What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Carburetor Lean Condition

Jbon

Active Member
My RV6 is running a carbureted O360, stock, except for 9:1 pistons. Since I’ve owned the airplane I have suspected that the engine ran a bit lean. I’m hoping that one of you have experienced my symptoms, and can comment.

The carb is a M/S MA-4-5. When I first acquired the airplane, I decided to send the carb out for inspection. Mainly for peace of mind, since the airplane had not been flying, but also because upon shutdown, there was not the rise in RPM one would expect. Adjusting the mixture screw didn’t help. The shop said all was good, but they did drill out both the main and idle jets to proper specs, saying that was not unusual. This really didn’t affect the lack of rise on shutdown situation, but the engine ran well, so I didn’t worry much about it. I have unscrewed the idle mixture screw about as far as I dare (4 turns), but still no change. Further evidence of a lean condition became apparent when operating out of a high elevation airport. Taking off at 7,000’+ MSL, I would expect to have to lean a good bit in order to get maximum power from the engine, but leaning the mixture didn’t seem to have much effect.

I’ve downloaded flight data from the Dynon. It shows fuel flows to be around 12 gph late in the takeoff roll, and maybe getting up to around 13 gph while accelerating in the climb. (this is a fixed pitch propeller, so RPM changes w/ accel.) I haven’t calibrated the “Red Cube” fuel flow sender, just keeping the default settings, so I can’t be sure of its accuracy, but its other readings seem reasonable.

The other thing that occurs is roughness and about 150 RPM drop during run up when operating just on the electronic ignition, while the side with the mag showed the expected drop. It was suggested by Electroair that this, along with the lack of RPM rise at shutdown indicated a lean mixture, perhaps caused by an induction leak. Because of the otherwise smooth operation at low idle, I didn’t believe this was the case, but I tested for a leak using both a shop vac plugged into the inlet and soap bubbles, as well as spraying WD-40 around the carb and inlet pipes looking for an RPM change. Nothing indicated a leak. I decided to change out the intake gaskets anyway.

I spoke with the carburetor shop, and the guy clarified for me that the idle mixture setting has no affect on mixture once you are beyond about half throttle, and indicated that we may need to drill out both jets a bit more. I’ve pulled the carb, and am going to let them take a look at it next week.

My question is: Does this takeoff fuel flow look reasonable for an O-360 w/ 9:1 pistons and a fixed pitch prop? The data shows engine RPM at rotation (IAS 66.4 kts) was 2,300. Fuel flow, 11.9. Also, Is it common to have to be experimenting with jet sizing? He said that non-standard equipment, like a tuned exhaust will affect carburation, but I’ve got the same Vetterman 4 into 2 system that most RV’s sport, so I see nothing odd there. Anyway, I’d appreciate any inputs anyone might have.
 
You don't mention which model of MA4-5 you are running. If it is the 10-3878 they tend to run lean unless they have the Mooney mod. I had a WOT lean condition on mine which the mod cured. The mod includes a larger main jet as well as a restrictor for the air bleed on the "economizer" circuit which adds extra fuel during WOT operation. The 10-4164 already has this mod.
 
the 10-3878 they tend to run lean unless they have the Mooney mod. I had a WOT lean condition on mine which the mod cured

Same here. And most probably due to the Vans FAB. My engine was kind of stumbling at full power settings, and the M mod cured it. Now seeing, with a CSP turning 2700, close to 15USG during TO, field elevation 1'300ft.
 
A stock O-360 should flow 16.5 gal at 2700 rpm full rich mixture.
With a fixed pitch prop and lower rpm at take of, your fuel flow seems normal to me. But 12 gal/ 16.5 = 73% power full rich, it may be a bit to low.
It is normal to change a carb nozzle to solve a lean issue.
In the experimental world we install parts to increase the airflow through the engine to get as much power as possible.
To get the right fuel flow and mixture, nozzles sometimes have to be changed.

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pdf/13-19260.pdf
https://msacarbs.com/technical-data/service-bulletins/
https://www.expaircraft.com/PDF/marvel-schebler-OH.pdf

Good luck
 
The 7K TO experience is not definitive. The differences are not huge and if your carb is so lean as to produce max power mixture at 7000' with full mixture, pretty sure you would have serious problems at sea level. You should really calibrate the red cube, as that is an excellent tool for diagnosis on this issue. Given that it was never calibrated, its output means little here. The default values are sometimes close to actual, but not universally. Depends a lot on the installation.

Suggestion: Go to 3000 feet and provide enough throttle for 26 or 2700 RPM. Start full rich and observe EGT. Then lean at a moderate pace until the EGT peaks at it's highest point and starts to drop. Report back with the full rich EGT and peak EGT. That will help us to see how rich or lean you really are.

FYI, idle mixture becomes irrelevant at around 1200 or so RPM, not half throttle. What is the typical MAP that you get at idle when the engine is fully warmed up? Ever get a stumble when accelerating from idle?

If the shop already drilled out the jets, it sounds like they are quite competent have a good idea what your engine needs. The vetterman is a cross over and therefore will flow a tad better than the spam cans, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it a tuned exh system. Their dyno data seems to imply that they are getting just a bit better scavanging.
 
Last edited:
You don't mention which model of MA4-5 you are running. If it is the 10-3878 they tend to run lean unless they have the Mooney mod. I had a WOT lean condition on mine which the mod cured. The mod includes a larger main jet as well as a restrictor for the air bleed on the "economizer" circuit which adds extra fuel during WOT operation. The 10-4164 already has this mod.
Al, thanks for your reply. I just checked, and yes, it is a model 10-3878. I remember when the shop drilled out the jets, they said it wasn't an unusual to have to do that, so I suppose he was referring to the "Mooney Mod". I don't know if he added the restrictor for the air bleed, or not, but I'll ask.

Generally, the engine runs well, but I have on occasion experienced some transient roughness early in the takeoff climb. The last time this happened, I turned off the electronic ignition, running on just the mag, and things smoothed out. When I turned it back on, it remained smooth, so like I said, the condition is transient.

I first thought the problem was with my electronic ignition, and I had it thoroughly checked out by Electoair. They found no problems, but explained that EIS's are more sensitive to an over lean condition than a mag. I can't wrap my head around it, but this certainly seems to be the case.

Thanks again for taking the time to respond.

John
 
Same here. And most probably due to the Vans FAB. My engine was kind of stumbling at full power settings, and the M mod cured it. Now seeing, with a CSP turning 2700, close to 15USG during TO, field elevation 1'300ft.
Dan, Thanks for the reply. What do you mean by "Vans FAB"? Glad to hear the Mooney Mod cured your issue, which sounds similar to mine. My fixed pitch prop will never turn 2700 at takeoff, of course, but the times I've experienced a stumble, it was early in the takeoff climb, and was transient.
 
A stock O-360 should flow 16.5 gal at 2700 rpm full rich mixture.
With a fixed pitch prop and lower rpm at take of, your fuel flow seems normal to me. But 12 gal/ 16.5 = 73% power full rich, it may be a bit to low.
It is normal to change a carb nozzle to solve a lean issue.
In the experimental world we install parts to increase the airflow through the engine to get as much power as possible.
To get the right fuel flow and mixture, nozzles sometimes have to be changed.

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pdf/13-19260.pdf
https://msacarbs.com/technical-data/service-bulletins/
https://www.expaircraft.com/PDF/marvel-schebler-OH.pdf

Good luck
Thanks Avanza! Good info. I am hoping making a second pass at enriching the mixtures will resolve my problem. I guess what surprises me is that both idle mixture, and main jet mixture appear to be too lean.
 
The 7K TO experience is not definitive. The differences are not huge and if your carb is so lean as to produce max power mixture at 7000' with full mixture, pretty sure you would have serious problems at sea level. You should really calibrate the red cube, as that is an excellent tool for diagnosis on this issue. Given that it was never calibrated, its output means little here. The default values are sometimes close to actual, but not universally. Depends a lot on the installation.

Suggestion: Go to 3000 feet and provide enough throttle for 26 or 2700 RPM. Start full rich and observe EGT. Then lean at a moderate pace until the EGT peaks at it's highest point and starts to drop. Report back with the full rich EGT and peak EGT. That will help us to see how rich or lean you really are.

FYI, idle mixture becomes irrelevant at around 1200 or so RPM, not half throttle. What is the typical MAP that you get at idle when the engine is fully warmed up? Ever get a stumble when accelerating from idle?

If the shop already drilled out the jets, it sounds like they are quite competent have a good idea what your engine needs. The vetterman is a cross over and therefore will flow a tad better than the spam cans, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it a tuned exh system. Their dyno data seems to imply that they are getting just a bit better scavanging.

Thank you Ir172! Some great information here. When I get the carburetor back from the shop, I'll run your tests. And yes, calibrating the "Cube" has been on my list of things to do. I'll have to do a search of the forum to learn how best to go about this. I'm guessing it involves some careful record keeping of actual fuel usage, and then tweaking the numbers until I get it dialed in. Also, I'll pass along your information on the Vetterman. Hopefully that will be useful to the shop.
 
Same here. And most probably due to the Vans FAB. My engine was kind of stumbling at full power settings, and the M mod cured it. Now seeing, with a CSP turning 2700, close to 15USG during TO, field elevation 1'300ft.

Dan 57 is correct that Vans FAB provides better airflow through the carb, compared to most certified aircraft Marvel Schebler carbs are used on. Another reason that you might be running slightly lean, is that you have a less restrictive exhaust system, compared to certified aircraft. I have lots of tech info on modifying & overhauling these carbs. If interested, shoot me a PM with your email address.
 
+1 on lean running carb RV's due to low restriction air intake and exhaust. Typ GA engine installations are very restrictive.

What do plugs look like? Is the porcelain bright white or light brown.

Do ground runup 2000-2200 rpm. Slowly lean and note if RPM rises before dropping as you get nearer lean cutoff. If it just drops you are too lean. If you have CS prop this should still work; showing RPM rise or change as you lean. At this RPM you should be below Governor range. If not try it at 1800-2000 rpm. You may want tie downs to do ground runs.

I had this lean condition with my RV4 O320. I drilled the main jet out incrementally. We are talking a few 1000's of an inch. Big difference.
 
Thank you Ir172! Some great information here. When I get the carburetor back from the shop, I'll run your tests. And yes, calibrating the "Cube" has been on my list of things to do. I'll have to do a search of the forum to learn how best to go about this. I'm guessing it involves some careful record keeping of actual fuel usage, and then tweaking the numbers until I get it dialed in. Also, I'll pass along your information on the Vetterman. Hopefully that will be useful to the shop.

GIven that the carb guy has already drilled out your jet, I would be very cautious with the advice here to drill it out. Yes, stock is often too lean, but your guy knows this and drilled it out accordingly.

Normally we calibrate the FF by using the qty required to re-fill full tanks and compare to what the instrument said we used and tweak accordingly. In your case, we need it now. I would create an accurate one gallon container. Pull the hose off the carb and insert into the container. Reset the fuel level to the default on EFIS and turn on the boost pump. Turn off when the fuel reaches the 1 gallon mark. See what the EFIS said you used and make adjustment to K factor. Repeat several times. THe challenge here is that most EFIS' only show fuel used with one decimal point of resolution. If you can find a 5 gal container, it will give more accurate calibration results, as the limited precision is less of an issue. An alternative is to repeat 5 times with the one gal container before checking results.

Larry
 
Last edited:
GIven that the carb guy has already drilled out your jet, I would be very cautious with the advice here to drill it out. Yes, stock is often too lean, but your guy knows this and drilled it out accordingly.

Normally we calibrate the FF by using the qty required to re-fill full tanks and compare to what the instrument said we used and tweak accordingly. In your case, we need it now. I would create an accurate one gallon container. Pull the hose off the carb and insert into the container. Reset the fuel level to the default on EFIS and turn on the boost pump. Turn off when the fuel reaches the 1 gallon mark. See what the EFIS said you used and make adjustment to K factor. Repeat several times. THe challenge here is that most EFIS' only show fuel used with one decimal point of resolution. If you can find a 5 gal container, it will give more accurate calibration results, as the limited precision is less of an issue. An alternative is to repeat 5 times with the one gal container before checking results.

Larry

Good idea on the fuel flow calibration. While I have the cowl off, I’m going to preform the test as you described, using a 5 gal. can. I’ll have to do some research, but I’m wondering if there’s a formula for determining how much to adjust the K-factor to get a X change in the readout?

Regarding further drilling of the carb, I spoke to the guy at the shop who worked on it. After hearing my symptoms, he admitted that it needs further drilling. He knows what he did before, so I’m not too worried that he’ll over do it. At this point, I don’t see I have much choice, as I’ve checked everything else.

John
 
GIven that the carb guy has already drilled out your jet, I would be very cautious with the advice here to drill it out. Yes, stock is often too lean, but your guy knows this and drilled it out accordingly.

Normally we calibrate the FF by using the qty required to re-fill full tanks and compare to what the instrument said we used and tweak accordingly. In your case, we need it now. I would create an accurate one gallon container. Pull the hose off the carb and insert into the container. Reset the fuel level to the default on EFIS and turn on the boost pump. Turn off when the fuel reaches the 1 gallon mark. See what the EFIS said you used and make adjustment to K factor. Repeat several times. THe challenge here is that most EFIS' only show fuel used with one decimal point of resolution. If you can find a 5 gal container, it will give more accurate calibration results, as the limited precision is less of an issue. An alternative is to repeat 5 times with the one gal container before checking results.

Larry
That is good advice. You can always buy a new main jet. DRILLING is more like ream... again very small amount of material removed at one time. I recall I went at my RV4's O320 at least 4 times before I was getting a slightly over rich mixture at full power. So even if it was "drilled" it may need to opened up more. Finding what PN is the richest main jet for MS carbs is a mystery to me. It is not like motorcycles or hot rod carbs you can get a box of numbered main jets and tune both main and midrange (needle setting) and other circuits (idle) with a twist of a screw driver.

Really the best way is send it to a CARB Repair Station with Flow Bench that is willing to work on "experimental" stuff. Most repair stations stick to the BOOK and will not modify it for you. Some will work with you. All the DIY approximate flow measurements are clever but never really going to be super precise.

The engine is telling you if it's too lean. Plug color is one. You should never lean at full power to 75% below you can. At 75% power or less with fixed pitch prop, you should see RPM increase as you lean then drop in RPM as you continue to lean. If not it just drops as you lean you are too LEAN. Regardless of any other test you do.

My suggestion of doing it on ground works well. Constant Speed Prop complicates it a little. You need to find at what point your prop control has no affect in making the prop blades more course (lower RPM). Then run the engine at that RPM and do the slow lean test and look for RPM rise. It should rise significantly as you get to the "stoichiometric" ideal best power. RPM should increase about 100 to 150 RPM or more. The more RPM rise before drop the merrier. To a point. ***

*** This is why after engine start, get it stabilized, Oil P good, LEAN the living daylights out of your sky scooter engine for taxi. Otherwise you can foul plugs. Enrichen before runup and take off of course. (NOTE HIGH ALTITUDE: You may have to lean for run up and takeoff. This LEAN and not RPM rise will give you a good idea. Some call for leaning on take off roll and sensing increase in power. Taking off full rich on a hot mountain strip has lead to many disastrous accidents. The SEEK Peak RPM works to tell you about your ideal mixture. We ONLY run full rich on take off and power settings above 75% for cooling and increase detonation margins, NOT efficient and NOT best power. That is why getting to less than 75% power or less and leaning as quickly as reasonable is best for your pocketbook.
 
Last edited:
Good idea on the fuel flow calibration. While I have the cowl off, I’m going to preform the test as you described, using a 5 gal. can. I’ll have to do some research, but I’m wondering if there’s a formula for determining how much to adjust the K-factor to get a X change in the readout?

Regarding further drilling of the carb, I spoke to the guy at the shop who worked on it. After hearing my symptoms, he admitted that it needs further drilling. He knows what he did before, so I’m not too worried that he’ll over do it. At this point, I don’t see I have much choice, as I’ve checked everything else.

John

both the dynon and garmin manuals give a calculation that involves the existing K factor, the fuel added and the reported fuel used and results in a new K factor. Getting this done will allow you to provide good feedback to your carb guy for further adjustment to the jet. FF at any given power setting is one of the best and easiest ways of insuring adequate fuel delivery. Lyc operating manual has a chart that provides a recommended fuel flow for every combination of RPM/MAP and is conservative.

discussion of restrictive exhaust. This is usually not the issue. It is all about velocity and tuning of the locations of junctions to improve In / Exh overlap scavenging (what your guy referred to as tuned exhaust). Vetterman went to the dyno with both 1.75" (what he thought was the minimum size) and a new 1.5" exhaust systems. The 1.5" version produced a bit more horsepower. Many misunderstand the principles involved in exh design. This is for naturally aspirated engines. Turbos a whole different matter.
 
Last edited:
discussion of restrictive exhaust. This is usually not the issue. It is all about velocity and tuning of the locations of junctions to improve In / Exh overlap scavenging (what your guy referred to as tuned exhaust). Vetterman went to the dyno with both 1.75" (what he thought was the minimum size) and a new 1.5" exhaust systems. The 1.5" version produced a bit more horsepower. Many misunderstand the principles involved in exh design. This is for naturally aspirated engines. Turbos a whole different matter.
The issue is with the FACTORY planes this engine and carb were certified on. The Air filter plastered on the face of the lower cowl bowl of a Cessna is terrible. No pressure recovery. The exhaust are really terrible with a "muffler" and odd untuned lengths. Van's FAB and almost any straight 4 into 4, Cross over or 4 into 1 headers on Kit planes are better and make more HP. That means more fuel. Stock Certified Engine/Carb combo with Van's FAB RAM air (and going much faster) and free flowing exhaust will make the engine run lean... guaranteed.

As far as diameter and ideal lengths of the exhaust pipes those have been researched to death. Cafe' Foundation back in the day had some great tests. Vetterman makes good exhaust but I find he is biased in his test results, especially when trying to prove 4 into 1 is not better. Sure. His 4 into 1 he slapped together was not good and far from optimal. He used that for his test, not a good 4 into 1. Headers do have potential for more power, and why every Formula F1 car and Drag race car has "tuned" "headers" with big collectors. However a poorly designed 4 into 1 may not be much better than 4 separate pipes.

The worst design for any 4 Cyl Lyc are "Y" Pipes where #1 & #3 (left side) tied together, and #2 and #4 (right side) tied into one. This is counter productive for scavaging. However it makes a clean installation.

Scavenging of exhaust gas to facilitate induction is tricky and only valid or idealized for one altitude and RPM/Power and less at any other parameter. So you have to define what power/rpm and altitude you are trying to optimize.

Bottom line our fast Van RV's with FAB and good pipes (cross over, semi tuned 4 into 4, or tuned 4 into 1) has way better engine volumetric air flow than any stock Cessna or Piper. MORE AIR NEEDS MORE GAS = MORE HP. A 160HP C172 is likely not making near 160 HP in any condition. It is choked off. So when an RV engine makes more power than a Cessna with same engine (and carb), it is not like RV's are magic, just that the GA planes are pretty poor. The delta HP increase of same engine / carb combo installed in GA vs RV is significant. This is why the company POWER FLOW has made a mint selling better exhaust for Pipers, Cessna's and other Std. Cert plane, claiming some big improvement in aircraft performance, which I tend to believe. Again their pipes are not magic, just the stock ones are awful, and intake is equally poor.

There is no free lunch but good induction and good exhaust is next best thing. This better intake and exhaust will make an engine for C172 run LEAN in an RV. Too lean? May be. In my experience my O320 160HP was very lean. I found O360's have some carb PN/models that do OK as is, likely Engine Carb combos for older Carbureted Mooney's. Mooney is a fast plane for GA, and they tried to capture ram air induction. Their pipes were OK I recall. So they may work stock in an RV.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top