Here's some analysis on time to climb and fuel consumption in my LIVP during a controlled ascent of 10,000' (from 6000' MSL to 16000' MSL) in both Lean of Peak (LOP) and Rich of Peak (ROP) engine configuations.

This test occurred over Pennsylvania 3/7/09, fixed heading (350*), fully configured and stabilized in level flight (6000' MSL) at 34.8" MAP and fuel flow, followed by a pitch up (over a known GPS reference point) and climb (to 16000' MSL) either LOP (18.2 gph) or ROP (34.2 gph).  Winds were light out of the northwest (a quartering headwind), remained consistent during both tests;  temps were above ISO.  The test was conducted over a 32 min span of time.  Engine: TSIO-550E.

10,000' climb at 34.8" MAP

Fuel flow 18.3 gph (estimate 100*F LOP)

Time Required: 11:28 min

Distance Downrange: 30.9 nm

Airspeed during climb: 152-157 KIAS (Calculated Groundspeed: 161)

Indicated VSI: 600-900 fpm (Calculated: 870 fpm)

Fuel Burn: 3.5 gallons (confirmed with totalizer)

Highest CHT Temp: 360*F (CHT2)

10,000' climb at 34.8" MAP

Fuel flow 34.2 gph (Mixture full in)

Time Required: 9:07 min

Distance Downrange: 26.5 nm

Airspeed during climb: 160 KIAS initially, but 165 KIAS last 1:30 min due to CHT2 >410*F

Indicated VSI: 1000-1400 fpm (Calculated: 1100 fpm)

Fuel Burn: 5.2 gallons (confirmed with totalizer)

Highest CHT Temp: 412*F (CHT2)

Immediate LOP to 18.3 gph

Proceeded to 30.9 nm down range

Additional time required in level flight: 1:17 min

Additional fuel required in level flight (LOP): 0.4 gallons

Total time to reach 30.9 nm down range: ROP 10:24 min (versus LOP 11:28 min)

Total fuel burn to reach 30.9 nm and 10,000' gain: ROP 5.6 gal (vs LOP 3.5 gal)

LOP during climb consumes 37% less fuel and only extends travel time 11%.

CHT are much better LOP during the climb.

Jeff Liegner

LIVP in New Jersey