Engine Analyzer Question/Lean vs Rich of Peak/Engine Longevity

[CO_Skymaster]

I will revive this thread with a question. The last entry was in 2005. I am considering in the future of replacing my instrument clusters with either a JPI 830 or an Ultra Twin engine system. From what I can tell the JPI fits into a 3.5 inch hole and there would be one for each engine. It is capable of replacing every engine instrument on my panel. It said it uses a JPI harness which I'm assuming is every engine sensor bundle through the firewall to the instrument itself. The Ultra is like the Garmin 1000 system, square in shape and requiring a cut in the instrument panel. However, I like the fact that a single data wire goes through the firewall to a box on the firewall. The box is connected to a harness that reads all the engine sensors. I'm leaning toward the Ultra. I'm getting tire of chasing one instrument after another trying to fix or calibrate them. It may be time to look at replacing the system instead of each component. I wanted to know if anyone has these systems and if they have had any problem. I would like your opinion on which one you like. (No LOP questions).

Karl

[Walter Atkinson]

Karl:

IMO, there is no comparison. I have flown behind both and find the Ultra system the best on the market, by far. It is much easier to read and has a much better pilot user interface. I prefer the method that Ultra uses for the alarms functions. I much prefer the installation advantages.

[CO_Skymaster]

Thanks for your replay Walter,

Even though it might be more expensive, I'm leaning toward the Ultra system also.

Karl

[Walter Atkinson]

Originally Posted by CO_Skymaster

Thanks for your replay Walter,

Even though it might be more expensive, I'm leaning toward the Ultra system also.

Karl

Karl:

I have been a big fan of JPI's hardware and have sold many, many units for them and recommended them for more than 15 years. They build very good hardware.

With disclosure, I was deeply involved with the design and certification of the Ultra system. My A36 was used as the test aircraft and I have a LOT of time working with the designers and the FAA during the cert process. I have a LOT of time behind the instrument. I got to help tweak it for pilot interface and engine management issues and how that should display. I am biased.

BUT, IMO educated opinion the Ultra unit is without a doubt the leader in ergonomics and the readability of the data display. It's a breeze to download the data.

[CO_Skymaster]

Thanks Walter,

Thanks for being honest about your involvement with the Ultra system. You may be the perfect person to ask this question. I plan to install an Ultra or JPI system. I am also looking at FADEC when TCM brings it to market, but I might look at a diesel conversion/FADEC power plant. If I did go from a 6 cylinder IO-360 to a 4 cylinder TD300, would changing the Ultra configuration be as simple as installing a new wiring harness to the firewall box and a display software upgrade? Are there plans to have the Ultra system and FADEC systems talk to each other since there are a lot of duplicate sensors? You might not have an answer to these questions, but I figured I'd give it a try. Thanks,

Karl

[Walter Atkinson]

Originally Posted by CO_Skymaster

Thanks Walter,

Thanks for being honest about your involvement with the Ultra system. You may be the perfect person to ask this question. I plan to install an Ultra or JPI system. I am also looking at FADEC when TCM brings it to market, but I might look at a diesel conversion/FADEC power plant. If I did go from a 6 cylinder IO-360 to a 4 cylinder TD300, would changing the Ultra configuration be as simple as installing a new wiring harness to the firewall box and a display software upgrade? Are there plans to have the Ultra system and FADEC systems talk to each other since there are a lot of duplicate sensors? You might not have an answer to these questions, but I figured I'd give it a try. Thanks,

Karl

Karl:

I am not at all impressed with TCM's FADEC as it currently exists. There are some show-stoppper problems with it and it has been a dismal failure in the market place so far. I only know of one private owner who put the TCM FADEC system in their aircraft. They had it removed after about a year. That's a big statement.

If I understand the Ultra system as it stands, changing the configuration from an installed six cylinder to a four cylinder application is very simple. I would check with them directly for a specific answer.

I know that when I was involved with it, there were a lot of things built in for future use. Many things. Many, really cool things. I would suspect that having it talk with a FADEC system (when there is a FADEC system that really works) is not that big of a deal.