pv9
New Member
Posts: 41
|
Post by pv9 on Dec 7, 2021 3:24:27 GMT
I am looking to spec out a P2008. Currently, the US office is advising that it is a 3-4 month wait which is not too long.
My dilemma is:
- 914: great climb rates, hungrier on fuel, can handle density altitude if I decide to fly to elevation in CA
- 912ULS: sips fuel, lower climb rates, can it handle the 90 degree days in the summer at MTOW?
- 912iS: even smaller sips of fuel, but apparently has bugs and hassles
Would be very grateful for opinions.
|
|
|
|
Post by buzz on Dec 7, 2021 4:02:25 GMT
Well, I think they all have some advantages to weigh. I have a 914 and love it. I first wanted the iS for the fuel efficiency, but Shannon talked me into the 914. I think it was a good choice. I am however envious of the iS efficiency. I bought my plane 5 years ago and Shannon told me he had concerns over sensor and electronics bugs in the iS. So that pushed me towards the 914. I don't know if the bugs are a real issue or not. I think there is at least one iS on here so hopefully you can get the real info. If you don't mind the little higher fuel burn of the 914 I don't think you would regret it a bit. A couple of other things about purchasing a plane. I went to Oshkosh to narrow down the plane I wanted. Then I went to Sebring to test fly. Then the next Oshkosh I went specifically to make a choice between Garmin G3X and Dynon Skyview Touch. I decided on Dynon. Oshkosh is a great place to go to do your shopping.
|
|
|
|
Post by FormerCirrus on Dec 7, 2021 18:42:12 GMT
Well, I think they all have some advantages to weigh. I have a 914 and love it. I first wanted the iS for the fuel efficiency, but Shannon talked me into the 914. I think it was a good choice. I am however envious of the iS efficiency. I bought my plane 5 years ago and Shannon told me he had concerns over sensor and electronics bugs in the iS. So that pushed me towards the 914. I don't know if the bugs are a real issue or not. I think there is at least one iS on here so hopefully you can get the real info. If you don't mind the little higher fuel burn of the 914 I don't think you would regret it a bit. A couple of other things about purchasing a plane. I went to Oshkosh to narrow down the plane I wanted. Then I went to Sebring to test fly. Then the next Oshkosh I went specifically to make a choice between Garmin G3X and Dynon Skyview Touch. I decided on Dynon. Oshkosh is a great place to go to do your shopping. Buzz -- What are you seeing for overall fuel burn? I'm seeing about 6.5 gph. (Hard to nail it with great precision.) My typical flight is 45 minutes to 5,500 feet. At these settings: 39 inches -- Takeoff and first three minutes 35 inches -- Cruise climb 32 inches -- Cruise (128-130 ktas) 30 inches -- Cruise (122-124 ktas) <26 in. -- Descent I get both higher-than-average P2008/914 speeds and fuel burn. Feels like the fuel burn is approx. 5% higher with UL94 vs. 100LL. Pitch is set at 5. I asked Mark Gregor to configure my plane for speed, since the 914 handles climbs well enough. |
|
|
|
Post by buzz on Dec 7, 2021 18:54:19 GMT
6.5 is in the ballpark. I think I am a little slower than your numbers. I have only used 100LL with Decalin so don't know about the UL94 difference. I have never had my pitch checked so I don't know what it is set at. I suppose I should get it checked. Anyway, my best guess looking at your numbers I would say I burn just a touch less and a touch slower.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cluemeister on Dec 7, 2021 20:43:30 GMT
I was pretty consistently 6 gph overall with the 914.
|
|
|
|
Post by grantopperman on Dec 7, 2021 22:15:30 GMT
Well, I think they all have some advantages to weigh. I have a 914 and love it. I first wanted the iS for the fuel efficiency, but Shannon talked me into the 914. I think it was a good choice. I am however envious of the iS efficiency. I bought my plane 5 years ago and Shannon told me he had concerns over sensor and electronics bugs in the iS. So that pushed me towards the 914. I don't know if the bugs are a real issue or not. I think there is at least one iS on here so hopefully you can get the real info. If you don't mind the little higher fuel burn of the 914 I don't think you would regret it a bit. A couple of other things about purchasing a plane. I went to Oshkosh to narrow down the plane I wanted. Then I went to Sebring to test fly. Then the next Oshkosh I went specifically to make a choice between Garmin G3X and Dynon Skyview Touch. I decided on Dynon. Oshkosh is a great place to go to do your shopping. Buzz -- What are you seeing for overall fuel burn? I'm seeing about 6.5 gph. (Hard to nail it with great precision.) My typical flight is 45 minutes to 5,500 feet. At these settings: 39 inches -- Takeoff and first three minutes 35 inches -- Cruise climb 32 inches -- Cruise (128-130 ktas) 30 inches -- Cruise (122-124 ktas) <26 in. -- Descent I get both higher-than-average P2008/914 speeds and fuel burn. Feels like the fuel burn is approx. 5% higher with UL94 vs. 100LL. Pitch is set at 5. I asked Mark Gregor to configure my plane for speed, since the 914 handles climbs well enough. I know this thread is for engine discussion, but I gotta ask: What's your RPM at the cruise settings you listed? |
|
|
|
Post by FormerCirrus on Dec 8, 2021 0:35:01 GMT
I'll write it down next time.
From memory ...
35 inches ... approx. 5550 (I use this setting for first 2-3 minutes in level cruise, then back off to 30-32)
32 inches ... approx. 5300
30 inches ... approx. 5200
|
|
|
|
Post by Flocker on Dec 8, 2021 19:31:41 GMT
I am looking to spec out a P2008. Currently, the US office is advising that it is a 3-4 month wait which is not too long. My dilemma is: - 914: great climb rates, hungrier on fuel, can handle density altitude if I decide to fly to elevation in CA - 912ULS: sips fuel, lower climb rates, can it handle the 90 degree days in the summer at MTOW? - 912iS: even smaller sips of fuel, but apparently has bugs and hassles Would be very grateful for opinions. It really boils down to what your mission is most of the time. Would you mind sharing that? |
|
pv9
New Member
Posts: 41
|
Post by pv9 on Dec 8, 2021 21:56:25 GMT
I am looking to spec out a P2008. Currently, the US office is advising that it is a 3-4 month wait which is not too long. My dilemma is: - 914: great climb rates, hungrier on fuel, can handle density altitude if I decide to fly to elevation in CA - 912ULS: sips fuel, lower climb rates, can it handle the 90 degree days in the summer at MTOW? - 912iS: even smaller sips of fuel, but apparently has bugs and hassles Would be very grateful for opinions. It really boils down to what your mission is most of the time. Would you mind sharing that? My mission is to fly 90% of the time to do 50-100nm trips and the monthly 200-300nm fishing trips with my son. Mostly the $100 hamburger. |
|
|
|
Post by Cluemeister on Dec 8, 2021 22:58:09 GMT
I would think the 912is would be the way to go. No carbs to deal with (Rotax has had recurring issues with floats), and the bugs are worked out. Fuel injected technology, and sips fuel!
|
|
pv9
New Member
Posts: 41
|
Post by pv9 on Dec 9, 2021 3:00:06 GMT
I would think the 912is would be the way to go. No carbs to deal with (Rotax has had recurring issues with floats), and the bugs are worked out. Fuel injected technology, and sips fuel! Thanks. And the 912iS is able to handle MTOW loads on summer days? I don’t plan on mountain flying. My LSA will be exclusively for sea level to a max elevation of 2500 ft (and even that is rare). |
|
|
|
Post by Flocker on Dec 9, 2021 12:41:08 GMT
I would think the 912is would be the way to go. No carbs to deal with (Rotax has had recurring issues with floats), and the bugs are worked out. Fuel injected technology, and sips fuel! Thanks. And the 912iS is able to handle MTOW loads on summer days? I don’t plan on mountain flying. My LSA will be exclusively for sea level to a max elevation of 2500 ft (and even that is rare). The answer is yes. I've never had an issue with mine and it can get pretty hot in Atlanta during the summertime. |
|
|
|
Post by buzz on Dec 9, 2021 13:15:53 GMT
Can't argue with Flocks thoughts based on the description of your mission. Not having to deal with carbs is a plus as well.
|
|
pv9
New Member
Posts: 41
|
Post by pv9 on Dec 9, 2021 15:39:17 GMT
Can't argue with Flocks thoughts based on the description of your mission. Not having to deal with carbs is a plus as well. I just spoke with a P2008 owner in Wisconsin who traded his 2013 914 for a 2021 with the 912. The ability to fly an extra hour was worth more than the climb rates for him. |
|
ergo1
Junior Member
Posts: 51
Home Airport: KDXR
|
Post by ergo1 on Dec 9, 2021 18:49:55 GMT
Can't argue with Flocks thoughts based on the description of your mission. Not having to deal with carbs is a plus as well. I just spoke with a P2008 owner in Wisconsin who traded his 2013 914 for a 2021 with the 912. The ability to fly an extra hour was worth more than the climb rates for him. Hi I have slightly different take on your question. As I see it, if you are flying primarily in flat land areas with no hills near your home airport, then the 912 is certainly doable. But if your are climbing over hills and mountains going to your favorite airports, I would seriously consider the 914. In addition, if you are flying in hot weather from higher elevation airports then the 914 would also be my choice. Whatever your choice, enjoy! BTW, why not buy the used Tecnam, if it’s priced right? |
|
