skyfrog

skyfrog

Well Known Member
I'm still a long way from buying an engine, but I had a newbie question on the kit (experimental) engines.

They sound too good to be true: less cost, new components, improved engineering, etc. I also think it would be fun building the engine and learning.

But there's got to be a down side. Legally, how are they different from a certified engine? Does an experimental engine prevent night or IFR operation? Extra paperwork? Any other issues?

John Edwards
(Sorry for the newbie question, but I couldn't find the answers)
 
No

Hi John,
Negative. You can fly IFR and night with an experimental engine and yes, It is fun and relatively easy to assemble the four-banger Lycs. We did our 0-360 overhaul with the Lyc manual and have an engine for around half of new.

You also don't have to buy an STC to burn mogas.......you just burn it.
 
I have an experimental AeroSport Power engine in my RV-4. The only issue I found was because I wasn't flying a certified engine/prop combo that my phase I testing was 40 hours rather than 25. It wasn't really a big deal to me. It's not like I didn't like flying the RV. :)
 
wrong way round

Its not that Experimental engines are too good to be true...Its more like certified engines represent the very worse our society can offer all rolled up into one hugely expensive chunk of metal.

Experimentals is the way it should be...
 
Primary difference, as stated earlier, is that phase I flight testing time will be 40 hrs with an experimental engine instead of 25 . However it takes close to 40 hrs to do complete testing anyway.
 
Keep in mind that a lot of the "inexpensive" engine choices do not have pendulum absorbers on the cranks. Depending on prop choice you may have some serious operating restrictions. With another prop you may have none, and with another you may only think you have none because nobody ever did a propeller vibration survey.

Think "combination" and check the details.

Dan Horton
 
Aboslutely. The propeller bolts directly to the crankshaft so in my book both propellor and engine should be considered as a single system.
 
Understand that just because something is new, doesn't necessarily mean it is better. Not all new ideas work out in service. I would watch how those parts prove out in service before putting them on an engine on a single-engine aircraft. Many of the new parts will do very well. But some of them (like the Ryton sumps) will fail more often than the equivalent Lycoming parts, and some of them will prove to have premature wear problems.
 
all parts on most engines

are certificate parts,the engine as a whole is not certificated. but now some manufatures have the kit engine they have been selling foeever certificated.
these are the parts you would buy if you were repairing cylinders or such..i dont know if i would buy non certified parts though.
 
experimental engines

I traveled to Mattituck NY some months ago and had the privelage of having John Haas explain every detail of the engine building process to me as he put a collection of ECI components together to make a beautiful TMX-IOF360 several hours later. IMHO ECI makes a great package. There are dozens of enhancements to the kit that makes it superior to a certified "sister" engine. With all that said, the building process is fairly straight forward, but there are several "gotcha" points that a novice builder could stumble over. I might attempt a kit build now, but only with the assistance of an experienced engine builder. Good luck with your choices.
 
"serious" operating limitations is an overstatement. I fly a O-360A1A (No dynamic counterweights) with an old Harztell CS prop, and I don't ever find the restricted range a problem (1900-2200 RPM) I usually run 18-23" MP and 2350RPM in cruise. Low, I run 25 squared. The restriction is no real problem.
 
It's a wonderful thing

frankh said:
Its not that Experimental engines are too good to be true...Its more like certified engines represent the very worse our society can offer all rolled up into one hugely expensive chunk of metal.

Experimentals is the way it should be...
Click to expand...

I agree! Someone once said that the new Lycoming engines were designed about the time of Lindbergh's flight across the Atlantic. Granted it is an excellent engine, but 20-40 THOUSAND for an engine is ridiculous considering you can buy an entire car for that amount. The difficulty bringing new designs to market is incredible as seen with Innodyne and Deltahawk. General Aviation has almost been regulated into extinction.

Fortunately, the "experimental" catagory has allowed innovations and creativity to continue (composite, carbon fiber, etc). In addition the new Sport catagory has infused new excitement into aviation. The more I look into experimental aircraft, the more I realise the advantages. I don't know why I waited so long. Oh yeah, I waited until Vans had new designs with prepunched holes.

It's a wonderful thing!

John Edwards
 
When building your "kit" engine, remember; even a certificated A&P mechanic must be supervised when building an engine of a type he has not built before. So if you are building an engine that you have not built before, please obtain supervision of someone who has experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.