Because Owning And Flying Your Beechcraft Can Be Done Safely AND For Less Money!
  Concorde vs. Gill Comparison (Or: Can I use a Concorde Battery in place of a Gill?)




Since buying my first Concorde battery about 16 years ago, my experiences were nothing but positive with their quality and longevity I received from their products. The vast majority of independent tests and forum raves about the Concorde battery continues to reinforce the notion with many pilots that: "If you need a battery, buy a Concorde!"


HERE is a Consumer article on Battery Comparisons


Check out the article  HERE on why AGM battery technology is the way to go.


Many folks, however, have run into a snag in using the Concorde battery in their Baron as the Concorde battery was somehow not "approved" for use in the Baron.


Here is the verbatim guidance from AC23-27, page 12, regarding batteries: "BATTERIES. If one type of series 35 battery (e.g. a Gill 35) is approved as original equipment or a PMA part, and another type of series 35 banery (e.g. a Concord 35) is PMA approved for some aircraft models but not your model aircraft, you may install the alternate type of series 35 battery and document the installation with only a logbook entry. This applies to all series 35 batteries. This philosophy also applies to other series, such as series 25 batteries. However, this part substitution is permissible only as long as the batteries are the same weight, within plus or minus one pound, and have such similar physical characteristics as to enable the use of the same securing or attaching devices, mechanisms, or containers.

Approval: This is a minor alteration and you may document it by a logbook entry. The logbook entry must reference the original and replacement manufacturer's identification or the performance specifications of the original and replacement battery."



NEWS FLASH: Find a Beech drawing showing Concorde as a battery source for Barons HERE


Well, here is a pirep from Baron owner Kevin Morris who took the AC23-27 Rule book to task on a Concorde vs. Gill comparison.


RG24-11 Drawing HERE


RG-35A Drawing HERE


Here is Kevin's story from his post on BeechTalk and his pictures:



Needing two new batteries for our B55 baron and reading all the posts in Beech talk and the Aviation consumer report on batteries I concluded that the Concorde RG25XC batteries would be my next purchase. The only problem was that based on what I read about the weight of the Batteries and the advisory circular from the FAA stating that the batteries could not be + or - one pound of the original equipment (Gill G25) I was concerned about buying the Concorde batteries.


Well I purchased the Concorde Batteries and weighed the old Gill G25 with battery acid and then my new RG25XC and found that both batteries were exactly the same weight and for all intentional purposes were identical in size. Bottom line is that the batteries fit in the battery box and there was no need to modify the battery box or lid with my hold down bars that were factory installed.


The problem that I had encountered from all the website data from Gill was that the battery weighed 21 pounds versus the actual weight when it is filled with battery acid of 22.5 pounds. So bottom line is that you can use either battery and be compliant with AC23-27.





Looks like a winner to me!



Here is some other photo evidence that will qualify under AC23-27, and NOT require some $100 STC piece of paper to put an aviation battery into an aviation application! Gill 242 vs Concorde RG24



Gill 242 Battery @ 28#



Concorde RG24 @ 28#




PS: As of March 2013, my nearly 8 year old Concorde batteries still passed the capacity check! However, in December of 2013 they were showing signs of swelling at the positive terminal posts and were removed from service. Long live the CB25XC battery!


Below are some helpful charts on batteries



HERE is the Concorde Operating Manual for their RG Series batteries.


web statistics