![]() |
Mt 3 blade
Since this thread is turning into a prop discussion, what are the thoughts about using a MT 3 bladed prop. I think I remember the weight is 55lbs so it is more inline with the Hartzell. That should help with cg issues. Besides the 12,500 price any other issues?
|
Viking aircraft engines
Take a serious look At the new Viking engines they have been upgraded and include some with turbo charging.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Dave |
Quote:
If you were flying a turboprop, metal vs composite blades wouldn't make any difference as long as the prop is balanced, but not so on piston engines. |
I spoke with several people at Oshkosh about the differences between the Hartzel aluminum prop and the composite. A couple of discussions helped me to decide to spend the extra $ and buy the composite. Specifically, composite props are "smoother" with less vibration transmitted to the airframe and engine environment, leading to fewer engine baffle cracks, etc. The second advantage, according to Hartzel, is that the composite prop leading edge is nickel, which is much harder than aluminum, leading to a reduced chance of prop nicks. Plus, they said if a nick occurred, leading to a crack in the leading edge, it was a simple job to replace the leading edge. Hartzel said by replacing the leading edge at overhaul, you would essentially have new blades. Unfortunately, the difference in cost is non-trivial. :eek:
|
Quote:
|
RV-14A with Superior XP-400
We're building our RV-14A at Synergy in Eugene, OR. This is a followup to my post in Jan 2017. Ultimately we purchased and built our XP-400 at the Superior's build facility in Dallas, TX in Feb 2017. My son and I assembled it in 2 ? days and it started right up in the test cell. We build our experimental planes for "educational & recreational" purposes - why shouldn't the same philosophy apply to our engines! After all, how better to understand, maintain & diagnose our engine than to have put it together ourselves.
This week we finally mounted it to our plane. The Superior A&P's said it was no more difficult than mounting the IO-390. Other than torquing the Dynafocal #1 Bolt adjacent to the #4 Cylinder Pushrod Tube, we had no difficulties. *We used a shaved down box wrench to slip into the narrow space between the pushrod tube and crank case. *I have subsequently learned that Lycoming has a special (expensive) tool just to tighten this nut. We then fit the Hartzell Prop Governor and B & C Alternators (both 60 Amp Boss Mount belt driven primary & 40 amp B/U to the vacuum pump pad) with Vans supplied hardware without difficulty. *The fuel injector line to the #3 cylinder had to be bent slightly to accommodate the Prop Governor cable bracket (which the Lycoming 390 also requires be done). The Vans Firewall Forward Kit supplied baffling fit the XP-400 with minimal trimming - which the Lycoming 390 also requires. *So, all-in-all, I?d say that installing the XP-400 is no more difficult than installing a Lycoming 390. So, in my opinion, the advantages of the XP-400 over the Lycoming 390 are: 15 extra HP Better Oil Path Flow with injectors to cool & lubricate the cylinders P-Mag instead of Slick Magneto Ignition Cold Air Induction Choked Nitrided Cylinders to maintain compression Horizontal,*Aluminum Sump that provides the extra space under the cowling to install Vetterman Exhaust with sound mufflers The opportunity to build the engine at the Dallas facility. Cheaper Price The day after we uncrated our engine, a fellow RV-14A builder at Synergy used our crate to pack up his installed IO-390 and ship it back to Lycoming to have the Connecting Rod wrist pin bushings replaced as required by the new mandatory AD. As Synergy uses a different source for connecting rods & bushings - their engines are not subject to the recall. A quote from my Superior build technician, Darrell Ingle, "we get our SL13923A bushings from a different vendor source than Lycoming so your connecting rods and bushings are good and don't fall under that Service Bulletin." |
I thought we are experimenters, made adaptors to mount 2.5 Subaru STOCK 165HP, wrx engine,to same o-320 engine mount, SDS Computer,to run ignition ,fuel injection, because RV 4, had to build modified cowl,any side by RV would be piece of cake ! Stock headers with,resonators from center pipe, made quieter than 172,,same awesome performance as
any RV 4,yet on car gas/achohol. A real hoot ! Also used stock suby fuel pumps in each tank! Had to plumb return lines for FI...Tom |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:32 AM. |