|
|
I don't know if you've concidered this but, if it was me building an ES or a IV and I was looking for a engine for it, I'd be leaning towards a 20B rotary. It's basically the same engine as a 13B [which came in all of the 80's & 90's Rx-7's] with an extra rotor, making it a three rotor. I would think 300hp should be no problem. There are Rv's flying w/ 2 rotors making over 200hp, adding the third rotor and the power is basically scaled linearly, making it around 300hp. They are light and super compact, and there a fair amount of 'off the shelf' item's one can buy to use in your FWF build, and more coming out all the time. There is also someone currently on the list who has a ES with a 20B and is very close to flying. I'll let him pipe up, if he so chooses.
Jarrett Johnson
235/320 55%
I wrote:
>>If I needed a big 6-cylinder engine for my aircraft, I would not
choose a fuel-injected Continental.<<
George Braly asks:
> So which large bore six cylinder engine would you select - - and why
> do you think it is "better" ?
I have not been shopping for a 6-cylinder engine. I have been reading
what Lancair builders have to say about theirs. For reasons that have
been thoroughly discussed already, I am convinced that the Continental
fuel-injection system is a bad design. If I were shopping for an enginefor my Legacy / LIV / LIVP, I would consider...
a) Continental (T)IO-550 with a separate fuel-pressure regulation system so that flawed system only has to deal with one fuel pressure. Better because I can leave the fuel pump running and not have the
engine quit.
b) Continental xO-550 (where x is some fuel delivery system other
than the stock Continental). Better because the fuel mixture
is determined by the fuel need (e.g. MAP and RPM).
c) Lycoming IO-540, which has a fuel injection system that is more
closely based on right parameters.
Better because it is readily available, fits the space, and has
a fuel injection system that doesn't suck as badly.
d) Some other ~300 HP engine... possibly a Subaru H-6 with a
turbo or supercharger. That would be an adaptation of the
Eggenfellner Subaru package for the RV-10. Better because
it has much better fuel flow control, is smoother, and is
less expensive, but is electricity dependent and heavy.
e) Maybe by the time I build a bigger Lancair, there will be a
good firewall-forward package based on the Chevy LS series
aluminum V8 engines. Better? I don't know.
If I were building an aircraft that needed an engine in this range,
those are the choices I would consider initially. With further
research something else might appear better.
George - I applaud all that you have done to improve fuel economy,
the fuel distribution in aircraft engines, and to improve the state
of understanding among pilots and mechanics. PRISM is another step
in the right direction. Perhaps GAMI could profitably fit a better
injection system to a Continental engine and make it a better engine.
--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
|
|