Propellor Overhaule or New ?

[cooker]

Hello again all.

I am still working at making a deal on a 1980 M5-235C.
After reviewing the logs i have found out the following.
Original Hub Model HC-C2YR-1BF
Original Hub Serial Number: CH25044
Original Blade Model: F8468A-6R
Original Blade Serial Numbers: E52539 and E52567

The propeller log did not start until 1990 and the highlights in it are as follows:

1990 - at 810 tach time the propellor had an overhaul and lists a propellor Serial number of CH3508 *** Note this is different from original which is not supprising as from what i understand the original likely had an AD which forced the change ... but i am not certain.

2002 - at 1371 tach time propellor was in for a re-seal ... service tag shows propellor model as HC-C2YK-1BF and serial no. CH3508

2003 - at 1600 tach time propellor was dynamically ballanced.

Currently 1750 tach time

The problem is when the aircraft is imported to Canada I will at minimum need to overhaul the propellor ... approximately 2500$.

After talking to a number of different propellor shops in the US as well as Canada it seems as though not a lot of faith should be put in the "old hub". The advice i am getting is that if more money than the 2500$ for a basic overhaul is required one should really consider a new propellor all together.

At this point we need more information on the condition of the propellor but that is unknown.

What are your experiences overhauling the propellor in question and costs?

Assuming a new propellor is required which one is recomended. My personal feeling is the hartzel propellor is to much money ... 10K. I have heard that a 3 blade is actually cheeper to buy but requires more $$$ for upkeep. What is the best bang for your buck in the propellor world .... please remember that the M5 would be destined for amphibious floats in the next 5 years or so.


Thanks for all your help guys.

[belandd]

I would go with the three blade. It will give you more ground clearence, more take off thrust and be smoother. May be some loss of max air speed.

Increase in resale value.

Looks cool.

New is better than o/h.

I can only imagine that three blades will cost more to o/h or reseal then two because of the numbers of blades.

I don't know about the requirements for the gov (Palin?). I would recommend a new one also to avoid the concerns about reliability.

Good luck on your project.

[aero101]

That overhaul price is still less then half price of cheapest propeller you're gonna buy new. You've already got the updated blades which gets rid of one AD and for another $1000 you can upgrade the hub and get rid of the AD for the repetitive eddy current inspection as well, and still much cheaper then new prop so long as the blades are ok? If going to floats I wouldn't bother with the Hartzell you have either, as if going to floats you'll probably want to go to a longer seaplane prop. The 2 or 3 Blade is kind of debatable item performance wise for floats. Been my experience the longer 2 blade does better, but you'll find people that swear by the 3 blade as well.

[Hottshot]

If you are going to use for Bush work the 3 blade presents it's own issues of replacment in the field as you are not able to get a 3 blade in a airplane with out hacking a blade to get it home and back out is another issue, the 2 blade gives you the option if needed. 3 blade is heavy-er but smooth for sure, if cost is a major issue go rebuild like jim said if you want the best performance go with a MAC 2 or 3 blade depending on your requirements