What do you want in an engine monitor?

[Will Kumley]

I've searched the forum for "engine monitor" and even searched specific engine monitors but I'm curious:
-If you were to purchase an engine monitor for a 60 year old plane with an O-235 in it, what features would you consider most important?
-A friend on the field is trying hard to push me towards a very basic setup like the Insight G2 but I see it is missing things like RPM, Oil Temp, Oil pressure and a slew of other features in more expensive engine monitors. Is it worth the additional cost to get those in an engine monitor as well?
-The Insight G3 and the CGR-30P (Premium) appear to record very similar parameters. Is the roughly $700 difference (Spruce) worth the added benefit of being able to remove older gauges in the panel? Or are there features on the G3 you would prefer to have over the CGR-30P?

*Extra points if you're an A&P or IA and have real world reasons for your opinion.

 

[Ed Haywood]

1. Display size.
2. Approved as primary.
3. Fuel flow.

My advice is don't buy one without looking at the display in person.

 

[Will Kumley]

My advice is don't buy one without looking at the display in person.

My friend has a G2 in his plane and loves it. I've looked at it once, briefly and while its not a large display, its fine for a 2 seat airplane. He thinks the G3 is too cluttered for its size though. All three options I discussed have fuel flow but the EI is the only one approved as primary and it has a larger screen. Just trying to determine if the added cost is worth it.

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

The upside of a new digital primary is the ability to ditch older analog gauges, thus clean panel and less to fix. The upside of non-primary is that you have redundancy with the old stuff.

The downside of new digital primary is that you don’t have redundancy. The downside of non-primary is that you still have old gauges that if they go out you’re not legal and gotta get fixed.

You gotta decide if legality or peace of mind is more important to you when SHTF or you’re stuck somewhere.

I selected JPI EDM-830 so I maintained redundancy in-flight, plus I wouldn’t have to fiddle with buttons to switch screens to get the info I wanted.

 

[MountainDude]

Insight G2 is perfect for me: 6CHTs, 6 EGTs, FF, fuel totalizer, carb temp, bus voltage, and OAT. Everything I need, nothing I don't, $3,000 installed with parts and labor.

 

[Clip4]

I've searched the forum for "engine monitor" and even searched specific engine monitors but I'm curious:
-If you were to purchase an engine monitor for a 60 year old plane with an O-235 in it, what features would you consider most important?
-A friend on the field is trying hard to push me towards a very basic setup like the Insight G2 but I see it is missing things like RPM, Oil Temp, Oil pressure and a slew of other features in more expensive engine monitors. Is it worth the additional cost to get those in an engine monitor as well?
-The Insight G3 and the CGR-30P (Premium) appear to record very similar parameters. Is the roughly $700 difference (Spruce) worth the added benefit of being able to remove older gauges in the panel? Or are there features on the G3 you would prefer to have over the CGR-30P?

*Extra points if you're an A&P or IA and have real world reasons for your opinion.

I would not put an engine monitor on a O-235.

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

I would not put an engine monitor on a O-235.

You bring up an excellent consideration - if these engines are the ones that are in 152s that are in primary private pilot training, they are always under the abuse of student pilots and their 250 hour CFIs that many times don’t pass on engine management knowledge. These engines seem to last in that training environment without reference to any instrument indications. Could they last longer if better “managed”? I dunno. No leaning, “red box” leaning, shock cooling, 2000 rpm cold starts, flooding, etc., they seem to make TBO?

 

[Jim_R]

-The Insight G3 and the CGR-30P (Premium) appear to record very similar parameters. Is the roughly $700 difference (Spruce) worth the added benefit of being able to remove older gauges in the panel? Or are there features on the G3 you would prefer to have over the CGR-30P?

This does not address your primary points, but a piece of data (pun intended) on the G3 that I wish I knew before I purchased it:

For some absolutely stupid reason, there is no mode that allows RPM and Carb Temp to be visible "at the same time"--even on different screens/displays.

Instead, there is one screen that has a slot for either RPM or Carb Temp, and you can choose between them if you go into setup as the G3 boots up--it's not practical to toggle that setting during flight.

I have made many requests to Insight over the years for them to change that behavior and allow Carb Temp to be displayed elsewhere--even if I have to scroll to a different screen to see it--but that request has fallen on deaf ears.

I love the form factor of the G3, and am happy with everything else it does, but that Carb Temp limitation is a significant disappointment--moreso because it's so unnecessary! I guess maybe if my engine ever stops due to a frozen carb and I crash and die, the NTSB might be able to retrieve the card and get a clue about what happened, so the feature is not completely useless, but...it is nearly so.

 

[Will Kumley]

The upside of a new digital primary is the ability to ditch older analog gauges, thus clean panel and less to fix. The upside of non-primary is that you have redundancy with the old stuff.

The downside of new digital primary is that you don’t have redundancy. The downside of non-primary is that you still have old gauges that if they go out you’re not legal and gotta get fixed.

You gotta decide if legality or peace of mind is more important to you when SHTF or you’re stuck somewhere.

I selected JPI EDM-830 so I maintained redundancy in-flight, plus I wouldn’t have to fiddle with buttons to switch screens to get the info I wanted.

Great points. I like redundancy, but I also like simplicity. To be honest, even if I go with a digital primary I still plan to keep the factory tach at the very least and if I remove any primary gauge it'll be the oil temp/pressure gauge.

 

[Will Kumley]

I would not put an engine monitor on a O-235.

Curious as to the reasoning on this. Is it because the O-235 is a low HP engine? Great record of reaching TBO? My thoughts are that an engine monitor gives peace of mind that everything is functioning properly as well as the ability to troubleshoot any issues before they become bigger issues. Am I overthinking the idea of taking care of the engine in my plane?

 

[Will Kumley]

This does not address your primary points, but a piece of data (pun intended) on the G3 that I wish I knew before I purchased it:

For some absolutely stupid reason, there is no mode that allows RPM and Carb Temp to be visible "at the same time"--even on different screens/displays.

Instead, there is one screen that has a slot for either RPM or Carb Temp, and you can choose between them if you go into setup as the G3 boots up--it's not practical to toggle that setting during flight.

I have made many requests to Insight over the years for them to change that behavior and allow Carb Temp to be displayed elsewhere--even if I have to scroll to a different screen to see it--but that request has fallen on deaf ears.

I love the form factor of the G3, and am happy with everything else it does, but that Carb Temp limitation is a significant disappointment--moreso because it's so unnecessary! I guess maybe if my engine ever stops due to a frozen carb and I crash and die, the NTSB might be able to retrieve the card and get a clue about what happened, so the feature is not completely useless, but...it is nearly so.

That is an interesting dilemma. I'm guessing the setup section doesn't allow you to assign what you want in the data blocks across the top of the G3.

 

[Dave Palacios]

I've searched the forum for "engine monitor" and even searched specific engine monitors but I'm curious:
-If you were to purchase an engine monitor for a 60 year old plane with an O-235 in it, what features would you consider most important?
-A friend on the field is trying hard to push me towards a very basic setup like the Insight G2 but I see it is missing things like RPM, Oil Temp, Oil pressure and a slew of other features in more expensive engine monitors. Is it worth the additional cost to get those in an engine monitor as well?
-The Insight G3 and the CGR-30P (Premium) appear to record very similar parameters. Is the roughly $700 difference (Spruce) worth the added benefit of being able to remove older gauges in the panel? Or are there features on the G3 you would prefer to have over the CGR-30P?

*Extra points if you're an A&P or IA and have real world reasons for your opinion.

A side of cost, (initial purchase, installation cost) a consideration is why you want a monitor. Some people just like the idea of having an additional light up instrument for looks, and seldom really use it. If you are interested in monitoring engine health, well you have the original factory instrumentation which for a non turbo 4 cylinder should be adequate. however if your legacy instruments are as old as the plane and never had an overhaul (which can be expensive, especially if all the instruments are done at once. and then you still have old instruments that will need overhaul again at some point) having accurate indications of oil pres & temp, CHT, EGT, and fuel flow (probably just as important as the other parameters). A monitor that gives you all these parameters and is STC'd as primary would be best because you can replace the old instruments, not only providing you with panel space but may prevent having to do pannel surgery (cuting the metal portion of the inst panel to fit "Additional instrument). As for brand I don't have experience "flying behind many" but I have installed EI & JP instruments Personally I like JP I not sure this would make a difference to you but the jpi harness is more flexible and for this reason the install is cleaner. both companies make primary units as well as secondary units. Again I would recommend a primary monitor, you don't need duplicate indications especially if one set is old and accuracy is questionable.

 

[Jim_R]

That is an interesting dilemma. I'm guessing the setup section doesn't allow you to assign what you want in the data blocks across the top of the G3.

Yes. The only option for displaying Carb Temp is on the "main" EGT/CHT monitoring screen. It can be placed at the top center, replacing the RPM reading. But that's also the only place that RPMs can be displayed, so it's a trade-off. Neither RPM nor Carb Temp appear on any other display--you'd think maybe CT would at least appear on the probe diagnostics screen, but it isn't even there. It's like that probe was added as an afterthought so they could say they have one and then mostly just ignored.

Unfortunately it never occurred to me that a company would be that dumb or dishonest, so I didn't think to check that all of the probes were actually useable. Buyer beware if Carb Temp is important to you.

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

For the G3 on a 4 cylinder, could you just use Cyl 5 or 6 for other temp like carb?

 

[Ed Haywood]

You bring up an excellent consideration - if these engines are the ones that are in 152s that are in primary private pilot training, they are always under the abuse of student pilots and their 250 hour CFIs that many times don’t pass on engine management knowledge. These engines seem to last in that training environment without reference to any instrument indications. Could they last longer if better “managed”? I dunno. No leaning, “red box” leaning, shock cooling, 2000 rpm cold starts, flooding, etc., they seem to make TBO?

IMO pilots and owners tend to overthink small engine management. A frequently used engine will withstand all kinds of "abuse", which is really just normal flight operations for the unfussy. Mike-Busch-level data analysis is overkill for an O-235.

But there are other good reasons to have a monitor, such as early warning of inflight issues, more efficient leaning, and more accurate tracking of fuel remaining.

You may not NEED a monitor, but there is nothing wrong with wanting one. I enjoy flying more and am more confident in my engine decisions now that I have one.

 

[Ed Haywood]

G3 presentation of engine gauge info was the main reason I did not seriously consider it. Much prefer the larger color-coded dials and sliders that EI and JPI use.

 

[Jim_R]

For the G3 on a 4 cylinder, could you just use Cyl 5 or 6 for other temp like carb?

Maybe. But if you learn this after the fact like me, then repinning the connector is a PITA way to try it and find out. Regardless, even if that works it's a stupid thing for the end user to have to do to kludge around a stupid software design.

 

[Ed Haywood]

A side of cost, (initial purchase, installation cost) a consideration is why you want a monitor. Some people just like the idea of having an additional light up instrument for looks, and seldom really use it. If you are interested in monitoring engine health, well you have the original factory instrumentation which for a non turbo 4 cylinder should be adequate. however if your legacy instruments are as old as the plane and never had an overhaul (which can be expensive, especially if all the instruments are done at once. and then you still have old instruments that will need overhaul again at some point) having accurate indications of oil pres & temp, CHT, EGT, and fuel flow (probably just as important as the other parameters). A monitor that gives you all these parameters and is STC'd as primary would be best because you can replace the old instruments, not only providing you with panel space but may prevent having to do pannel surgery (cuting the metal portion of the inst panel to fit "Additional instrument). As for brand I don't have experience "flying behind many" but I have installed EI & JP instruments Personally I like JP I not sure this would make a difference to you but the jpi harness is more flexible and for this reason the install is cleaner. both companies make primary units as well as secondary units. Again I would recommend a primary monitor, you don't need duplicate indications especially if one set is old and accuracy is questionable.

I have redundant gauges. It's an eye opener comparing digital to analog and seeing how inaccurate the analogs are and how much they lag.

I do like having both. For some operations, like aerobatics, a quick eyeball of the steam gauges is easier than sorting through all the data on the monitors. I also like having mechanical MAP and RPM in case I have to shut down the electrical system.

I have a non-primary monitor (JPI 830). If I did it again, I would probably get a primary monitor and leave selected gauges in as backup. But my panel is very space constrained, and I could have used those extra gauge holes for other stuff.

 

[bradg33]

Primary replacement, IMHO, should be the main consideration. It's basically the same amount of work to install an "advisory" monitor vs. a full primary replacement one (other than the work to remove the other gauges). Plus, with a primary replacement, you can get the live fuel and oil lines out of the cockpit.

I'm a big fan of the CGR30P series; I've had 2 airplanes with them (A single with a 1-screen setup, and a twin with a 3-screen setup) and I'm about to buy a 3-screen setup for my new airplane.

 

[TCABM]

The first question I have is what’s the use case for replacing or adding to your existing stuff.

 

[Skyrys62]

Feel free to add to the lists...

Pros: (some subjective)
More panel space
Newer sensors/gauges
More accuracy (assumed)
Added information
Info all in one spot (mostly, depending on what you choose to do)
Nicer looks
Data history/analysis
Warnings/alerts
Peace of mind
It's a new toy!
Added resale value

Cons:
Initial cost and time
Less redundancy
Harder to read, maybe
Some people will tell you you wasted your money.


You're going to spend the money on something, might as well be your airplane