ECi O-340 engines

ENGINESEVO · #1 01-15-2009, 06:56 AM

Any of you have experience with the new ECi 340 engines? Another option for me would be to buy an used O-320 and buy the kit to upgrade it to a 340 version.

osxuser · #2 01-19-2009, 09:51 AM

Bart at Aerosport power told me at Oshkosh that for an initial installation, just go with a O-360 instead. If you already have a -320 core then it can be worth it. I was pretty enthusiastic about this engine up until that point

.

terry.mortimore · #3 01-19-2009, 03:29 PM

I too have been thinking of the IO-340. I just picked up a O-320 crankcase and assorted parts. The crank for this engine did not pass inspection (bent flange) so I'm thinking of buying the Crankshaft Retrofit Kit.

One question that I have is if the older "Narrow Deck" engine would be a good candidate to use to build the IO-340 engine.

Any thoughts?

Terry.

92ndwest · #4 01-19-2009, 07:30 PM

We are looking at building an O-340 for a customer and the change also requires a -360 sump and MA4-5 carb. So his RV-4 would still require a cowl mod.
If using a narrow deck core, I would only use the 160hp version.
Don

terry.mortimore · #5 01-19-2009, 07:52 PM

Hi Don, thanks for the input.

The Crankshaft Retrofit Kits for 340 Stroker Engine list a compression ratio of 7.2-1 not sure what horsepower this would work out to.

I plan to use ECI's Fuel Injection and cold air induction. I already have the Sam James Holy cowl that will accomodate the engine.

cheers, Terry.

osxuser · #6 01-20-2009, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 92ndwest

We are looking at building an O-340 for a customer and the change also requires a -360 sump and MA4-5 carb. So his RV-4 would still require a cowl mod.
If using a narrow deck core, I would only use the 160hp version.
Don

And ECi said it was 'Drop in'... I guess it just doesn't make sense at all... I guess it'd be drop in for fuel injected engines...

Shine'r · #7 01-22-2009, 10:04 AM

I did a partial O-340 conversion about a 100 hours ago. I started with a O-320 B3B. This is the narrow case 160 HP. I say partial because I did not change the sump or carb (yet.) The engine was due an overhaul and was using oil with a low compression reading on one cly. It turned out I had two broken rings on two clys. The main objective to the O-340 for me was to increase HP with the min amount of work with a flying RV-6. I didn't want to change the bottom cowl or re-work any of the systems. (I had a carb and didn't want to go to the FI) Since I was doing the overhaul anyway the cost to go to the O-340 was about the same as keeping it at O-320. I will be more than glad to answer any questions you may have if you e-mail me at jasperg@nationwide.com. It was a good learning experience and I picked up 100 RPM at WOT. I look at it as a work in progress and will continue to pump the engine up to the 175 to 180 range.
Shine'r (Not flying in frozen Pittsburgh, Pa. "Go Steelers")

Kyle Boatright · #8 01-22-2009, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 92ndwest

We are looking at building an O-340 for a customer and the change also requires a -360 sump and MA4-5 carb. So his RV-4 would still require a cowl mod.
If using a narrow deck core, I would only use the 160hp version.
Don

I understand the need for an uprated carb, but what drives the need for a revised sump?

Mike S · #9 01-22-2009, 06:14 PM

Intake manifold in in the sump.

That may have something to do with it??

92ndwest · #10 01-22-2009, 07:18 PM

The factory O-340's, and ECI recomends, using the MA4-5 carb, same as on the O-360 (thru 540's).
The O-320 uses a MA4-SPA which has a smaller mounting flange and requires a sump with a smaller mounting pad.
FYI, the O-290 and O-235 use MA3 carbs and have smaller flanges yet.

Using a MA4-SPA carb should work but may not have enough flow for full potential of the engine.

The sumps are basically the same size externally. The rub is the 4-5 carb is much larger and interfears with the RV-4 320 cowling.
Don