Jet A Maule

[TomD]

A guy sent me a picture of a M9-230 Maule N305SR in the AOPA Palm Springs aircraft parade with "Jet A" on the cowling and with a BIG air scoop on the bottom of the cowling.

FAA listed it as belonging to Maule Air, Inc. in an Experimental catagory.

Engine type "unknown" Mfg. AMA/EXPR.

Is this the diesel we have been hearing about?

TD

[Kirk]

Yep, sure is.

The performance numbers aren't all that impressive. It would fill the niche for overseas customers that fly where avgas is virtually unavailable.

Stateside, I don't see much advantage, especially if you are weight limited. The Jet fuel weighs more than 10% more than avgas, so when you compare lbs/hr it isn't much more economical.

Still, I sure look hard at any option to 100LL

Kirk

[maules.com]

The engine is by SMA. It is 230hp for 5mins then 205hp, which it can hold to 12,500ft. It is 4cyl with oil cooled heads and no shock cooling, and fewer moving parts and is expected to be a 3000hr tbo. It burns 35% or better, less fuel per hour. The airframe is the new M9 at 2800lb gross. Control of throttle,mixture and prop is one lever and no guessing.
It was flown out to AOPA convention in Palm Springs CA from Moultrie, GA and returned today.
The same engine is certified and STC'd in the C182 which was also on display.

[Wirsig]

Hi Jeremy,
I see your taking orders for the M-9, when will it start rolling off the line? I also read that after the engines been in use for a while they'll turn it up to around 235 hp. Is there anything to that?
Talk to ya later,
wirsig.

[maules.com]

The engine is 230hp for takoff and 5mins then 205hp maintained by turbocharging through 10,500ft I think. The 235hp Lyc is down to about 137hp at 10,500ft. The SMA burns 30 to 40% less fuel though the fuel is a 10% heavier, but the M9 carrys 275lbs more than the M7.
Not sure of delivery dates yet.

[dunbarst]

Jeremy,

How will the price compare with the 235? I've been tooling around in my trusty M-5 but waiting for the upgross and diesel to come out before making a decision.

[a64pilot]

Jeremy,

How will the price compare with the 235?

I'm afraid that is the real question.

[aussieaviator]

Base price will start at $250k

[dunbarst]

Steep but within reason when compared with the competition.

I noticed that the BushHawk is being renamed to Expedition Aircrfat and the cost will go up to ~$450 K. The 206 is still more. I know they are much more aircraft but they are closest real competitors for new airplanes.

[maules.com]

The M9 230 turbo $250,000 at the moment.
M9 260 IO540 $216,900
M9 235 IO540 $201,800
Compare with Topcub or Husky, the above are a bargain.
M7 260C IO540 $196,200
M7 235C IO540 $183,800
M7 260B IO540 $189,200
M7 235B IO540 $177,200
M7 235B O540 $169,200
MX7 180C O360 $158,200
MX7 180B O360 $152,900
M4 180V O360 cs $145,900
M4 180V O360 fp $135,900
MT7 260 IO540 $201,900
MT7 235 IO540 $190,100
MXT7 180 O360 cs $165,200
MXT7 180A O360 fp $149,700


Hope this helps re pricing. Now for the decision...which one.

[Lowflybye]

I'll take one of each...just put it on my tab.

[dunbarst]

Interesting looking at the price list again. The difference between the M9 235 and the M7 235 is 18,000 or more if you get the B model. You'll pay $72 per pound of increased payload. I'll have to ponder that one.

[maules.com]

The M9 has beefed up fuselage carrythrough and tail area, stronger landing gear which is gundrilled for brakeline, beefed up wing spars and ribs and many years of R and D plus certification costs. The B gear is not available for the M9. The M7 is 2500lb wheels and 2750 on floats.
The M9 is 2800lb wheels and 3100lb planned for floats which will make it an attractive amphib relative to the new C182 on wipaire amphibs which only has 575lb useful.

[morrisond]

Any other info on the M9/235/260 specs?

Actual Useful Load?
Takeoff and Land over 50' obstacle?

[maules.com]

Performance figures are not yet officially test flown.
At same weights as M7's the takeoff and climb and landing will be the same but as we know from aeronautical math a 10% gross wt increase = 18% takeoff increase and 10% landing increase for most pilots.
The Diesel will be different as it does'nt lose hp because of turbo normalizing like the gasoline engines which lose approx 3+% of hp per 1000ft alt. which = 8% takeoff increase.
The Diesel should out perform the 235hp from 4500ft up and the 260hp from 5500ft up.
I don't have the M9-230 empty weight yet though the M9 235 and 260 will be about 15lbs heavier than the M7 C models with a useful increase of about 285lbs on wheels and 300lbs on floats.