mon Mar 24, 2014 3:57 pm
I think part of the reason that your plane was off a little faster than the other 160 horse was that The Force has B-2550s and thus a lot better floatation than the EDO 2000s which are a little too small for a C-172.
Mon Mar 24, 2014 4:11 pm
Oh I'm sure - there is a lot of variability between the planes. Don't get me wrong - I'm sold on the powerflow and love it, but their conclusion that the difference is *obviously* due to the PF exhaust system installation is a little overblown.
Can't blame them for putting the video up, though - PF exhaust as part of a STOL package is a wonderful addition.
Mon Mar 24, 2014 5:01 pm
Just remember, "Let the Force Be With You".
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
phpBB Mobile / SEO by Artodia.