|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

09-06-2010, 07:44 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Davis, CA, USA
Posts: 540
|
|
VW VR6? (alt engine musings)
For those who have considered an auto engine...
Have you considered a VW VR6 engine for use in your RV. (If you had an RV6, it seems the VR6 would be fate)
I have a 2000 VW jetta with the VR6. This is not a normal V6. the "vee" angle is 15 degrees rather than the standard 45-60 deg. This essentially gives you a v6 in a slightly over-sized I-4 package (meaning narrow). Overall it's been a great engine for the road, and I wonder how well it would do in the air.
basic info:
2.8 L
174 hp @ 5800 rpm
181 Tq @ 3200 rpm
10:1
I'm guessing around 300 lbs.
(it's got AC  )
Aaannnnd Discuss.
Really I'm in the process of replacing the alternator, and it is such a PITA with all the other **** jammed into the engine compartment, that I would rather remove the engine and scrap the car than try to get the new alternator in there. 
__________________
Jeff Caplins
California
RV7 N76CX
(started: Feb 2002 --> Completed: May 2016)
|

09-06-2010, 07:59 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scappoose
Posts: 119
|
|
If you look into some of the reliability of these engines, they do have some problems that are not very exciting to deal with if you are in the air.
I think they may be a little too high strung to be good in an airplane. Good engines - Yes, Dead stone reliable for airplane use - I think No.
Just my opinion is all...
|

09-07-2010, 05:17 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Louisville, Ga
Posts: 7,840
|
|
Most auto engines nowadays are extremely reliable...
...but for airplane use, a whole new batch of problems arise....cooling issues and cowl modifications and worst of all, a reliable PSRU, which has been the downfall of many auto conversion attempts.
Best,
__________________
Pierre Smith
RV-10, 510 TT
RV6A (Sojourner) 180 HP, Catto 3 Bl (502Hrs), gone...and already missed
Air Tractor AT 502B PT 6-15 Sold
Air Tractor 402 PT-6-20 Sold
EAA Flight Advisor/CFI/Tech Counselor
Louisville, Ga
It's never skill or craftsmanship that completes airplanes, it's the will to do so,
Patrick Kenny, EAA 275132
Dues gladly paid!
|

09-07-2010, 05:57 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Davis, CA, USA
Posts: 540
|
|
Can you be more specific, Richard? And what do you mean by high strung?
I don't want this to be a "if you want to fly, get a lycombing..."
It seems all engines will have cooling issues to work out and anything other than an O-3xx will need cowling mods.
The Rotax engine is liquid cooled, requires a gear reduction unit, and has 2 carbs that need to be balanced, and people seem to love them. How is any auto conversion different?
(I should also note that I'm years away from finishing and my VW has over 100K on it, so I won't be using this engine anyway (maybe  ). Just thinking out loud here.)
__________________
Jeff Caplins
California
RV7 N76CX
(started: Feb 2002 --> Completed: May 2016)
|

09-07-2010, 09:20 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: S21, Oregon
Posts: 161
|
|
VR's are sweet sounding engines, but I think the iron block (at least of the earlier VR's) would be a deal killer. I think a W-12 out of a Phaeton would make a SWEET engine for an RV-10 though
Did you remove the front end of your Jetta to get access to the alternator, or are you trying to remove it with a shoehorn?
(Jetta and Scirocco 1.8T owner here  )
__________________
Kelly
RV-7 empennage done, wings done, fuselage to QB stage.
1973 Maule M4-220C flying
|

09-07-2010, 09:58 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 1,324
|
|
Development
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcaplins
The Rotax engine is liquid cooled, requires a gear reduction unit, and has 2 carbs that need to be balanced, and people seem to love them. How is any auto conversion different?
|
Bluntly, the diference is several millions of dollars spent on engineering and development. Given enough time and money most any internal combustion engine could be converted to aircraft use, time and money that few of us have to invest.
John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
|

09-07-2010, 10:35 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Davis, CA, USA
Posts: 540
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1:1 Scale
VR's are sweet sounding engines, but I think the iron block (at least of the earlier VR's) would be a deal killer. I think a W-12 out of a Phaeton would make a SWEET engine for an RV-10 though
Did you remove the front end of your Jetta to get access to the alternator, or are you trying to remove it with a shoehorn?
(Jetta and Scirocco 1.8T owner here  )
|
Yup, the Iron block is heavy. Doesn't a lycombing have an Iron case? I'm not real sure about the weight. the internet is telling me the VR6 weighs anywhere from 300 to 700 pounds. It seems a bit too tall also.
I got the old alternator out the bottom. pulled the PS pump, pulled the AC compressor, removed the dogbone, removed passenger side engine mount. wiggled, pushed, pulled, raised and lowered the engine till I could drop it out the bottom. Still not sure how I am going to get the new one in.
Quote:
|
Bluntly, the difference is several millions of dollars spent on engineering and development. Given enough time and money most any internal combustion engine could be converted to aircraft use, time and money that few of us have to invest.
|
Is this true, or just what we assume to be true? Rotax has been around a long time, working from 2-stroke to 4-stroke and putting engines in may things; planes, snow mobiles, ultralights, motorcycles. the LSA market has seemed to really spike their popularity.
I'm sure millions and millions of dollars have been spend on R&D, but they also seem to work off the tried and true, if it works don't fix it philosophy that lycombing and continental have used. There is not a whole lot of innovation there that I can see.
Auto makers spend a ton of money on engine R&D. They are tested in the harshest of conditions. I don't think the flight environment is any tougher than driving; excluding aerobatics and racing. The gear reduction unit would be the only thing left for new design/testing/research/etc. for auto conversions.
(I'm not bashing Lycombing, Continental, or Rotax. Just thinking about... experimenting.)
__________________
Jeff Caplins
California
RV7 N76CX
(started: Feb 2002 --> Completed: May 2016)
|

09-07-2010, 11:00 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,275
|
|
Jeff, you are free to install whatever engine you wish.
BUT....
Why an auto conversion? In addition to the anecdotal info that they just don't perform well compared to a Lycoming, you have the PSRU, running at 5000 RPM which is not a normal car operating regime and VERY FEW people will buy the plane should you ever sell it.
My biased opinion: Stick with a Lycoming equivalent. Keep the auto engine in a vehicle with four wheels.
|

09-07-2010, 12:22 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,061
|
|
Actually, the flying environment requires near full power for hours at a time. This is a big deal.
__________________
Steve Zicree
Fullerton, Ca. w/beautiful 2.5 year old son 
RV-4 99% built  and sold 
Rag and tube project well under way
paid =VAF= dues through June 2013
|

09-07-2010, 01:00 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 440
|
|
to quote (more or less) one of our VAF members: "Build the plane YOU want, not the plane others want."
A lot of water will have gone under the bridge before you reach the point of actually buying an engine. you have a long time to scheme and dream. 
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:35 AM.
|