Other than JPI, who else is there?

I have no complaints whatsoever with JPI tech support. I'm not sure
what the hub-bub is about, but I for sure didn't get any bad support.

I think the "hubbub" came about when they decided to make their data
format proprietary. JPI had every right to do that, and they furnish
a free viewer that also saves the data in xls format, but there was
one of these multi-day 200 entry discussions on rap about heartless
they were not to listen to everybody that was happy with what they
had.

Paul kgyy wrote:

I have no complaints whatsoever with JPI tech support. I'm not sure
what the hub-bub is about, but I for sure didn't get any bad support.


I think the "hubbub" came about when they decided to make their data
format proprietary. JPI had every right to do that, and they furnish
a free viewer that also saves the data in xls format, but there was
one of these multi-day 200 entry discussions on rap about heartless
they were not to listen to everybody that was happy with what they
had.

That's not exactly why. I was a member of the Cessna Pilots Assoc at
the time and they had one of their senior people in the company at the
time come on to the CPA forums(CPA provides free membership to industry
reps) and basically tell everybody there they didn't know their ass from
a hole in the ground. Absolutely zero skills in interacting with the
customer. It's our way or the highway. My local avionics shop, which
is one of the largest in the experimental field, will tell you the same
thing. The upper management of JPI could not possibly care less what
you think and they let you know that at every opportunity. I wouldn't
have believed what they did on the CPA forums if I didn't see it for
myself. I will never put any of their crap in my plane.

Paul kgyy wrote:

I have no complaints whatsoever with JPI tech support. I'm not sure
what the hub-bub is about, but I for sure didn't get any bad support.

I think the "hubbub" came about when they decided to make their data
format proprietary. JPI had every right to do that, and they furnish
a free viewer that also saves the data in xls format, but there was
one of these multi-day 200 entry discussions on rap about heartless
they were not to listen to everybody that was happy with what they
had.

Actually, the bad rap that JPI has came years ago when they sued a
maker of fuel flow instruments for experimental aircraft over the name
of a product. The maker (Matronics) had something called (IIRC) "Flowscan".
JPI wanted to name their new device "Floscan" and sued the smaller company
into changing the name. It was considered an exceedingly unwarranted suit
by many.

I may have the details wrong, but thats how I remember it happening.


--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Boise, ID

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
news:000f01c7e25a$7191c0e0$4b01a8c0@omnibook6100.. .
Other than the JPI EDM line of engine analyzers, what other
manufacturers are out there with good, reliable, full featured products
for a big bore Continental?


I'd recommend looking at Electronics International http://www.buy-ei.com/

Their products are good and their customer support is the greatest.

Dennis

One other BIG difference between EI and JPI:
JPI probes are grounded through their sheath, while EI probes are
electrically isolated from their sheath. There are large currents
that flow in the engine and airframe due to where the alternator and
battery are located, and because the airframe is used as a grounding
path. The resulting ground voltage drops create ground loops between
the various JPI probes, while EI avoids this problem by isolating
their probes. JPI installations can be very troublesome get working
properly. As a retired instrumentation engineer, dealing with low-
level analog sensing methods most of my working life, you couldn't
give me JPI system...

mikem wrote:

One other BIG difference between EI and JPI:
JPI probes are grounded through their sheath, while EI probes are
electrically isolated from their sheath. There are large currents
that flow in the engine and airframe due to where the alternator and
battery are located, and because the airframe is used as a grounding
path. The resulting ground voltage drops create ground loops between
the various JPI probes, while EI avoids this problem by isolating
their probes. JPI installations can be very troublesome get working
properly. As a retired instrumentation engineer, dealing with low-
level analog sensing methods most of my working life, you couldn't
give me JPI system...


IF you follow the JPI installation instructions, including wiring the
ground to the engine block, not to the panel ground, it works fine right
out of the box. If you don't ground the instrument to the engine block
per the instructions, you'll have the problems you described.

For a 6 cylinder system, the JPI offers more functionality, as the EI
system is limited to 16 measurements, 12 of which are used for the EGTs
and CHTs on a six cylinder engine. Add oil temp, carb temp, voltage
monitor and OAT and you've used up all the spare capacity. I'm a happy
JPI customer and would buy one of their units again.