T

TShort

Well Known Member
I read this thread and watched most of the video:
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=9473&highlight=ethanol
Interesting stuff.

Has anyone seen the fleet of RV-3s and the -8 that are at OSH and fly on ethanol? They are running injected lycomings and powered by ethanol. Just NE of Aeroshell square. Only got to talk to them briefly, but it sounds like things are going well.

It is reassuring to know that even if 100LL goes away some of our current engines will run on ethanol. Just think ... if the hangar fridge is out of beer, you could just sump a little "fuel" from the plane after the flight instead! :D :D

Thomas
 
>> They are running injected lycomings and powered by ethanol.

Very cool... do these engines have to be modified in any way to run on ethanol?
 
I only talked to them briefly as they were pushing the planes in after landing on Monday ... he said it is only a minor mod to the fuel injector system (servo) and that's it.
They were nice looking RV's, too - four RV-3's (two with wing tanks and two with bulkhead tanks) and an RV-8.
Hopefully someone else will get a chance to get more info. I'm surprised they have not been publicizing them more.

Thomas
 
where do they get their ethanol?

After the modification, do you know if the engines can still use 100LL, or will they then run ethanol only?
 
Last edited:
Dunno the answer to either.
I have a buddy who is still at OSH - I'll call him and ask him to stop by and ask some questions.

T.
 
The BIG problem to me is the loss of range/energy density issue. About 40% less BTU's/gallon. But then again, if I had ADM payrolling me and my plane, I might change my mind.
 
I agree. I don't plan on using it in the near future.
But, if 100LL is gone, at least I know my engine will be usable.

T.
 
engine choices

A consideration for me, and other builders who aren't at the engine stage, is looking down the road. When the time comes, I might want to make my engine choice carefully so that down the road I could convert to an alternative fuel as painlessly as possible. For example, maybe fuel injection is a better option in this regard? Other considerations? O-235 vs O-320 ??
 
prkaye said:
A consideration for me, and other builders who aren't at the engine stage, is looking down the road. When the time comes, I might want to make my engine choice carefully so that down the road I could convert to an alternative fuel as painlessly as possible. For example, maybe fuel injection is a better option in this regard? Other considerations? O-235 vs O-320 ??
Click to expand...
Phil,

The O-235 is a "high compression" engine and requires 100LL. Some of the O-320's are "low compression" and can run on 80 octane or higher. Meaning you can run regular unleaded (87 octane) or better.

I have heard that some of the new "high compression" engines can run on premium unleaded (93 octane) but you will need to check with your engine manufacture.

The carb vs. fuel injection might be an issue, I don't really know. Either way, FI can be fitted to any of the Lycomings.

FWIW, my O-290-D2 has a 7.5 to 1 compression ratio and can run 80 octane or better and, unlike other Lycomings, the timing is 18 degrees BTC.
 
Thanks for that information... I know very little about engines (haven't read that Bingeles book yet).

>> Some of the O-320's are "low compression"

Some of them? How can you tell which ones? Can the RV-9A be fitted with any O-320?

>> my O-290-D2 has a 7.5 to 1 compression

Is that a high or low compression? Do you recommend this engine?

>> the timing is 18 degrees BTC

What does this mean?
 
Last edited:
The O-320 is one of the recommended engines for the -9/-9A.
The 150 hp O-320s are the low compression ones.
7 1/2 to 1 IS considered low compression.
Ignition timing is the point at which the spark plugs fire;
18 degrees before top dead center vs. 25 degrees BTC as on most other
Lycomings.
 
Following up on Mel's comments.

Lycoming built a number of different 320 engines (as well as other sizes).

The 320 is in reference to the size of the engine in cubic inch displacements. Kind of like to the old 289, 327, 350, 455 V-8s.

The "O" tells you it is opposed, meaning the cylinders are arranged in opposing rows. This is like the "V" in V-8 tells you the cylinders are arranged in a "V".

There are a number of these codes with the most common being "I" as in IO-360. This "I" tells you it is a fuel injected engine. Other codes you might see are A - Acrobatic, H - Helicopter, F - FADIC, L - Left hand rotation, usually found on one side of a twin. There are more but you get the idea.

After the number there is usually a dash number, my engine is an O-290-D2. That "-D2" really tells me which version of the O-290 I have. It dicates the compression ratio, crank, pistons, accessory case, type of engine mount required, etc. There is a LOT to this "dash number", more than I could hope to ever know and more than I can write here.

If you are worried about the future availability of 100LL and engine compatibility, contact Mattituck. They can give you the low down and suggest an appropriate engine.

As for the O-290 being a good engine for the -9/9A, it is all in who you talk to. I got such a great deal on the 290 that I couldn't pass it up. I wasn't looking for this engine, it found me. The O-290 was last produced in something like 1954 so parts are always going to be an issue.

You can't go worrying with a good O-320. Stay away from the -H suffix O-320's. These were used in some Skyhawks and the fuel pump is mounted on the top front of the engine which requires you to put a blister on the top front of your engine cowl. I do know of one -6A with this engine and he removed the fuel pump and installed duel electric pumps to avoid adding the bump to his cowl.
 
cool... thanks for that run-down on engine naming... now the codes make a bit more sense to me.
Who is Mattituck?
 
O-235

so the most fuel-economical of the engines van recommends for the RV-9 is probably the O-235 (e.g. O-235-L2C). Is this a low-compression engine that can run mogas, and maybe eventually be converted to run ethanol, or car gas with ethanol added?
 
235-L2C is a high compression engine. You will have to call Vans or Lycoming to find out if you can run anything other than 100LL.

Maybe Mahlon can answer that question for you.

Remember from getting you PPL that you can always go up in octane but not down. Thus an 80 octane engine can run 100LL but a 100LL engine cannot run 80. Mogas (auto fuel) is almost always lower, 87 octane for regular (although I have seen 86), and 93 octane for premium. Some stations carry 100 octane unleaded race gas, at least in Charlotte they do.

Again, this all has to do with your compression ratio, not the engine size.

Since 80 octane seems to have gone the way of the dinosaurs, it would be safe to say all new engines are high compression. However, a friend bought an O-360 for his -7A and it can run on premium unleaded but I don?t know about the ethanol thing. I?m going to do everything I can to avoid running ethanol in my engine.
 
I guess the problem is that Lycoming will tell you that you must use Avgas (they have a whole page about this on their website). But this may be for insurance or liability reasons. So it might be hard to find out what fuels can be run reliably in those engines without talking to someone who has tried it for an extended period of time.

How low can you go with an RV-9A? Could you put in a really small engine like a Rotax? The katana is a bit heavier than the RV-9A and it runs on a Rotax 912 80hp engine. The Rotax 914F is 115 HP. This engine says you should use the following fuels

min ROZ 95
EN 228 Super

and use 100LL only if the above aren't available... apparently the lead will foul things up in these engines. What are the above fuels? Are they MOGAS? Cheaper than 100LL?

Anybody ever used a Rotax in an RV?
 
Last edited:
Quote:
Remember from getting you PPL that you can always go up in octane but not down. Thus an 80 octane engine can run 100LL but a 100LL engine cannot run 80. Mogas (auto fuel) is almost always lower, 87 octane for regular (although I have seen 86), and 93 octane for premium. Some stations carry 100 octane unleaded race gas, at least in Charlotte they do.

Just completed a road trip up to Yellowstone and discovered that up there, regular unleaded is 85 octane and mid-grade is 87.
 
Ethanol

I would be interested in whatever happened to the yellow RV-4 team that was sponsored by a grain board a few years ago. They used 100% ethanol with no problems, I believe. If the demise of Avgas comes sooner rather than later, and mogas goes the same way a bit later, I would have no hesitation whatsoever in converting my hi-comp O-320 to run on 85% ethanol. The compression ratio is not a concern - just a matter of changing a jet or two and making sure that the seals and gaskets are compatible.
The real problem is going to be having the infrastructure to provide the fuel at all the local airfields. If I could get ethanol at any airfield now, I would seriously convert now.
Cheers

Martin in Oz
 
ethanol rv's

The Vanguard Squadron is a group of 4 Rv3's and 1 RV8 for training from eastern SD. They were bright yellow with blue trim and lettering. Within the last few months they have been repainted to blue, dark blue and green.

http://domesticfuel.com/?cat=10
has a picture.

Dave Wolles
finishing 9A
SD
 
That's so cool... I'm suprised to hear how easy it could be to adapt a standard aircraft engine to burn ethanol. Perhaps this is the way of the future (AVGAS may be around for a long time, but petrolium is certainly not going to be around forever).

I wonder if anyone will develop a flex-fuel mod for aircraft engines. How sweet would it be if you could dump in either AVGAS or ethanol, or a blend of the two !?!
 
ethanol

we had a presentation at our eaa chapter about 8 months ago on ethanol. the presenter was dr. max shauck -- http://www.baylor.edu/bias/index.php?id=34701

iirc, the only airframe problem was that ethanol doesn't like aluminum. there is a treatement for the inside of the tank, and the lines/fittings can be changed out to steel. on the engine, the only necessary mod was bigger injectors (to allow more flow -- as someone else pointed out the energy density is lower.) dr. shauck said that if he wanted to run 100ll, he just pulled the mixture way back and it ran fine -- he used to do airshows on ethanol, but would have to tank up on 100ll while flying his plane to the airshow venue. pretty interesting stuff. currently the infrastructure is not there, but it looks like that may be changing.

hth
 
As flex fuel cars become more popular we will begin seeing E85 at local stations. We have 2-3 such stations here in San Diego already. Worst case may be putting a transfer tank in my truck and filling from there. The cost of the fuel would certainly be cheaper than at the airport.
 
Baja_Traveler said:
As flex fuel cars become more popular we will begin seeing E85 at local stations. We have 2-3 such stations here in San Diego already. Worst case may be putting a transfer tank in my truck and filling from there. The cost of the fuel would certainly be cheaper than at the airport.
Click to expand...

Lots of stations in some parts of the Midwest have E85. As I hear it, farming communities are starting to use it to run equipment, trucks etc. Please somebody correct me here...I may have my facts confuzled but I remember reading something about this just a month or so ago.
 
AGE85

Just reading back through this thread, and noticed that nobody mentioned AGE85 (Aviation Grade Ethanol).
Check out www.age85.org/
Pretty cool stuff!

I may contact them to find out if there are any things I should do when I get to that firewall-forward stage to make eventualy conversion to AGE85 easier (e.g. using steel lines instead of aluminum?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.