What's new
Van's Air Force

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

RV engine choices

havent

Member
I'm wading into an RV7 quick build kit. At first I only considered the VANS Lycoming XIO-360-A1B6 (200 hp) and the XIO-360-M1B (180 hp). I wanted the 200 hp unit for more speed. But, in the end I picked the M1B because it's $8000 cheaper and weighs around 30 lbs less. For that, I suppose I can give up 7 mph.

After asking VANS about ways to get more power for the M1B, I learned that several after market shops offered power modified M1Bs with increased hp. Of the main players in this market (I stuck with those listed on the VANS engine I D form), the most economical appeared to be the Mattituck TMX IO-360-M1B at slightly less than VANS price for the experimental Lycoming M1B.

The three power mod options they recommend are the 9:1 high compression pistons, the Hall effect Plasma II electronic ignition, and the front facing cold air induction kit. They claim a 190 + hp result. The cost runs slightly less than half the cost of buying the standard experimental 200 hp engine. Sounds good, but is it really worth the slight performance increase (maybe 3-5 mph?)?

I actually think the electonic ignition is a good idea (replaces right mag) as it looks like it would cause better combustion and timing for smoothness. And I'm okay with the cold air induction kit as helpful for getting denser air to the fuel mixture for greater power (costs a lot, though, for probably fractional power increase). Any pro or con comments are welcome.

I'm concerned about the non-standard pistons though. Could any of you engine gurus give the pros and cons of making high compression piston mods to an otherwise standard engine? I'm concerned about how much it might shorten the life of the engine and cause unneccesary strain and heat to the engine. Is the compression ratio increase from 8.5:1 to 9:1 enough to create a problem? Also, if I ever have a piston problem, it seems like it would be much easier to get a standard piston rather than a high compression one. Mattituck says that their high compression piston is actually a standard piston for another engine (the IO-320, I think they told me) which is slightly taller than the standard one for the IO-360-M1B engine.

So, I'm looking for pros and cons from anyone who's savvy about these sorts of things.

Thanks,

havent

PS: I'm also checking into simple airframe mods like vortex fins, gear fairings, etc. to see if a few more mph of speed can be found there. Any suggestions that have worked for others?
 
This is completly my opinion, so take it for what it's worth, but with the future of 100LL being very questionable at this point, I personally wouln't build up and engine with anything more than the 8.5:1 compression pistons, so if needed, you can still burn auto fuel or something similar for the "next generation" AVGAS.

Just me though...:eek:
 
There really isn't a down side to going with 9:1 compression over stock. Half a compression point increase does not drastically increase the cylinder pressures and has no bearing on TBO, all things considered.

There are both cast and forged 9:1 pistons on the market. You have a choice. I personally prefer the forged as they are stronger IMO.

You also can run high octane mogas with 9:1 pistons. People do it all the time. Smells like a lawn mower though:rolleyes:

Allen Barrett
BPE, Inc.
 
Vortex fins?

Thanks,

havent

PS: I'm also checking into simple airframe mods like vortex fins, gear fairings, etc. to see if a few more mph of speed can be found there. Any suggestions that have worked for others?

Hi Henry,
Did you mean vortex generators that are glued to the top forward wing skin? If so, save your money because they will cost you speed. As far as gear leg fairings and wheelpants, Van has them just about optimized. The James cowl/plenum seems to add several MPH as well. A well built, clean, light airplane will yield 200 MPH speeds and getting more from this point is a real effort.

Regards,
 
Pumped up Parallel Valve will run significantly higher CHT's than the 200HP angle valve. Hence the Angle will probably last longer. Given the same displacement, the angle valve is simply more efficient and has more cooling fin area. I like it better.
 
I'm concerned about the non-standard pistons though. Could any of you engine gurus give the pros and cons of making high compression piston mods to an otherwise standard engine? I'm concerned about how much it might shorten the life of the engine and cause unneccesary strain and heat to the engine. Is the compression ratio increase from 8.5:1 to 9:1 enough to create a problem?

Well I'm certainly not an engine guru but I have a friend who thought it was a good idea at the time to go for 9:1 pistons on his new IO360 to get a few more HP. Unfortunately he later discovered that Hartzell did not recommend any of their CS props with high compression pistons. So he paid a lot of extra money to purchase a composite CS prop which ultimately gave him trouble and cost him even more money. Turns out it was a VERY expensive 5 HP.
 
Steve,
Thanks for your response. Sounds like the angle valve engines have better cooling capabilities. As I've continued to study the engine options, I'm wondering about the IO-390-210 hp engine. Weighs only 8 lbs more than the IO-360-180 hp engine, is midway in price between the IO-360 180 hp and 200 hp, and VANS tells me that several have been used successfully in RV-7's. Know anything about this or have further insights to share?

Thanks,

Hank Avent
 
Pierre,

Enjoyed talking with you today about the Enigma display. If weather permits, I hope to fly over to you Monday to have a look. I'll try to call you Sunday evening to confirm that you'll be available.

Thanks,

Hank Avent
 
Back
Top