On Jul 12, 7:39*am, Stealth Pilot
wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:40:54 -0500, "Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net
wrote:







wrote in message
....

I can understand why a poor -- as in not smooth -- paint job would
alter the prop's efficiency, but never would have guessed having a
fractional mm of paint ablated from the leading edge of the prop would
affect it that much. Tongue in cheek question -- did the natural color
of the prop clash with that color and scare the air, or something?

On a serious note, have you any thoughts as to why such a minor change
in shape would have such a remarkable change in efficiency? A 5 knot
change in airspeed is like reducing the manifold an inch or so, isn't
it? That's huge! It also suggests there may be very minor changes in
prop that could improve performance too.

---------------------------------------------------

You are absolutely right, and his is just exaggerating again as usual.

Just keep an eye on his posts, you will come to expect it in time.

unlike retards like you maxie I actually regularly fly and have a real
life. I have no need to exaggerate. life is sweet enough for me using
the real numbers.

Stealth Pilot- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So of the 2 props, 58" and 60" Which would be considered the cruise
and which is the performance ?
Or are they not far enough apart to tell the difference ?