Jump to content

Savannah VG Prop Choice


Bell Driver

Recommended Posts

About to go prop shopping.  Savannah VG with Jabiru 2200.  I'd appreciate members suggestions--what are your favorites?  My bias is toward climb performance.  2 or 3 blade?   Ground adjustable?  If not, size and pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would recommend going to JG's website Stolspeed and reading the Props Comparison (scroll down to find the link on the left):
https://www.stolspeed.com/

It's an interesting and informative read on props, tested on JG's Savannah VG

In fact, the whole site is interesting and informative.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bell, there is real depth of Savannah experience in Australia, while here in New Zealand we are a bit later to the party.
I think I'd be right in saying most Savannahs in this part of the world run 100hp Rotax 912 with a 3-bladed ground adjustable prop.
Bolly, which is an Australian brand, are popular for the local builds, and I have been very happy with mine.
As you can see on this site, there is also real interest in the E prop, which seems to be giving good results on various aircraft.
And there is a fair bit of interesting and useful debate on how to arrive at best pitch.

 

Let us know what you decide, and how you go!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has a Jab engine so only certain props can be used because it is a direct drive engine

 

Eprop are testing props for those style of engines now and will soon release their versions. There will be 2 and 3 blade available I am told

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to have another 15-20 hp (or more), but Jabiru 2200 is running well and problem free, so just looking to get the best possible performance possible from it-recognizing its limitations.  If I were to change engines, the Viking 130 would probably be the frontrunner.  Outstanding  performance in Zenith 701.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Presently using a wood 60X40 (from previous owner).  Climb RPM 2900 (confirmed by Tiny Tach)  Rate < 500fpm at sea level with weight at 1080 (have the increased gross wt. 1234 mod.)  Don't presently have an accurate full throttle, level flight number.  What performance are Jab 2200 operators getting.  Climb  rates of particular interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/04/2021 at 12:23 AM, Bell Driver said:

I'd love to have another 15-20 hp (or more), but Jabiru 2200 is running well and problem free, so just looking to get the best possible performance possible from it-recognizing its limitations.  If I were to change engines, the Viking 130 would probably be the frontrunner.  Outstanding  performance in Zenith 701.

Viking 130 engines, although really good, are heavy.

 

If you changed to a Viking 130, you may just have enough weight remaining for the pilot and the tanks filled with fuel and you'd reach your extended 560 kg (1,234 lb) weight limit. You will only be able to carry a feather for a passenger.

 

 

Edited by eightyknots
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bell, here is a publication from the British Microlight Assoc:

https://www.bmaa.org/files/hads_hm10_savannah.pdf

 

Right at the end are performance figures for the for the VG/Jabiru (but with no information on weight).

 

They quote 860fpm for VG/Jabiru(1-4). If you go to the table near the top (you have to look for the VG, not the plain Savannah), the first has a 65" prop pitched very fine, the second and third have 62" props, and the fourth has 60" pitched fine

 

They then quote 600fpm for VG/Jabiru (5 and LS). These are 61" props pitched medium.

 

These figures are suspiciously rounded and consistent, but it looks from that as though you are better with a slightly larger prop pitched a little fine. Which would make sense: looking at JG's comparative study the only prop that didn't quite perform was the smaller diameter one.

  • Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should add that I don't pretend to know anything about props, Bell, apart from the one I'm currently using.

 

Apparently the standard convention is to measure the pitch at 75% of the radius (out from the centre), but for some reason 2 of those props have been measured at or near the tip, so we can't say what the pitch is when compared to the others.

About all I can make out from that document is that most of the props are slightly larger than what you have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...