VAF Forums

VAF Forums (https://vansairforce.net/community/index.php)
-   RV-14 (https://vansairforce.net/community/forumdisplay.php?f=109)
-   -   RV-14 Engine choice (https://vansairforce.net/community/showthread.php?t=98748)

kaber56 09-28-2016 10:33 AM

Make sure it is an A1D6. The A1B6 as in the C177RG does not have a front governor pad. The engine MUST have a front governor pad (if you are going to be using a constant speed prop).

SabreFlyr 09-28-2016 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaber56 (Post 1114915)
Make sure it is an A1D6. The A1B6 as in the C177RG does not have a front governor pad. The engine MUST have a front governor pad (if you are going to be using a constant speed prop).

That's confusing! It's my understanding that the IO-360-A1B6 that Van's sells, and used in the -14 prototype, has the front governor pad. The following Wikipedia page (which could ABSOLUTELY be wrong) indicates that the -A1B6D used in the 177RG differs from the -A1B6 only in the type of mag:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ariants#IO-360

(And, I'll sheepishly admit that it was another Wikipedia page that I used to determine that the 177RG uses the -A1B6D. :o)

EDIT: Okay, I think I must have referenced an incorrect post that it was the -A1B6 in the -14 prototype. The Wiki page I reference above also indicates that it's the -A1D6 that has the front governor, not the -A1B6. At the same time, I've seen multiple references to the IO-360 from the Mooneys and Cardinal RGs being suitable engines for the -14/-14A. And, more hearsay, that the IO-390 being used to re-engine those same airplanes. I bow out of the discussion now. I'm obviously passing on too much bum info! :o

pazmanyflyer 09-28-2016 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flywade4 (Post 1114821)
I have a Low time IO 360 in my 177RG that I want to use, What do I need to know?

Straight from Vans on their FB page.

"One of the most important red flags is the location of the propeller governor. The IO-360-A1D6, like the IO-390, has the governor mounted on the front left side of the crankcase. Many, probably the majority, of IO-360s have governors mounted on the rear accessory case, where it physically interferes with the steel engine mount/nose gear of the RV-14A and causes many ducting/wiring/routing problems for the RV-14. From what we can tell, it is not feasible to convert a rear governor engine to the forward governor configuration. We recommend that RV-14 builders avoid IO-360s with rear-mounted governors."

The full version here: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.p...21827541221519

Bigortho 01-07-2017 12:03 PM

RV Engine Choices
 
Van?s Forum is filled with pages of discussion about which engine to buy, because builders want either a cheaper engine or a more modern engine than the Lycoming IO-390 sold by Vans. I too have been tempted by either the Titan 370 or the Superior XP-400 because they are advertised as being more advanced than the IO-390 as they come equipped with Nitrided Cylinders, counterbalanced crankshafts, roller tappets, weight matched components (pistons, rods, etc) and burn premium grade ethanol free mogas.

In addition Superior and Titan would let you build your own engine in their engine school, which would enable you to maintain it. However, after Continental bought Titan, they did away with engine school, but Superior will still allow you to observe or assist your engine build. Both engines are significantly cheaper than Vans Lycoming.

There are many arguments against using these alternative engines. The Titan attaches it?s constant speed propeller governor on right rear pad, where it interferes with the engine mount. In addition the Titan weighs 25 pounds less than the IO-390, which can lead to center of gravity problems. People who have installed the Titan report that expenses of modifying the firewall forward package have eaten their cost savings. The Superior engine is 2 inches longer than the IO-390, which will result in interference with the fit of the cowl. Lastly mogas isn?t a realistic fuel alternative as finding it when flying cross country is nearly impossible.

As for engine school, Lycoming offers both engine maintenance and engine assembly/disassembly courses, which will enable you to maintain your engine.

All this Sturm und Drang has been caused by Lycoming?s awful website, which offers little information and specifications. You can?t even find Lycoming?s publication Certificated Aircraft Engines SSP ? 110 on their site. You can download the June 2010 version here:

http://www.readbag.com/lycoming-supp...sources-ssp110

Now the good news: I need not have been concerned about IO-390?s modern features. After speaking with Lycoming?s technical support I learned that the Lycoming IO-390 engine has all the advanced features that we need. Vans sells the Lycoming model XIO-390-A3B6 RT, which comes with nitrided cylinders. A3B6 RT indicates that the governor is mounted on the left front of the engine, the propeller flange bushings are reindexed, the crankshaft counterbalanced with 1/6 & 1/8 order counterweights and the push rods have roller tappets.

If you want polished ports; pistons, pins & connecting rod?s all weight matched to 1/2 gram: order the Thunder Bolt version of the IO-390, which starts at $39,700. You can substitute E-Mags for the magnetos for an additional charge of $2,400. As for me, I plan on purchasing the IO-390 from Vans as soon as Lycoming announces it?s Sun ?n Fun show price.

Hartzell's composite propeller costs twice as much as it's 74 inch IO-390 aluminum propeller. As opposed to the 360, the aluminum propeller has no RPM restrictions when running on the 390.

See chart on next page: 


Engine Comparison


Manufacturer Lycoming Superior Titan
Designation XIO-390-A3B6 RT XP-400 IOX-370-A4H1N

Bore (inches) 5.319 5.126
Stroke (inches) 4.375 4.375
Displacement 389 400 361
Length (inches) 30.7 32.8 29.07
Width (inches) 34.25 34.3 33.41
Height (inches) 19.35 24 24.8
Dry weight (lbs) 308 310 283
Mount Dynafocal-1 Dynafocal-1 Dynafocal-1
Fuel system Injection Injection Injection
Fuel type 100LL 100LL/Mogas 91 100LL/Mogas 93
Cooling system Air Cooled Air Cooled Air Cooled

Power at 2700 rpm 210 215 200
Specific pwr: hp/in? 0.54 0.54 0.55
Compression ratio 8.70:1 8.90:1 9.6:1
Pwr/weight: hp/lb 0.68 0.69 0.71

Cost 38,700 34,500 30,300

Prop Governor Front Left Right Rear

Av8rRob 07-28-2017 10:45 AM

Any engine updates at Oshkosh '17?
 
Just curious if anyone learned anything new about our -14 engine options at Oshkosh?

Thanks

czechsix 07-29-2017 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Av8rRob (Post 1191145)
Just curious if anyone learned anything new about our -14 engine options at Oshkosh?

I spent all week at OSH and if there's anything new with respect to engines suitable for the -14 I didn't hear about it. Van's is running the usual show special on IO-390 with Hartzell metal prop. It's not clear whether that deal is negotiated by Vans or between Lycoming and Hartzell, but I sure wish they'd offer a Lycoming/Whirlwind combo so we could get a modern composite prop. The Hartzell is the cheapest but it's heavy, transmits lots of vibration back into the airframe (typical of any metal prop), and worst of all the blade hub seals tend to dry out if you don't get it flying soon enough and then you've gotta pull the prop off and have it torn down to replace them. Kiss your $1000 savings goodbye...been there, done that, and Hartzell shows no inclination to fix the issue even though they've known about it for decades. So...the bundled deal is the cheapest option up front but has its drawbacks unfortunately...

Carl Froehlich 07-29-2017 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by czechsix (Post 1191403)
SNIP but I sure wish they'd offer a Lycoming/Whirlwind combo so we could get a modern composite prop. SNIP...

Considering the Whirlwind 650 hour/5 year teardown and cost, I offer the Hartzell is the better value. I have a lot of hours behind this prop in the RV8A and RV-10, and my third Hartzell BA prop just arrived for the new RV-8 project. I've never had any issues with hub seals or anything else.

Carl

rwtalbot 07-29-2017 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by czechsix (Post 1191403)
I sure wish they'd offer a Lycoming/Whirlwind combo so we could get a modern composite prop.

For most of us the Hartzell prop sold by Vans provides the best performance, is more durable and costs the least to buy and own.

Whirlwind have significantly higher overhaul requirements. Depending upon the model the Whirlwind gives you 3-5 years and between 400-650 hours. There are quite a few reports of premature failures - loose blades, grease leakage etc. In Australia we get 10 years and 2,000 hours on Hartzell even on a certified aircraft. One of the main reasons is that the Harzell can be re-greased at annual.

No composite blade will do well with stone damage. They cost lots of money when the nickel leading edge gets cracked and you will be out of action until it is repaired. Not ideal on an -A model RV with limited ground clearance. Taildraggers tend to do better.

Of course, the composite props are lighter, produce fewer vibrations and are great for aerobatics where the gyroscopic forces are low. They are quieter for our friends in Europe. Is it worth the additional inconvenience and cost for a composite propeller? That's up to each builder.

czechsix 07-29-2017 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Froehlich (Post 1191426)
Considering the Whirlwind 650 hour/5 year teardown and cost, I offer the Hartzell is the better value. I have a lot of hours behind this prop in the RV8A and RV-10, and my third Hartzell BA prop just arrived for the new RV-8 project. I've never had any issues with hub seals or anything else.

If I recall correctly Hartzell has a TBO of something like 6 years but I've never met anyone in either the experimental or certified world who actually does that, and neither do the Whirlwind owners. As for the issues with slinging grease on the Hartzell, it's well documented by many owners, I think Tim Olson has written about it in his blog and plenty of instances in the VAF and Matronics forums. I suspect you are getting your airplanes flying more quickly than the average homebuilder if you've had three of them and no problems so far...

czechsix 07-29-2017 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwtalbot (Post 1191432)
Whirlwind have significantly higher overhaul requirements. Depending upon the model the Whirlwind gives you 3-5 years and between 400-650 hours. There are quite a few reports of premature failures - loose blades, grease leakage, etc

Are those failures on recent 200RV and 74RV models? I know there were some issues like that with the earlier WW 151s about a decade ago but thought those problems had been resolved. If not it looks like I'll have to pick my poison when it comes time to buy a CS prop for my -14...


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:32 AM.