Don
Well Known Member
Van's is offering, for a limited time, an "inexpensive" O-320 for $20,900 (fixed pitch only). I'm comparing this to Penn Yan Aero's LX-O-320 for 21,850 (fixed pitch). Both appear to have the same accessories (2 Slick magnetos, harness, carb, and lightweight starter) and the same 2000 hour TBO. The Penn Yan Aero engine has the camshaft roller lifters.
I'm building a 9A and am about ready to order the "finish kit" (which is about as much of a misnomer as the word inexpensive is in O-320 advertisement - but I digress) and I need to make some decisions. I plan to use a Catto prop so I'm not concerned about the difference between a 25 and 40 hour Phase I program.
I see three possible advantages to the Penn Yan engine - one is there's no rush buying it. Van only has a few inexpensive engines left and I need to act fairly soon. My reputation for holding on to my money may rival Van's but I'm not nearly as well known as Van. Tomorrow's buck always seems to be worth less than todays - but the difference in this case is likely nearly meaningless. Second, the Penn Yan has the roller bearings. I have no idea if these are worth an extra $950. Penn Yan suggests they reduce cam shaft spalling, especially on a dry start of if there's corrosion. My question is how much difference? Third, the Penn Yan has some options available that look interesting, such as "port, polish and flow match" for $800 and add 10HP (I'm not interested in debating how many HP to put in an RV-9
), a piston cooling oil nozzle kit and electronic ignition.
I'm not an engine guru but both engines, barring FAA considerations, look nearly equal in terms of reliability with a possible edge going to the Penn Yan Aero. I'd like to hear opinions, especially from folks with experience and those that know engines.
Don
I'm building a 9A and am about ready to order the "finish kit" (which is about as much of a misnomer as the word inexpensive is in O-320 advertisement - but I digress) and I need to make some decisions. I plan to use a Catto prop so I'm not concerned about the difference between a 25 and 40 hour Phase I program.
I see three possible advantages to the Penn Yan engine - one is there's no rush buying it. Van only has a few inexpensive engines left and I need to act fairly soon. My reputation for holding on to my money may rival Van's but I'm not nearly as well known as Van. Tomorrow's buck always seems to be worth less than todays - but the difference in this case is likely nearly meaningless. Second, the Penn Yan has the roller bearings. I have no idea if these are worth an extra $950. Penn Yan suggests they reduce cam shaft spalling, especially on a dry start of if there's corrosion. My question is how much difference? Third, the Penn Yan has some options available that look interesting, such as "port, polish and flow match" for $800 and add 10HP (I'm not interested in debating how many HP to put in an RV-9
I'm not an engine guru but both engines, barring FAA considerations, look nearly equal in terms of reliability with a possible edge going to the Penn Yan Aero. I'd like to hear opinions, especially from folks with experience and those that know engines.
Don