automobile engines for the RV-10

[JDanno]

None of the LS engines have been the cause of the crashes. It's the wiring, the fuel plumbing, ECU programming. Put more energy into developing these systems and I believe you will have a good overall system. I'm putting my actions where my mouth is.

As far as the resale value.....I don't really care. This is the only airplane I'll ever build and I'm flying the snot out of it until I'm too old. Investments and airplanes are words that shouldn't be used in the same sentence.
Remember the axiom: "If it floats, flies or *****,.... rent"!! It will ALWAYS be cheaper.
Unfortunately it is difficult to rent a really decent boat or airplane and the third one is illegal in all states except for Nevada. Hence we buy boats and build airplanes.

[rracer10]

Todd,
I haven't read the NTSB report on your RV-10 fire that consumed it.

JDanno's comment: "It's the wiring, the fuel plumbing, ECU programming" that cause the problems with LS type engine installs. In your opinion, is that correct?

Can you address in hind site what went wrong with your RV-10 and when you build again (I'm assuming from you comments), what will you have to do to make sure you project is safe and dependable to fly?

[David Shelton]

David Algie has a very impressive turbo LS-1 on his LP-1 project. He developed a lightweight carbon fiber gear reduction unit. The carbon fiber prop was designed from scratch and it's fadec-controlled for constant mach number. The radiator is located behind the pressurized cabin and a radiator fan flips down to prevent overheating on the ground. The cooling air exits the rear fuselage with the help of a blown exhaust system.



If you haven't been on his website, it's probably worth a look: http://members.iquest.net/~aca/

I dropped by his shop a few weeks ago and I was very impressed. It's an extremely complex (maybe it would seem simple if I built Indy cars for a living like David) project with an awful lot of variables... but he seems to have everything well planned out.

PS - The answer to that question in your head is 385 knots while pressurized to sea level.

[Morraine]

Fascinating reading in this thread. I am one of the gearheads that have built 10, V6 naturally aspirated auto conversions, 7 supercharged V6 auto conversions and 1, LS2 naturally aspirated conversion. To date, half of the V6s are flying and only one to my knowledge has had problems, all related to using AV gas instead of Auto fuel. I believe they are still using AV but putting in an additive to neutralise the lead. The LS2 has been thru 2 aircraft so far but I do not know hours except to say when I last saw it it had 173 hours and that was in late 2008 in the first aircraft I installed it in.
All these conversions use belt reductions specifically designed for them and the V8 uses twin belts. No failures to my knowledge with these units.
I currently fly behind a Sti 2.5 turbo I also designed and built myself and have to date 130 trouble free hours. I will be using this installation in a RV8 QB I have just purchased.
As Ross Farnham mentioned and I fully agree I use only dedicated and properly mapped ECUs (MoTeC) and wiring harnesses specifically designed for the application and built by a specialist(CPWS) in Mil Spec Wiring. I use an Auto flight PSRU which has an enviable record and I believe Titan also use these PSRUs exclusively as does RAM performance.These PSRUs are used in their hundreds, yes hundreds by gyro flyers using all manner of Suby engines. I have heard of only one failure in these units which was openly discussed by the designer and manufacturer Neil Hintz. I did extensive dyno work mapping these engines, weeks in fact, then the mule aircraft flew hundreds of hours without a single issue and all maps remained unchanged in my time with the company. Cooling systems were designed and Rads manufactured by PWR exclusively with not a single issue.
My own installation has had no changes made of any sort since day one save for shortening the rad exit skirt on the back of my cowl.
Properly designed and executed Auto conversions are very cost effective and reliable in my humble opinion.

[pierre smith]

However, as Ross pointed out, the average guy is not capable of your expertise without your experience/education.

For most, the simplicity of bolting on a Lyc and correctly wiring and plumbing it, is a challenge of its own, but within the means of most of us.

Guys like you and Ross amaze me with what you come up with!

Best,

[rv6ejguy]

Originally Posted by David Shelton

David Algie has a very impressive turbo LS-1 on his LP-1 project. He developed a lightweight carbon fiber gear reduction unit. The carbon fiber prop was designed from scratch and it's fadec-controlled for constant mach number. The radiator is located behind the pressurized cabin and a radiator fan flips down to prevent overheating on the ground. The cooling air exits the rear fuselage with the help of a blown exhaust system.



If you haven't been on his website, it's probably worth a look: http://members.iquest.net/~aca/

I dropped by his shop a few weeks ago and I was very impressed. It's an extremely complex (maybe it would seem simple if I built Indy cars for a living like David) project with an awful lot of variables... but he seems to have everything well planned out.

PS - The answer to that question in your head is 385 knots while pressurized to sea level.

David's project is simply amazing and I've been following it for years. It is the probably the most complex experimental ever designed. His clean sheet design shows his thinking outside the box is truly innovative. The carbon work is pure art as is the rest of the project.

That being said, I'll go out on a limb and say the aircraft will never do the speeds quoted at the fuel flows claimed- these are an impossibility. I wish him luck on the carbon gearbox case and propeller. The landing gear has some interesting features. There is a lot to prove here. I'm skeptical of a 24,000 foot pressurized aircraft not fitted with an intercooler and the same goes for a turbocharged engine fitted with cast pistons.

David is an immensely talented fellow in so many fields but this project is a huge, huge bite to take without some prior experience in aviation. I do believe however that David will work the bugs out. He is tremendously driven and tenacious.

I can't wait to see it fly and see how everything works out. I think it is the most exciting experimental design to come along in decades. Many eyes will be on this project and the concept of the automotive V8 will be either proven or not.

[Toobuilder]

Originally Posted by rv6ejguy

David's project is simply amazing and I've been following it for years. It is the probably the most complex experimental ever designed. His clean sheet design shows his thinking outside the box is truly innovative. The carbon work is pure art as is the rest of the project.

That being said, I'll go out on a limb and say the aircraft will never do the speeds quoted at the fuel flows claimed- these are an impossibility. I wish him luck on the carbon gearbox case and propeller. The landing gear has some interesting features. There is a lot to prove here. I'm skeptical of a 24,000 foot pressurized aircraft not fitted with an intercooler and the same goes for a turbocharged engine fitted with cast pistons...

I too have been following the project with awe. The fabrication is spectacular quality. That said, I recognize that the airplane is new and unproven from the spinner back, and this is a huge development nightmare. I wish him all the best of luck, but this is a "hail Mary pass" in every sense.

[rv6ejguy]

Originally Posted by Morraine

Fascinating reading in this thread. I am one of the gearheads that have built 10, V6 naturally aspirated auto conversions, 7 supercharged V6 auto conversions and 1, LS2 naturally aspirated conversion. To date, half of the V6s are flying and only one to my knowledge has had problems, all related to using AV gas instead of Auto fuel. I believe they are still using AV but putting in an additive to neutralise the lead. The LS2 has been thru 2 aircraft so far but I do not know hours except to say when I last saw it it had 173 hours and that was in late 2008 in the first aircraft I installed it in.
All these conversions use belt reductions specifically designed for them and the V8 uses twin belts. No failures to my knowledge with these units.
I currently fly behind a Sti 2.5 turbo I also designed and built myself and have to date 130 trouble free hours. I will be using this installation in a RV8 QB I have just purchased.
As Ross Farnham mentioned and I fully agree I use only dedicated and properly mapped ECUs (MoTeC) and wiring harnesses specifically designed for the application and built by a specialist(CPWS) in Mil Spec Wiring. I use an Auto flight PSRU which has an enviable record and I believe Titan also use these PSRUs exclusively as does RAM performance.These PSRUs are used in their hundreds, yes hundreds by gyro flyers using all manner of Suby engines. I have heard of only one failure in these units which was openly discussed by the designer and manufacturer Neil Hintz. I did extensive dyno work mapping these engines, weeks in fact, then the mule aircraft flew hundreds of hours without a single issue and all maps remained unchanged in my time with the company. Cooling systems were designed and Rads manufactured by PWR exclusively with not a single issue.
My own installation has had no changes made of any sort since day one save for shortening the rad exit skirt on the back of my cowl.
Properly designed and executed Auto conversions are very cost effective and reliable in my humble opinion.

Thanks for your input on your experiences with auto engines. Sometimes I feel like a small voice in the woods here.

[TSwezey]

Originally Posted by David Shelton

David Algie has a very impressive turbo LS-1 on his LP-1 project. He developed a lightweight carbon fiber gear reduction unit. The carbon fiber prop was designed from scratch and it's fadec-controlled for constant mach number. The radiator is located behind the pressurized cabin and a radiator fan flips down to prevent overheating on the ground. The cooling air exits the rear fuselage with the help of a blown exhaust system.



If you haven't been on his website, it's probably worth a look: http://members.iquest.net/~aca/

I dropped by his shop a few weeks ago and I was very impressed. It's an extremely complex (maybe it would seem simple if I built Indy cars for a living like David) project with an awful lot of variables... but he seems to have everything well planned out.

PS - The answer to that question in your head is 385 knots while pressurized to sea level.

What a project! Some impressive work. The radiator in the back is exactly where I am going to put mine when I build again. The workmanship is just exceptional. Not a big fan of the the exhaust system tucked inside and the very little if any cooling to the engine compartment but I would probably guess he has all that worked out. It is a piece of art !