E

ENGINESEVO

Member
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.
 
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 :).
 
ECI O-340

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.
 
O-340

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
 
ECI IO-340 engines

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.
 
92ndwest said:
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
Click to expand...

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...
 
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 [email protected]. 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")
 
92ndwest said:
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
Click to expand...

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

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
 
177 HP, according to Joe at ECI

terry.mortimore said:
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.
Click to expand...

According to Joe Trampota at ECI, the carburetor version produces up to 177 horses, the the cold air induction FI gets you to 185+.

Total cost of conversion, without changing sump/carb is gonna be around 8K if you do the work yourself. J & J Airparts sells the "kit" at a pretty good discount (still expensive) which consists of crank, rods and Pistons. You need rings, bearings, rod bolts, assorted metal and gaskets/seals, which all adds up pretty fast. Then add labor. :)

YMMV,
 
N131RV said:
According to Joe Trampota at ECI, the carburetor version produces up to 177 horses, the the cold air induction FI gets you to 185+.

Hi Joe: thanks for the input.

If you go to ECI's website the show their complete IO-340 engine with a 9.0:1 compression ratio with a horsepower listed at 185.

Yet if you go to their 340 stroker kit listing they show the kit as a 7.2:1 compression ratio which I would prefer due to future fuel availablity. I'm wondering what the horsepower of the lower compression ratio would be.

I'm just now sending my crankcase down to ECI for some work , so I'll ask them directly when I get a chance.

I'll need the HP rating when it comes time to order the Sensenich propeller.

tailwinds, terry.
Click to expand...
 
All 340's are 9:1 (I think)

I may be wrong, but I think all the O-340s are 9:1 compression. They use the 7.2:1 pistons from an O-320(150hp) but b/c of how they are set up with the crank they run at 9:1.

I very well could be wrong on this - best to check with ECi.
 
O-340 compression ratio

Pete you are correct.
The Lycoming O-340 uses a unique cylinder but the ECI -340 uses the -320 cylinder and results in the increased compression from the increase in stroke.
I guess the piston tops could be milled to reduce compression.
The -340 requires unique rods because of the increased stroke and case clearance. The rod nut reliefs are cut deeper. The -360 engines solve this by changing the direction of the rod bolts in the rods.
Don
 
ECI IO-340 engines

Hi Pete, that makes sense. Thats where the 7.2:1 compression ratio number is coming from.

I'll have to dig into it futher before I order the kit.


thanks, terry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.