[Jim Lewellyn]

I am considering the purchase of a flying RV6 with a 200 HP IO360 and a fixed pitch wood prop. I realize that 200 HP is more than recommended for a 6. The airplane has been flying in this configuration for over 10 years. Are there any issues or problems with this set up that I should be aware of?

Thank you,
Jim

 

[aadamson]

Just an observation

I am considering the purchase of a flying RV6 with a 200 HP IO360 and a fixed pitch wood prop. I realize that 200 HP is more than recommended for a 6. The airplane has been flying in this configuration for over 10 years. Are there any issues or problems with this set up that I should be aware of?

Thank you,
Jim

Jim, sorry, I can't comment on the RV6 specifics, but you did strike a thot or 2.

Is that a "stock" angle valved IO360 at 200HP, or a parallel valve that someone has modified to be at 200HP and if the later, can it really be proven?

It did seen odd that that power combination didn't have a CS prop. Depending on how it's prop'd, you may be able to improve the economy with a CS upgrade down the road, so it would be worth knowing what engine and if it could be converted later.

Just a couple of random thots.

 

[Jim Lewellyn]

Alan,

Thanks for pointing that out. It is an angle valve. I also felt that a CS prop may be a nice addition, and would appreciate any comments from those more experienced than me.

Thanks,
Jim

 

[Bob Axsom]

Try to Reach Dan Berry

I used to used to go to Boulder, Colorado every month for management reviews of the Kepler Project and the top guy there for mechanical engineering was Dan Berry. I received an e-mail from him in the past year stating that he had converted his RV-6 (which he built) to an IO-360 and was very pleased with the results. I do not have the e-mail or his address anymore but I believe he sometimes checks this website. He is an exceptionally capable and honest engineer and if you can get an input from him it would be very valuable. I believe he lives in Longmont, CO. The largest engine recommended by Van's for the RV-6 is the O-360-A1A and I was told the IO-360 would not fit inside the RV-6 cowl so the modifications to achieve compatibility should be questioned as well as the empty weight and gross weight issues. From another thread it was learned recently that fuel burn during conservative operations will actually be less with the larger engine.

Bob Axsom

 

[Jim Lewellyn]

Bob,

Thanks for the suggestions. I will try to find and contact him.

The cowling on this plane is modified as you said, and appears to be well done. The present owner has been flying the plane in this configuration for the 7 years that he has owned it. I have not had a chance to review the logs yet, but I believe the owner told me that this engine/prop has been installed since new (1992). The EW is a bit over 1100 (I don't have the exact number here in front of me). It has a very loaded panel (IFR capable - steam guages).

Thank you,
Jim

 

[gmcjetpilot]

More the merrier

I am considering the purchase of a flying RV6 with a 200 HP IO360 and a fixed pitch wood prop. I realize that 200 HP is more than recommended for a 6. The airplane has been flying in this configuration for over 10 years. Are there any issues or problems with this set up that I should be aware of? Thank you, Jim

Not sure anyone touched on it but the plane probably has a high empty weight and forward CG. The normal empty should be around 1,000 lbs to 1070 lbs. The recommend max gross (1600lbs). If the empty weight is too high it does not leave much room for pilot, passenger, bags and fuel. The aerobatic max gross is much more limited. If the empty weight is too high the plane is no longer aerobatic or only a solo aerobatic plane.

You can raise the max gross above what Van's recommends, since it's an experimental aircraft, but you are exceeding Van's Aircraft spec weight limits. It is pretty common for RV-6 builders to raise the Max Gross weight up some arbitrary amount (100-150lb above 1600 lbs) to account for a higher empty weight. However I would never exceed aerobatic limit weight that Van has set (I don't recall the Acro wight limit but recall 1275 lbs).

Also check the prop out carefully. The 200HP IO360 is very hard on props and requires you to watch that there is enough "crush pressure" to keep the prop from fretting from friction due to the engine powerful pulses. The trick is you need a larger diameter crush-plate and extension diameter to give more area to give more clamp force to account for the extra power. You have to re-torque the prop regularly if its wood. Other than that (besides the cowl mod that was likely done to make it fit), it should be like any other RV.

There is nothing wrong with HP but the weight is an issue to consider. As long as it is not crazy heavy and CG is not way forward you should be fine. Not trying to scare you away. It is what it is. If you have little RV time have an experienced RV pilot fly it and see what they think.

With two people, no bags and trim for hands off on final approach as a rough check that the CG and trim range.

 

[n468ac]

With two people, no bags and trim for hands off on final approach as a rough check that the CG and trim range.

Just to add ... you also need to see it fly hands off final, solo, less than 45 mins fuel, nothing else on board (NOTHING).

You need to see if you have enought up trim and up elevator on landing ... with the bigger engine you may be very close if not past the FW CG.

 

[rgbewley]

Engine Weight

If helpful to you, the angle head IO-360 is 28 lbs heavier than the O-360 p/h engine. This is dry weight.

 

[Jim Lewellyn]

Thanks for the help

To all who have posted a reply - thank you very much! This is an excellent group. If I proceed with a purchase on this one, I will be sure to look closely at the CG and try the practical tests on final.