VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Model Specific > RV-14
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-30-2014, 09:51 PM
Bernard Hartnell Bernard Hartnell is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Grand Junction, CO
Posts: 65
Default Port polish and balancing

All you have to do, is stick your finger inside a jug to feel the profound shape and smooth or roughness difference between a jug that was done by Ly Con and the std issue jugs from the factory, to tell the difference. Next see the flow test data differences. Then the Dino testing results. This hp increase improves performance as well as fuel burn efficiency with no cost to engine life. Payback comes over time but performance is immediate. Raising compression to this level is moderate and is standard helicopter issue with same TBO. E ignition saves fuel while reducing the chance of predetination. Small hp improvement too. Ever try to run your plane one one set of plugs vs both? Now think about even greater efficiency!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-23-2016, 10:21 PM
Bernard Hartnell Bernard Hartnell is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Grand Junction, CO
Posts: 65
Default Almost done now with FWF

almost all FWF Kit parts fit up to my IO360; exhaust, hoses etc. etc.. The block and jugs are a match to the IO390. My sump does not have the boss for mounting the throttle cable just aft of the servo. So had to work with my EAA tech counselor to build a bracket. Installed today and works well. Baffles fit perfectly with no mods. Prop governor- front, same hardware as 390. Bottom line is that an overhauled, modified like mine or a stock low time IO360 is a good option, as long as you use a forward mounting governor if you use a CS Prop & you use a forward facing sump & servo. Check out Vans comparative performances between the IO360 & the IO390. Your performance is not a factor with this choice. If you buy new through Vans, go the IO390. If you want to save significantly, and have the skill or have a friend who does to build you an IO360A, this is a clear cut alternative to consider. Jessie at Colorado Air Parts has been a very good company to acquire cost effective certified or non certified parts, both used, reconditioned or new!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-24-2016, 09:11 AM
rv7charlie rv7charlie is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pocahontas MS
Posts: 3,884
Default

There's an easier way. Change the name plate (& cyl count) to Continental.

[troll mode off]
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-24-2016, 10:06 AM
rvbuilder2002's Avatar
rvbuilder2002 rvbuilder2002 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 9,035
Default

If you think there is anything easy about installing a 6 cyl Continental engine where a 4 cyl Lycoming was intended to go, my guess would be that you haven't ever built an airplane yourself.
__________________
Opinions, information and comments are my own unless stated otherwise. They do not necessarily represent the direction/opinions of my employer.

Scott McDaniels
Van's Aircraft Engineering Prototype Shop Manager
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")

Last edited by Mike S : 11-24-2016 at 10:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-24-2016, 12:57 PM
rv7charlie rv7charlie is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pocahontas MS
Posts: 3,884
Default

Shucks, Scott; did you read the 2nd line?
{insert obligatory ;-) here}

Charlie
(Flying a purchased -4; RV-7 Mazda Renesis FWF in progress)
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-24-2016, 01:38 PM
rvbuilder2002's Avatar
rvbuilder2002 rvbuilder2002 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 9,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rv7charlie View Post
Shucks, Scott; did you read the 2nd line?
{insert obligatory ;-) here}
Sure I did....... most trolls come across as being dead serious....
__________________
Opinions, information and comments are my own unless stated otherwise. They do not necessarily represent the direction/opinions of my employer.

Scott McDaniels
Van's Aircraft Engineering Prototype Shop Manager
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-24-2016, 06:29 PM
czechsix's Avatar
czechsix czechsix is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Spring Hill, KS
Posts: 365
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernard Hartnell View Post
Check out Vans comparative performances between the IO360 & the IO390. Your performance is not a factor with this choice.
Where is the comparative performance info from Vans? I'm pretty sure Vans hasn't done true comparative perf testing...they have a -14 with a 360 and older model Hartzell that according to their website is a bit faster than their -14A with the 390 and newer 'blended airfoil' Hartzell. It's well documented that the stock 390 produces about 15 more HP than a stock angle valve 360, and also well documented that the blended airfoil Hartzell is a few knots faster than the older blade profile. My takeaway is that the nose gear on the -14A is a pretty significant drag penalty compared to the nose gear on the other 2-seat RVs, otherwise the taildragger 14 with smaller engine & less efficient prop should not be faster than the trigear 14A. Take a look at the -7 with 180 hp vs -7A with 200 hp (really 195 hp for a stock IO-360), or the same comparison on the 8 series. In each case the A model with the 15 extra hp is about 5 mph faster than the taildragger. Big difference for the -14 series where the A model with 15 extra hp AND better prop is still a couple mph slower than the taildragger I know the -14A has a bigger nosewheel and more robust gear leg, but I'm still surprised the drag penalty is so significant.

It would be nice to have true comparative perf numbers for the different engines on each airframe so we could know just how big the difference is for each.
__________________
Mark Navratil
Spring Hill, KS
RV-8A N2D #80583 - built/flew/sold
RV-14A #140017 - wings complete, empacone in progress...
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-24-2016, 09:19 PM
mike newall's Avatar
mike newall mike newall is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 2,052
Default

Personally, I am not bothered about a knot here or there, but if Scott can give us an insight to the pro's and con's of substituting an IO-390 with an IO360-A1B6 variant with a rear governor, I would be interested.

At S n F last year, a few of the aftermarket engine vendors were already speccing motors for the 14.

We are a couple of years away from a motor. The initial cost of a Vans deal 390 outweighs the cost of a new 360 but with possible future penalties re spares etc etc.

390 is sensible, fits, designed for, but if the resale goes soft because of potential spares costs, is it worth it ?

Other 360's are a chunk cheaper.
__________________
"I add a little excitement, a little spice to your lives, and all you do is complain!" - Q

Donated in 2020
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-24-2016, 09:39 PM
rvbuilder2002's Avatar
rvbuilder2002 rvbuilder2002 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 9,035
Default

The small amount of side by side testing that we have been able to do showed that the two prototypes, as currently equipped, have pretty much exactly the same speeds (I flew the tail dragger for this test and the two airplanes were dead even while in loose formation). When I fly them cross country I get 171-172 knots TAS with both airplanes at the same fuel flows.
So if the tail dragger did have an IO-390 and blended airfoil prop it should be a bit faster... probably by about the same difference that there is between an RV-7 and 7A.

Where did you see the info implying that the A model prototype is slower than the tail dragger?

I think either engine is a great choice depending on what deal someone is able to make (but the IO-360 must be a variant with a Fwd. gov., not a rear one. The two engines use the exact same FWF kit... all the parts work for either one. The weight difference isn't enough to be any issue.
__________________
Opinions, information and comments are my own unless stated otherwise. They do not necessarily represent the direction/opinions of my employer.

Scott McDaniels
Van's Aircraft Engineering Prototype Shop Manager
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")

Last edited by rvbuilder2002 : 11-24-2016 at 09:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-25-2016, 01:56 AM
czechsix's Avatar
czechsix czechsix is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Spring Hill, KS
Posts: 365
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002 View Post
The small amount of side by side testing that we have been able to do showed that the two prototypes, as currently equipped, have pretty much exactly the same speeds (I flew the tail dragger for this test and the two airplanes were dead even while in loose formation). When I fly them cross country I get 171-172 knots TAS with both airplanes at the same fuel flows.
If you're flying them side-by-side at the same fuel flow then you're probably making about the same horsepower on each engine. In that case I'd expect the taildragger to be a few knots faster since it has less drag. If you were instead flying the same percent power (for example, wide open throttle at 8500' and using the same leaning procedure to get 70% power on both engines), the 390 has got to be burning more fuel and making more power than the 360.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002 View Post
Where did you see the info implying that the A model prototype is slower than the tail dragger?
http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv14perf.htm Note that the specs show the taildragger to be faster on the smaller engine at the same percent power settings...
__________________
Mark Navratil
Spring Hill, KS
RV-8A N2D #80583 - built/flew/sold
RV-14A #140017 - wings complete, empacone in progress...
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:45 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.