What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

'IO-375 Aerosport engine in RV-7's

gabb

Member
id like to get some feed back from you guy's out there flying rv7's with the aerosport IO-375. 195hp and 205 hp and who is using a fixed pitch prop?what speeds and fuel useage you are seeing etc etc.
 
I have an IO-375, but I am not flying yet. When I was researching engines and props, I came to the conclusion that none of the Sensnich fixed props would work.

I think you could have a prop maker (Catto, etc) make you a fixed prop that would work with an IO-375.

For what its worth, I decided to use the Hartzell BA prop that Vans sells for the 180 - 200Hp IO-360s.

Hope this helps,
Jason
 
I have one

I now have about 70 hrs. on my RV-7A with a 0-375, 205 hp. It's a great engine and the folks at Aero-sport are great to deal with and very helpful. I have a 3 blade catto on it.
It will turn about 2850 rpm's down low. I'm planning to have it re-pitched to lower the rpm's. The best speed that I've seen so far is 212 mph. (184 knots) 4 way run with all fairings at about 1500' msl. Might be faster up high. I dont have the fuel flow red cube yet, but it does burn more fuel than the 0-320 I had in the 9A that I flew before. Someone with a cleaner airframe might see a little more speed.
Larry
 
prop

Hi Glenn,
Mine is a 3 blade Catto 68" Diameter x 75" Pitch. Craig said the target speed was 215 to 220 mph at 2800 rpm. He hit it right on the numbers.
Larry
 
IO-375

I've got the IO-375 195 hp in my 7A with a 2 blade MT prop. Inspection next week so I hope to fly it soon. With full power on the ground the prop holds RPM to 2700 rpm.:)
 
thanks guy's for the reply's,do you think the io 375 195hp will go well with the senenich 85'' cruize prop i have???
 
I've got the IO-375 195 hp in my 7A with a 2 blade MT prop. Inspection next week so I hope to fly it soon. With full power on the ground the prop holds RPM to 2700 rpm.:)

wolf are you happy with your engine ?? is that the mogas model??would you have some photo's i could see??
regards glenn
 
IO375

I also purchased an Aerosport IO375 with Superior cold air horizontal induction, and Eagle EMS electronic ignition/injection. I picked the IO375 with the 8 to 1 compression ratio so I could keep the HP up yet have more options in the future with the fuel issues. I have Cato working on a 2 blade prop for me. I am far from flying at the moment.

Dennis Conner
Tomball Texas
RV7A engine mounted, starting wiring.
 
Weight and Power

285lbs as per Sue
195hp for the carb and vertical induction versions and 7hp more for the horizontal induction model because it has cold air induction, as per Bart.
 
I hope to fly mine by july. The Horizontal cold air induction 195 HP with a 2 blades RV200 Whirlwind propeller.
 
Alttitude of the IO-375

Guys,

what is the highest you can fly the aircraft with the IO-375?

FL180, FL200?

I would like to fly the thing at FL200. Is that a reasonable proposition or is that just pushing the thing too far?

Regards,

Gus Bisbal
 
Why so high? I don't think there will be any problem running up there, you'll have to be careful coming down from such a high altitude so as to not shock cool the engine.
 
Why so high?

Because I want to be able to know if I can get above weather if needed when going over large bodies of water. And yeah thermal shock is an issue but I don't plan to decend any faster than about 500ft/m
 
No way.

Because I want to be able to know if I can get above weather if needed when going over large bodies of water. And yeah thermal shock is an issue but I don't plan to decend any faster than about 500ft/m

Gus, we were on the way to N.C. yesterday but we knew it would be dicey...lots of Cu building up. I scrolled the pointer of the 496 to the center of the red...."Tops 33,000' ". No way to top that, so we u-turned and went back.

Good luck,
 
Gus, we were on the way to N.C. yesterday but we knew it would be dicey...lots of Cu building up. I scrolled the pointer of the 496 to the center of the red...."Tops 33,000' ". No way to top that, so we u-turned and went back.

Good luck,

+1. I don't know what the weather is like down under (does the rain go up?) but "topping" weather at 20K is a risky proposition. If you're just talking about layers, thats fine. However if you're thinking you're going to top any serious cumulus build ups, when you're up that high the build ups can easily out climb your aircraft with a moderate level of convective activity. You could find yourself in a very dangerous position very quickly up there. I've been in the mid 40's and seen storms that have anvil'd on top start building right past me (with about a 30 mile stand off).
 
One step at a time

Guys,

flight envelope, I want to know my flight envelope.

If I know what alttitude I can operate at then I know my options. I want to KNOW my options. Not "I am building a flight plan right now and am putting on my gloves so that I get ready to taxi out"

I am going to be going over the mountains in New Zealand they are at max FL130.

I would like to know how high I can go. This is an engine question not a flight practices question. That is a completely different issue.

PS. I have no problem with IFR/IMC with a mask. I prepare and practice for those missions and it is part of being a private pilot for me. Getting a -20C draft is more an issue for me actually over a 2 hour period. That affects my concentration but again this is a flight envelope question not a best practices question.
 
In that case, I don't think you'll have any problems getting up there and operating. The other issue you'll have to be careful of is exceeding Vne TAS on the way down. Other than that and the shock cooling... if your motor will get you up there I can't think of any other potential issues.
 
Before you do it, think a little harder; Do you have a heated pitot, prop deice, wing/tail deice, etc......? Flying on top is one thing, getting on top in VFR may be possible, but you most probably will be in IMC. And coming down from 20K at 500 ft/m means you will probably be in the clouds picking up lots of ice for 40 minutes.

Paul
N277PM
LAF
ATP RV-7A
 
+1. I don't know what the weather is like down under (does the rain go up?) but "topping" weather at 20K is a risky proposition. If you're just talking about layers, thats fine. However if you're thinking you're going to top any serious cumulus build ups, when you're up that high the build ups can easily out climb your aircraft with a moderate level of convective activity. You could find yourself in a very dangerous position very quickly up there. I've been in the mid 40's and seen storms that have anvil'd on top start building right past me (with about a 30 mile stand off).

Before you do it, think a little harder; Do you have a heated pitot, prop deice, wing/tail deice, etc......? Flying on top is one thing, getting on top in VFR may be possible, but you most probably will be in IMC. And coming down from 20K at 500 ft/m means you will probably be in the clouds picking up lots of ice for 40 minutes.

Paul
N277PM
LAF
ATP RV-7A


My goodness how easy we go on a rant. He's just asking flight envelope questions guys... No need to beat on someone about the reasoning behind their choices. He's a grown man. If you don't have the answer to his question, then there is no need to reply!

I'd like to know the numbers on this question too as I am eyeballing this engine as well!

/rant off.
 
Last edited:
My goodness how easy we go on a rant. He's just asking flight envelope questions guys... No need to beat on someone about the reasoning behind their choices. He's a grown man. If you don't have the answer to his question, then there is no need to reply!

I'd like to know the numbers on this question too as I am eyeballing this engine as well!

/rant off.

More like considerations to think about from voices of experience. Can you, sure. Should you? Here are some things to think about to keep yourself safe...
 
More like considerations to think about from voices of experience. Can you, sure. Should you? Here are some things to think about to keep yourself safe...

Thanks Sig600

Daniel, I was not ranting, but I notice he never responded back so maybe I did make a point. If you want performance at altitude, get an TIO320 engine from a turbo twin comanche complete with a hydraulically controlled waste gate. It will be a much better fit.

Paul
N277
LAF
 
Taking to professionals

If it makes everyone feel better I just called Jon Johanson yesterday to ask him config questions his recommendations etc.

He had some interesting things to say about a lot of things including the real deal of what you need to consider for a trip like that. Across the Tasman Sea from Aust to New Zealand.

Lets just say there are some things that are totally out from normal text book doctrine, that if he hadn't done the global Lap 4 times you may say that it was not a good idea.

( for the record I will have G900x, dual alternators, dual batteries, VP-200 Dual, dual heated piots and I will be carrying my wife to be. F$#% with me, life happens, but I will go to ANY length to make sure that nothing will happen to her. )
 
Altitude in normal aspired engine.

Gus,
Unless you get turbo charging you will rapidly run out of MP in the mid teens and you'll find out that the wings are not long enough to support flight with an engine developing 45 % power probably well below FL180

Take it for what it is worth . you'll never top a TRW at 20 thousand feet. That's not even a Thunderstorm..

I used to fly a Cessna 340 turboed and flight in the low 20's was an effort. The engines are very touchy.

Then I flew a cheyenne 2 for about 8 years and it was nice to get into the upper 20's but then again we were turbo prop.

for 20 years we have flown jets and I'll tell you there are no piston aircraft constantly in the 20 thousand foot level with out turbo charging and O2

As for an RV going up there yes it might make it into the 20's. Some one probably has already done a service ceiling on the RV's and an Absolute Ceiling. Remember Service ceiling is where the aircraft will only climb at 100 feet per minute... and you are on the ragged edge of not staying in the air.
Your airspeed will be extremely low and turbulance will be your worst nightmare.

If you have enough power HP, Turbo charging, to fly at those altitudes, then you now create more problems... exceeding your TAS red line and flutter problems increase rapidly and added weight of the turbo charging system.

Just my .02 cents.

Smilin' jack
 
Gus,
Unless you get turbo charging you will rapidly run out of MP in the mid teens and you'll find out that the wings are not long enough to support flight with an engine developing 45 % power probably well below FL180

Right there we go.Thank you Jack

Some actual data Altitude flying. Excellent. Whew.... that took a while. I knew someone would say something other than "go to the naughty corner".

Bart told me that it would be at 45% at FL200. My Air speed will be determined by my GPS TAS. At those altitudes the IAS can read 165 and my TAS can be 230. I am aware of that. My Wing loading is a real problem and that is what I am concerned about. I will be taking alot of fuel so looks like FL200 is pretty much out and even FL180 might be impossible, as far as getting over CBs and the like......I mentioned weather. I was meaning a light bit of rain, not something that Noah would be looking out for. I get away from that all together, just due to up drafts and strange wind currents etc.

Am I pushing the envelope yes. Am I aware of that, yes. Am I here asking question because of that yes!

Geesh, you are all making out like I am communicating via VHF from the clouds. Imagine if I said I was going to have the aircraft certified over gross with the Extended fuel tanks...

What a can of worms that will be....

(eyes off the pigeons... come here pussy cat...we are going to have some fun)
 
Gus,
Don't take it personally. The range of experience on here varies from 0 time to 30K hour career airline guys, to military fixed wing and helo, and everything in between.

Asking a question of capability, IMHO should also be answered with whether it should be attempted. A simple "yes" or "no" to the ability should be accompanied by experience with whether it is smart/safe to attempt, and the conditions/variables that exsist. While the OP may not be the lowest common denominator in the thread experience wise, there are others reading this that may be. Those same folks need to know what they're getting themselves into max performing their a/c up in thin air, and have the information and experience to make safe desicions. Things can get real dicey up high and you need to know exactly what you're doing and what can go wrong to do it right.
 
Gus

When I finish my 7 I plan on exploring the same flight envelope. I do know my carburated mooney it will go 17,000 with some coaxing so with the 7 wing I'd be happy with 15-16. Can't wait to personally find out.
 
Gus,
Don't take it personally. The range of experience on here varies from 0 time to 30K hour career airline guys, to military fixed wing and helo, and everything in between.

No problem, you what they say get 3 pilots in a room and you will have 4 opinions.

This is why we have a forum. So that we can argue, if not we would be sitting back with cups of Tea, cucumber sandwiches sipping with our pinkies sticking out.
(I am Australian, its part of the constitution to give some stick to the British)

For what it is worth, I thank and am greatful for EVERYONE that contributed to this post. All respectful honest words are worth listening to. It is the second best thing about VANs, the education power of this forum.

Get something with two engines then.

Well I could and I could also just buy two tickets on a 737, that would be safer, cheaper, faster, quieter, warmer, more convenient and require less riveting but then again....

What fun would that be.... Althought...hmmm.... RV 7A with an IO-360 on each wing....now that is a mod
 
more feedback on the IO-375

I have this engine hung on my project. just curious if there is any additional feedback since this initial thread seemed to drift way off topic (although interesting).

Specific questions are smoothness comparison to the 360. Fuel burn. any quirks as compared to the 360?
 
data point...

I have IO360-180hp, constant speed prop.

Just to give you an idea of what a normal RV can do, I peeked at an old engine data log where I climbed up to 17500. During the climb, I maintained a constant airspeed of around 95kts, running 2400RPM and WOT. Prior to reaching 17500 and leveling out, my climb rates had steadily shrunk to 400-450fpm. I clearly wasn't near the ceiling and could have gone into the lower flight levels. FWIW, my MAP was 15.1 at 17500, and I was reading 46% HP.

I think I can safely conclude that 17500 is how high an RV has to climb before it starts performing like a Cessna 172 does at sea level. :cool:
 
Hi Alt Info

Gus,

FL 227, Standard Snorkel, AEIO-360 A1B6, 16" 2550 RPM, 102 KCAS, 164 KTAS, OAT -26c (March), 35 ROP, 7.6/hr. Climb rate was about <200 fpm. Descend @ 3-400 fpm and 2420 rpm WOT gives about 191 KTAS. Having tested up there prop control was an issue it would be easy to exceed max RPM as the governor struggles with the thin air, believe it or not oil temp was an issue 235f but I am running smaller inlets than standard so that would be different with your set up. Finally weight 1560lbs with 30 usg I am carrying Johansen tips
Used MH O2 which is absolutely brilliant. If you need any more info pm me I am also running G900X and may have some installation advice for you.
Be careful up there it's bloody cold. By the way heart of the envelope for a 7 is 7-9000 if your after performance

Cheers
 
I'd wager a guess: it's because lots of people have 172 time and can make the connection.

RV=good
172-not so good.....unless that's all ya got

Yeah I guess so. It's hard to recognize that other airplanes have their own strengths on this website, but the constant comparisons between RVs and planes designed for entirely different purposes never fail to amuse me.
 
But the comparison also gives a known benchmark, most of us have flown 172's at one time or another, it didn't appear that any criticism was intended. I can tell you that any higher than 18,000 and the RV7 is more demanding to fly (pitch sensitive and neutrally stable at even mid cg positions) and you are severely punished in terms of performance for sloppy flying.

I think this is thread drift so I will stop now.
 
flying high

Because I want to be able to know if I can get above weather if needed when going over large bodies of water. And yeah thermal shock is an issue but I don't plan to decend any faster than about 500ft/m

I fly a Citation Encore. 20K is right smack in the middle of the weather. You need 40k to get over about 70% of the weather. If its too nasty to fly through, and you don't have room to safely go under where you can see rain shafts, then it may be time to park it and wait it out.
 
I have an aerosport IO 375 with a raven inverted flight system. The plane fly for one month and I must say that I am extremely happy with it. fast and responsive.

Since yesterday I have one problem: Even with a full raven inverted it cannot fly inverted. after 3 second, the oil pressure drop from 69 to 19 PSI.

I took the oil in inversion from the vacuum pump trap. does anyone had a similar problem?
 
And I have found the solution

In fact I install the Raven like a Christen (No doc as far I know with the Raven) In the Christen Doc (and on many web site) they told you to cut the screen that goes inside the sump by maybe 10mm. With the Raven system as the connection is different you do not need to cut the screen and the problem was coming from that. The screen hold a plug to force the oil to pass inside the Inverted system. If the screen is too short , then the plug may move and of course the inverted system is shunted again and do not work.

i just machine small aluminium piece that fit inside the Raven connector The plug is now maintain by the screen in the good position and I have perfect inverted flight.

YESSSS!!!!
 
Not even close...

170 knots TAS at 17500 is not uncommon for an IO-390 7 or 8 -- something never done by a C-172 in level flight.

Bill
 
RV 7 w IO 375 and Raven inverted, MT 3-blade, James cowl

Hi guys,

we're some german folks willing to set up an RV7 with the above setup. However, since we do havehelp from an A&P who built already like 7 7's, this buddy recommends to stick strictly onto vans plans, because:
The cooling-baffle might not fit
"Unknown vibrations" not yet tested, compared to a IO 360
The MT-guys don't feel to happy with this, however would supply the prop
The Raven system is not known yet in Germany??
The exhaust would need some mod's?
What kind of mount would one need for the engine?
The IO 375 weighs 14 lbs less than the "original" 360 lycoming and produces significantly more power, so the paper looks good for the beginning.
And last, I'm eyeballing the James cowl. Has anyone experience with that one?

Looking forward to hearing from y'all

HotDoc
 
Hi guys,

we're some german folks willing to set up an RV7 with the above setup. However, since we do havehelp from an A&P who built already like 7 7's, this buddy recommends to stick strictly onto vans plans, because:
The cooling-baffle might not fit
"Unknown vibrations" not yet tested, compared to a IO 360
The MT-guys don't feel to happy with this, however would supply the prop
The Raven system is not known yet in Germany??
The exhaust would need some mod's?
What kind of mount would one need for the engine?
The IO 375 weighs 14 lbs less than the "original" 360 lycoming and produces significantly more power, so the paper looks good for the beginning.
And last, I'm eyeballing the James cowl. Has anyone experience with that one?

Looking forward to hearing from y'all

HotDoc

Hi,
I'm a RV8 builder but I think the informations I have could be right for a 7.
Van's baffles need modification to fit the conical fin on the cylinder (fin diameter increase from the root to the cylinder head). I contacted Bart at Aerosport Power and that is what he recommends.

Vetterman exhaust produces at least a 4 in 4 and a crossover exhaust for the cold air sump mounted on the IO-375 (the dual heat muff on the 4 in 4 is a plus).

I also have a James cowl, there is not interference between the cowl and engine.

The engine mount is the same as the IO-360 M1B ( I can't remember if it is the DI or the DII but someone else will tell you)

The Whirlwind guys think it is a good engine

I weighted the IO-375 M1S (w/o : prop extension, mags (I use dual plasmaIII) alternator) and I found 125,9 Kg <=> 277lb which is pretty light. It is a plus on the 8 which is generally nose heavy.

I don't have a raven but the christen fit well.

There is a mixture and throttle bracket mod to do ( I can send you pics if needed) but nothing difficult.

But as my 8 isn't flying yet I can't report any review for the moment.

Hoping this will help you

Have a good evening.
 
Last edited:
I have an IO-375 with Lycoming Cylinders and Van's standard IO-360 baffle kit fit just fine with little to no modification (other than hearing from other folks that the standard IO-360 oil cooler may not be sufficient for the 375 and modifying the rear baffle to work with a FW mounted larger oil cooler)
 
Hi,
have just flown my 8 with an IO375, goes great, sounds great! Max so far 186kts, but 130kts at 24 ltr/hr. 100kts at 19ltr/hr and what a machine!

IO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
io-375 throttle and mixture brackets

Just mounted my IO-375 in my 7. I was wondering what throttle/mixture brackets to use with the Silver Hawk horizontal injection and cold air sump. Did you use Van's brackets? What mods were required?
 
Last edited:
Mixture of custom and Van's

I made a custom throttle cable bracket and mixture bell crank bracket and then used the Van's mixture bell crank and mixture cable support bracket.
 
Last edited:
Figure out your oil cooler solution before drilling cable holes

Aerosport recommends the 13 tube cooler for the 375's. While that might be a bit big, it is what they recommend and can only be mounted on the firewall, right where Vans has you drill the prop and mixture holes. So before you drill those holes, make sure you have thought through what cooler you want and how you want to mount your cooler.

I ended up using a 9 tube cooler mounted in the baffles, which is larger than the Van's 7 tube used for the 360. I think I will be OK and will let people know if I have any cooling concerns.

http://www.704ch.com/2012/05/oil-cooler.html
 
Last edited:
Back
Top