Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Stock Lycoming
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

daveleikam(at)wi.rr.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:38 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

I am close to ordering my engine.  I  originally wanted a BPE engine.  In order to save $$ I am now leaning  toward a stock XIO-540 and Hartzell prop combo from Van's.   I am  looking for opinions on this decision regarding engine reliability, LOP  operation with Bendix injection system, smoothness and overall performance  compared to the BPE or other engine shop engine.  I will probably install  an ElectroAir ignition with one mag.  Thanks in advance for the  input.

  

 Dave Leikam

RV-10 #40496

N89DA  (Reserved)

Muskego, WI



   [quote][b]

Kelly McMullen

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Posts: 1188
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:02 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

Hard to go wrong with stock. That doesn't necessarily mean factory

built via Vans. I'd guess that the authorized engine kit shops, like

Barrett and Aerosport and Mattituck could be pretty competitive on

price if you stay with stock components. It is the changing fuel

system, ignition, sump, compression ratio, etc that add to the bottom

line. I'd be inclined to pursue quotes from at least the two shops

closest to you on a real apples to apples comparison so you have

comfort with your decision.

I operate LOP frequently on my IO-360A1A with stock Bendix mags,

Bendix FI with stock injectors. Plenty smooth after I had prop

balanced. Not sure what you mean on performance. With stock setup you

should get 260hp, within +/- 5%.

While I think I want the cold air induction sump, I also realize it

entails extra work if I go that route. I'll try to get Bendix mags

instead of the stock Slick. That's about all the changes I'd go for.

The closer to stock you stay, the quicker you finish....but you

already knew that.



On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Dave Leikam <daveleikam(at)wi.rr.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   I am close to ordering my engine.  I originally wanted a BPE engine.  In

 order to save $$ I am now leaning toward a stock XIO-540 and Hartzell prop

 combo from Van's.   I am looking for opinions on this decision regarding

 engine reliability, LOP operation with Bendix injection system, smoothness

 and overall performance compared to the BPE or other engine shop engine.  I

 will probably install an ElectroAir ignition with one mag.  Thanks in

 advance for the input.



 Dave Leikam

 RV-10 #40496

 N89DA (Reserved)

 Muskego, WI

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor
KCHD

carl.froehlich(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:37 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

I went down the same road.  I liked the BPA engine but the cost was $8K - $10K more than the deal you get at Vanâ€™s.  Considering the marginal gain from the cold air induction, I decided BPA did not present a value for me.  

   

I routinely run LOP above 6000â€™ in my RV-8A, IO-360 (O-360 back fitted with Air Flow Performance fuel injection) and dual electronic ignitions and the Hartzell blended airfoil prop.  The engine runs significant cooler and smooth.  I expect the same from the XIO-540 from Vanâ€™s.  I recently completed RV-10 near me runs 20-30 degrees LOP, 176 kts TAS at 12 GPH.  This is with a Vanâ€™s stock IO-540 (mags) and Hartzell prop.  

   

Bottom line, you can get more engine if you want it â€“ if you have no issue with cost and want to routinely feed it the fuel needed to get that margin of extra performance.  For me, and what I want the airplane to do, the Vanâ€™s engine/prop deal is the value proposition.  

   

Carl Froehlich   

       

From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Leikam

 Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 9:37 AM

 To: RV-10 matronics

 Subject: Stock Lycoming  

  

  

     

I am close to ordering my engine.  I originally wanted a BPE engine.  In order to save $$ I am now leaning toward a stock XIO-540 and Hartzell prop combo from Van's.   I am looking for opinions on this decision regarding engine reliability, LOP operation with Bendix injection system, smoothness and overall performance compared to the BPE or other engine shop engine.  I will probably install an ElectroAir ignition with one mag.  Thanks in advance for the input.  

    

   

    

Dave Leikam

 RV-10 #40496

 N89DA (Reserved)

 Muskego, WI

AirMike

Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 514
Location: Nevada

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 8:54 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

You might want to wait for OSH in July/August. Mattituck and Vans always seem to have some kind of deal going the coincides with OSH. Last year Vans had a great deal on a prop/engine combo. I got a fair deal on a Mattituck at OSH 2007. Nice engine, and Mattituck claims a 2500 hr TBO on the TMX-IO540. They throw in the freight and even provided lift gate residential delivery at no extra charge.

_________________
See you OSH '18
Q/B - sold.

noconwud(at)earthlink.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 9:29 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

Mike,



I've never been to OSH, but would love to go this year if I thought I could 

get a really good deal on an engine.  What was the price tag?



Andy

---

Matt Dralle
Site Admin

Joined: 08 Nov 2005
Posts: 25627
Location: Livermore CA USA

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 9:40 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

I can't offer any performance or reliability input at this point, but I can say that the customer service and quality of assembly from Aero Sport Power is excellent ( http://www.aerosportpower.com/ ).  They delivered on time and as promised and the IO-390 they built is a work of art. I went with gloss black and chrome and she is a beauty!  

Sue and Bart at ASP were great and emailed me photos of the build and break in processes along the way.  The engine arrived in perfect condition in a very well constructed, plywood box.  The 3-year warrantee from the first flight is also hard to beat.

Here is a link to all of the pictures I received from ASP and also some I took of the delivery:

http://www.mykitlog.com/users/category.php?user=dralle&project=638&category=2972

I also opted for an additional 10 hours of break in to get me past those initial, critical break in hours.  The log book shows 11.5 hours of total run time.  Also the peace of mind knowing that the engine is running great for that amount of time is comforting.  The extra $1k was well worth the investment in my opinion.  I won't have to sweat some extended taxi testing now...

Anyway, give Bart or Sue a call at ASP and talk to them about what they can build for you.  Great people; great service; great product.  http://www.aerosportpower.com/

Matt Dralle

RV-8 #82880/N998RV

Wiring...

At 07:36 AM 2/15/2009  Sunday, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  I went down the same road.  I liked the BPA engine but the cost was $8K - $10K more than the deal you get at Van’s.  Considering the marginal gain from the cold air induction, I decided BPA did not present a value for me.

I routinely run LOP above 6000’ in my RV-8A, IO-360 (O-360 back fitted with Air Flow Performance fuel injection) and dual electronic ignitions and the Hartzell blended airfoil prop.  The engine runs significant cooler and smooth.  I expect the same from the XIO-540 from Van’s.  I recently completed RV-10 near me runs 20-30 degrees LOP, 176 kts TAS at 12 GPH.  This is with a Van’s stock IO-540 (mags) and Hartzell prop.

Bottom line, you can get more engine if you want it – if you have no issue with cost and want to routinely feed it the fuel needed to get that margin of extra performance.  For me, and what I want the airplane to do, the Van’s engine/prop deal is the value proposition.

Carl Froehlich 

>From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Leikam

>Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 9:37 AM

>To: RV-10 matronics

>Subject: Stock Lycoming

> 

>I am close to ordering my engine.  I originally wanted a BPE engine.  In order to save $$ I am now leaning toward a stock XIO-540 and Hartzell prop combo from Van's.   I am looking for opinions on this decision regarding engine reliability, LOP operation with Bendix injection system, smoothness and overall performance compared to the BPE or other engine shop engine.  I will probably install an ElectroAir ignition with one mag.  Thanks in advance for the input.

> 

>Dave Leikam

>RV-10 #40496

>N89DA (Reserved)

>Muskego, WI

Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551

925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email

http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft

2008.12.31_-_RV-8_-_Lycoming_IO-390_Arrives_(26).jpg

Description:

Filesize:

134.99 KB

Viewed:

10219 Time(s)

2008.12.31_-_RV-8_-_Lycoming_IO-390_Arrives_(26).jpg

2008.12.31_-_RV-8_-_Lycoming_IO-390_Arrives_(24).jpg

Description:

Filesize:

146.05 KB

Viewed:

10219 Time(s)

2008.12.31_-_RV-8_-_Lycoming_IO-390_Arrives_(24).jpg

2008.12.31_-_RV-8_-_Lycoming_IO-390_Arrives_(4).jpg

Description:

Filesize:

130.82 KB

Viewed:

10219 Time(s)

2008.12.31_-_RV-8_-_Lycoming_IO-390_Arrives_(4).jpg

2008.12.12_-_RV-8_-_Aero_Sport_Power_-_Lycoming_IO-390_-_Assembly_Part_3_(3).jpg

Description:

Filesize:

167.67 KB

Viewed:

10219 Time(s)

2008.12.12_-_RV-8_-_Aero_Sport_Power_-_Lycoming_IO-390_-_Assembly_Part_3_(3).jpg

_________________
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator

msausen

Joined: 25 Oct 2007
Posts: 559
Location: Appleton, WI USA

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 1:02 pm Post subject: Stock Lycoming

.. or talk to any number of equally good US based companies and keep the dollars here.  I did find when I was looking at engines that the key really is apples to apples comparison.  Some throw in services that others charge for like balancing.  If you change one component you need to make sure it's the same with everyone.  Same thing with the prop, Jim Ayres is great to work with and matches Van's prices.  He gave me a really good deal on a new MT that someone ordered and changed their mind on.



  The Van's combo deal is a good price and I don't believe that anyone can beat it flat out, but don't expect to change or customize anything.  If you want to switch out one component here and there talk to the other shops and you may find they are competitive after having to order the extra components you want.  If you really want to save $$ go with a rebuilt for now and a used prop.  Oh, and you don't need to actually be at OSH or anywhere else for their "deals", they take the orders like usual and the last couple times they had way more than they actually advertised.  It's the old "we only have a couple left so you better order now" sales pitch.



Michael



--

dlm46007(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:14 pm Post subject: Stock Lycoming

It all depends whether a builder wants to experiment and build or fly. One

of my buddies has suggested that the RV10/IO540/Hartzell Prop takeoff is

like a cat shot; another just likened it to pedal down on his corvette. I

have nothing against experimenting but recognize that every change you make

from the original plans require adjustments and time to accomplish them. For

me it is the Van's IO540/blended prop. It goes like a bullet but when you

see the fuel flow on takeoff at 22 gal/hr, its time slow down and lean. 



--

robin1(at)mrmoisture.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:43 pm Post subject: Stock Lycoming

Dave & I have spoken off line about engine choices. I am VERY pleased

with my BPE engine but it does have a few "extras" vs. the stock Vans

engine. That being said I don't think the base BPE engine was anywhere

near $8-10K more that Vans. In fact I doubt my final engine with cold

induction, custom paint, 9:1 and extra bench break in time was close to

the numbers quoted. Of course I purchased the unit "pre-depression" so

maybe I wasn't looking as hard at some of the invoices. I think the key

as mentioned earlier is comparing apples to apples. In the end I paid a

fair price for a very strong performing engine. BPE went out of their

way to deliver exactly what I wanted at a good price (when considering

we are talking AVIATION). I personally would not change a thing on my

front end (BA Prop). That being said I doubt you can go wrong with 2 or

3 other builders mentioned earlier. Properly flown only time will tell.



http://www.painttheweb.com/rv-10/engine.htm



Robin

Do Not archive



--

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 5:59 pm Post subject: Stock Lycoming

Hundreds of hours running LOP on my Bendix system and all is well.

There are some things you can do to better balance your injectors,

and some places will work with you on it.  Bart at Aerosport

has always had an open offer with me to swap injectors to balance

the fuel flows as best I can.  He balanced them originally.

They have worked so good I haven't yet taken the time to see

how much more perfect I can get them.  It runs really well

LOP.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Dave Leikam wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   I am close to ordering my engine.  I originally wanted a BPE engine.  In 

 order to save $$ I am now leaning toward a stock XIO-540 and Hartzell 

 prop combo from Van's.   I am looking for opinions on this decision 

 regarding engine reliability, LOP operation with Bendix injection 

 system, smoothness and overall performance compared to the BPE or other 

 engine shop engine.  I will probably install an ElectroAir ignition with 

 one mag.  Thanks in advance for the input.

  

 Dave Leikam

 RV-10 #40496

 N89DA (Reserved)

 Muskego, WI

bkbrown(at)minetfiber.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:33 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

How many degrees lean of peak do you normally run at in typical cruise

settings? An example of fuel flow would be helpful.  On my 7 for instance, I

typically lean to a fuel flow (say 7.5 gph) at a given cruise power setting

and density altitude, knowing that particular fuel flow will put me 40 or 50

degrees LOP.  It's a quicker setup than trying to lean to a specific LOP

number.  I was just wondering how many degrees LOP you end up at.  It's cool

that your temps (and by inference, your fuel flows) are balanced at those

LOP settings.



--

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:04 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

I try to get the power set to 65% or less, then I lean to at least

25 degrees LOP on the richest cylinder (last to peak).  So I may

have it set anywhere from 25-70 degrees LOP depending on the day.

You do feel the power come back if you take it further LOP than

necessary.  But, I always lean using the EFIS as an initial starting

point, because then I don't have to worry so much about what

density altitude and conditions I'm in.  I do try to avoid EGT's

that stretch too far above 1400, so if that means leaning to

40 or 60 LOP on a particular day, I usually do, and typically

I end up with maybe one or two that are pretty close to 1400.

Considering that I don't run LOP under about 7,000', my fuel

flows are almost always 10gph or less....maybe 10.5 max, but

I don't see that often.  Usually 10.1 down into the 7's, depending

on altitude.  Common would be 8.5-10gph, as I don't get up in that

14,000-15,000' range too often.  At altitudes running 10gph

or so, I may commonly see 160-165kts TAS.  If I'm leaner than

normal, or higher, I can get down even to 155kts TAS or

anywhere in that 154-165kt range.  It's always an easy 3gph or

more less than if I were running ROP, and generally costs me

somewhere around 8 kts.  The range stretches incredibly though,

and I flight plan 160, and use the added range I get with LOP

to give me fuel margins on my planned stops.  It's really not

hard to have 4.5-5 hr legs running LOP, or even more.  But,

you have to remember you're going to need higher flows once

you start down out of altitude.  The temps are nice and cool

on the CHT's all the time running LOP.  I would just lean to

a fuel flow, and once I'm set up, I do actually use fuel flow

to manage temps, but I'm hesitant to JUST use fuel flow because

there are just too many variables that affect it.  I figure

with today's power in the EFIS's, I should use them. The Chelton's

have a great leaning tool built into the engine page.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Bob and Karen Brown wrote:

[quote] 

 

 How many degrees lean of peak do you normally run at in typical cruise

 settings? An example of fuel flow would be helpful.  On my 7 for instance, I

 typically lean to a fuel flow (say 7.5 gph) at a given cruise power setting

 and density altitude, knowing that particular fuel flow will put me 40 or 50

 degrees LOP.  It's a quicker setup than trying to lean to a specific LOP

 number.  I was just wondering how many degrees LOP you end up at.  It's cool

 that your temps (and by inference, your fuel flows) are balanced at those

 LOP settings.

 

 --

Kelly McMullen

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Posts: 1188
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:40 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

Hmm,

I guess I worry a bit less with my IO-360. I'll run LOP anytime above

4000 ft and 75% or less. I set the amount LOP based on power

generated. The closer to 75% the leaner I want to be, maybe 40 LOP. At

70% or less, I'll run between 0-10 LOP, because that is where my

engine runs smoothest, EGT and CHT temps are closest together. My

engine runs cool, often in the 280-290 range, rarely above 330 in

cruise.  Only if EGT or CHT on a cylinder goes unexpectedly high will

I abandon LOP or go significantly leaner.

I don't worry about how high peak EGT goes, as I have never seen it

over 1500, and it isn't a limiting factor for normally aspirated

engines. Depending on OAT, peak may be anywhere from low to high

1400s.

With the normally aspirated engines, the red box is somewhat smaller

than for turbos, and you mainly are protecting against long term

impacts of high internal combustion pressures, rather than detonation

per se. From what I recall from Walt Atkinson of APS, they haven't

generated true detonation on a normally aspirated engine running 100LL

with stock compression ratios of 8.7 to 1 or less. I would guess you

would have to be more conservative with higher compression ratios.

Kelly



On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 I try to get the power set to 65% or less, then I lean to at least

 25 degrees LOP on the richest cylinder (last to peak).  So I may

 have it set anywhere from 25-70 degrees LOP depending on the day.

 You do feel the power come back if you take it further LOP than

 necessary.  But, I always lean using the EFIS as an initial starting

 point, because then I don't have to worry so much about what

 density altitude and conditions I'm in.  I do try to avoid EGT's

 that stretch too far above 1400, so if that means leaning to

 40 or 60 LOP on a particular day, I usually do, and typically

 I end up with maybe one or two that are pretty close to 1400.

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor
KCHD

jim(at)CombsFive.Com
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:48 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

Tim,   You are so right about the EFIS systems and the amount of information they present.  I am still learning about the engine and what is "Right".  But the informationpresented is fantastic.  At first it is overwhelming, but you soon learn what to look at and what to let the computer monitor for you.The Advanced Flight Systems EFIS also has a tool for leaning.  It's easy to use.  Based on what I have seen of the many EFIS systems, I just can't image anyone building and not going the EFIS route.  There are many really fantastic systems out there.Is it time to do another "Poll" of the population and see what people are doing?Jim CombsN312F - Flying - Still in Phase I (32 hours)Do Not Archive--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com>I try to get the power set to 65% or less, then I lean to at least25 degrees LOP on the richest cylinder (last to peak).  So I mayhave it set anywhere from 25-70 degrees LOP depending on the day.You do feel the power come back if you take it further LOP thannecessary.  But, I always lean using the EFIS as an initial startingpoint, because then I don't have to worry so much about whatdensity altitude and conditions I'm in.  I do try to avoid EGT'sthat stretch too far above 1400, so if that means leaning to40 or 60 LOP on a particular day, I usually do, and typicallyI end up with maybe one or two that are pretty close to 1400.Considering that I don't run LOP under about 7,000', my fuelflows are almost always 10gph or less....maybe 10.5 max, butI don't see that often.  Usually 10.1 down into the 7's, dependingon altitude.  Common would be 8.5-10gph, as I don't get up in that14,000-15,000' range too often.  At altitudes running 10gphor so, I may commonly see 160-165kts TAS.  If I'm leaner thannormal, or higher, I can get down even to 155kts TAS oranywhere in that 154-165kt range.  It's always an easy 3gph ormore less than if I were running ROP, and generally costs mesomewhere around 8 kts.  The range stretches incredibly though,and I flight plan 160, and use the added range I get with LOPto give me fuel margins on my planned stops.  It's really nothard to have 4.5-5 hr legs running LOP, or even more.  But,you have to remember you're going to need higher flows onceyou start down out of altitude.  The temps are nice and coolon the CHT's all the time running LOP.  I would just lean toa fuel flow, and once I'm set up, I do actually use fuel flowto manage temps, but I'm hesitant to JUST use fuel flow becausethere are just too many variables that affect it.  I figurewith today's power in the EFIS's, I should use them. The Chelton'shave a great leaning tool built into the engine page.Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flyingdo not archiveBob and Karen Brown wrote:> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Bob and Karen Brown"> <bkbrown(at)minetfiber.com>>> How many degrees lean of peak do you normally run at in typical cruise> settings? An example of fuel flow would be helpful.  On my 7 for> instance, I> typically lean to a fuel flow (say 7.5 gph) at a given cruise power> setting> and density altitude, knowing that particular fuel flow will put me 40> or 50> degrees LOP.  It's a quicker setup than trying to lean to a specific LOP> number.  I was just wondering how many degrees LOP you end up at.  It's> cool> that your temps (and by inference, your fuel flows) are balanced at> those> LOP settings.>> --

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:54 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

I agree totally.  I am just pretty conservative and don't

fly for best speed...more for economy.  I have 8.5:1 pistons.

I know I could push it a little more, but in general I figure

that if I do it how I am, I'm giving some pretty good margins

against any worry.

Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Kelly McMullen wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 Hmm,

 I guess I worry a bit less with my IO-360. I'll run LOP anytime above

 4000 ft and 75% or less. I set the amount LOP based on power

 generated. The closer to 75% the leaner I want to be, maybe 40 LOP. At

 70% or less, I'll run between 0-10 LOP, because that is where my

 engine runs smoothest, EGT and CHT temps are closest together. My

 engine runs cool, often in the 280-290 range, rarely above 330 in

 cruise.  Only if EGT or CHT on a cylinder goes unexpectedly high will

 I abandon LOP or go significantly leaner.

 I don't worry about how high peak EGT goes, as I have never seen it

 over 1500, and it isn't a limiting factor for normally aspirated

 engines. Depending on OAT, peak may be anywhere from low to high

 1400s.

 With the normally aspirated engines, the red box is somewhat smaller

 than for turbos, and you mainly are protecting against long term

 impacts of high internal combustion pressures, rather than detonation

 per se. From what I recall from Walt Atkinson of APS, they haven't

 generated true detonation on a normally aspirated engine running 100LL

 with stock compression ratios of 8.7 to 1 or less. I would guess you

 would have to be more conservative with higher compression ratios.

 Kelly

 On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com> wrote:

> 

>

> I try to get the power set to 65% or less, then I lean to at least

> 25 degrees LOP on the richest cylinder (last to peak).  So I may

> have it set anywhere from 25-70 degrees LOP depending on the day.

> You do feel the power come back if you take it further LOP than

> necessary.  But, I always lean using the EFIS as an initial starting

> point, because then I don't have to worry so much about what

> density altitude and conditions I'm in.  I do try to avoid EGT's

> that stretch too far above 1400, so if that means leaning to

> 40 or 60 LOP on a particular day, I usually do, and typically

> I end up with maybe one or two that are pretty close to 1400.

daveleikam(at)wi.rr.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:51 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

Considering all the usual variables, what kind of average range would you 

say you get with the 10?  Longest ever?  Would you say having the cylinders 

flow matched etc. has any affect on efficiency or LOP operation?



Dave L.



---

scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:19 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

At 12,500 (about 19 inches) I burn 9.2 gph running just as Tim mentioned.  

My cylinder temps drop to 300 or less running this way. 

 

Scott Schmidtscottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com



From: Tim Olson  <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>

To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 5:59:23 AM

Subject: Re: Stock Lycoming



 --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com (Tim(at)myrv10.com)>



I try to get the power set to 65% or less, then I lean to at least

25 degrees LOP on the richest cylinder (last to peak).  So I may

have it set anywhere from 25-70 degrees LOP depending on the day.

You do feel the power come back if you take it further LOP than

necessary.  But, I always lean using the EFIS as an initial starting

point, because then I don't have to worry so much about what

density altitude and conditions I'm in.  I do try to avoid EGT's

that stretch too far above 1400, so if that means leaning to

40 or 60 LOP on a particular day, I usually do, and typically

I end up with maybe one or two that are pretty close to 1400.

Considering that I don't run LOP under about 7,000', my fuel

flows are almost always 10gph or less....maybe 10.5 max, but

I don't  see that often.  Usually 10.1 down into the 7's, depending

on altitude.  Common would be 8.5-10gph, as I don't get up in that

14,000-15,000' range too often.  At altitudes running 10gph

or so, I may commonly see 160-165kts TAS.  If I'm leaner than

normal, or higher, I can get down even to 155kts TAS or

anywhere in that 154-165kt range.  It's always an easy 3gph or

more less than if I were running ROP, and generally costs me

somewhere around 8 kts.  The range stretches incredibly though,

and I flight plan 160, and use the added range I get with LOP

to give me fuel margins on my planned stops.  It's really not

hard to have 4.5-5 hr legs running LOP, or even more.  But,

you have to remember you're going to need higher flows once

you start down out of altitude.  The temps are nice and cool

on the CHT's all the time running LOP.  I would just lean to

a fuel flow, and  once I'm set up, I do actually use fuel flow

to manage temps, but I'm hesitant to JUST use fuel flow because

there are just too many variables that affect it.  I figure

with today's power in the EFIS's, I should use them. The Chelton's

have a great leaning tool built into the engine page.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Bob and Karen Brown wrote:

[quote] --> RV10-List message posted by: "Bob and Karen Brown" <bkbrown(at)minetfiber.com (bkbrown(at)minetfiber.com)>

 

 How many degrees lean of peak do you normally run at in typical cruise

 settings? An example of fuel flow would be helpful.  On my 7 for instance, I

 typically lean to a fuel flow (say 7.5 gph) at a given cruise power setting

 and density altitude, knowing that particular fuel flow will put me 40 or 50

 degrees LOP.  It's a  quicker setup than trying to lean to a specific LOP

 number.  I was just wondering how many degrees LOP you end up at.  It's cool

 that your temps (and by inference, your fuel flows) are balanced at those

 LOP settings.

 

 --

dlm46007(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:47 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

The GRT EFIS and engine monitor also have a LEAN function  which show both graphically and in digital form the first and last cylinders to  peak.

   From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of  jim(at)CombsFive.Com

Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 7:48  AM

To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Stock  Lycoming

Tim,   

You are so right about the EFIS systems and  the amount of information they 

present.  I am still learning about the  engine and what is "Right".  But the information

presented is  fantastic.  At first it is overwhelming, but you soon learn what to look at  

and what to let the computer monitor for you.

The Advanced Flight  Systems EFIS also has a tool for leaning.  It's easy to use.   

Based on what I have seen of the many EFIS systems, I just can't image  anyone 

building and not going the EFIS route.  There are many really  fantastic systems out 

there.

Is it time to do another "Poll" of the  population and see what people are doing?

Jim Combs

N312F - Flying -  Still in Phase I (32 hours)

Do Not Archive

--> RV10-List  message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com>

I try to get the  power set to 65% or less, then I lean to at least

25 degrees LOP on the  richest cylinder (last to peak). So I may

have it set anywhere from 25-70  degrees LOP depending on the day.

You do feel the power come back if you take  it further LOP than

necessary. But, I always lean using the EFIS as an  initial starting

point, because then I don't have to worry so much about  what

density altitude and conditions I'm in. I do try to avoid EGT's

that  stretch too far above 1400, so if that means leaning to

40 or 60 LOP on a  particular day, I usually do, and typically

I end up with maybe one or two  that are pretty close to 1400.

Considering that I don't run LOP under about  7,000', my fuel

flows are almost always 10gph or less....maybe 10.5 max,  but

I don't see that often. Usually 10.1 down into the 7's, depending

on  altitude. Common would be 8.5-10gph, as I don't get up in that

14,000-15,000'  range too often. At altitudes running 10gph

or so, I may commonly see  160-165kts TAS. If I'm leaner than

normal, or higher, I can get down even to  155kts TAS or

anywhere in that 154-165kt range. It's always an easy 3gph  or

more less than if I were running ROP, and generally costs me

somewhere  around 8 kts. The range stretches incredibly though,

and I flight plan 160,  and use the added range I get with LOP

to give me fuel margins on my planned  stops. It's really not

hard to have 4.5-5 hr legs running LOP, or even more.  But,

you have to remember you're going to need higher flows once

you start  down out of altitude. The temps are nice and cool

on the CHT's all the time  running LOP. I would just lean to

a fuel flow, and once I'm set up, I do  actually use fuel flow

to manage temps, but I'm hesitant to JUST use fuel  flow because

there are just too many variables that affect it. I  figure

with today's power in the EFIS's, I should use them. The  Chelton's

have a great leaning tool built into the engine page.

Tim  Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Bob and Karen Brown  wrote:

[quote] --> RV10-List message posted by: "Bob and Karen Brown"

  <bkbrown(at)minetfiber.com>

 How many degrees lean of peak do  you normally run at in typical cruise

 settings? An example of fuel flow  would be helpful. On my 7 for

 instance, I

 typically lean to a  fuel flow (say 7.5 gph) at a given cruise power

 setting

 and  density altitude, knowing that particular fuel flow will put me 40

 or  50

 degrees LOP. It's a quicker setup than trying to lean to a specific  LOP

 number. I was just wondering how many degrees LOP you end up at.  It's

 cool

 that your temps (and by inference, your fuel flows)  are balanced at

 those

 LOP settings.

  --

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:58 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

I don't know what I've used for a longest range so far.  I think

somewhere in the 5 or 5.5 hour leg range, so maybe  750-800nm.

The plane is capable of more if you fly it higher.  You'll find

great economies above 12,000', and really good ones between

8,000-12,000'.  If a person had the want, it's not hard to do

OSH to Atlanta or more.  I know Jesse has done something like

OSH to Florida, right Jesse?  I myself have really never landed

with less than 12 gallons or so of fuel, so I don't push the

range as much as I could.  If I had extended range tanks I'd

feel better about using up all 60 gallons, but I like knowing

that there is plenty of fuel, more than the legal reserves,

and I consider that at ROP settings....so 12 gallons is just

under an hour....or if you pull back the power, maybe a little

more than an hour.  The RV-10 can cover a lot of ground in an

hour.  I've often taken off and seen my range be 500-700nm,

but once I have reached cruising altitude (if it were higher),

and started leaning, the range pushes to over 1000nm with

reserves (at that fuel flow).  Heck, think about it...at

8.5gph, you're looking at a 6 hour range with 1 hour reserve

at LOP settings, so you could do a 900nm leg if you wish.



I don't know if flow matched cylinders give all that much

benefit.  My original ECI Titans had special valve cuts

and stuff done at Aerosport.  The new ones I got after the

SB/AD came with a "venturi cut" valve or something like that.

Seems to me the cylinder run the same, and those are stock

ECI Titans.  I've heard that the benefits are fairly

minimal on our Lycs.  Now, flow matching the injectors

is another story.  Bart did mine originally.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Dave Leikam wrote:

[quote] 

 

 Considering all the usual variables, what kind of average range would 

 you say you get with the 10?  Longest ever?  Would you say having the 

 cylinders flow matched etc. has any affect on efficiency or LOP operation?

 

 Dave L.

 

 ---

Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.co
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 9:12 am Post subject: Stock Lycoming

I have a stock IO-540 plus porting.  LOP fuel flow varies between 10.5-11.0

at 8000 to 9.0-9.5 at 12000.  TAS is always about 160 knots, maybe +/- 3

knots.  Porting is supposed to get you about a 10% horsepower/effieciency

gain, but I can't say for sure I'm seeing that.



Dave Saylor

AirCrafters LLC

140 Aviation Way

Watsonville, CA 

831-722-9141

831-750-0284 CL

www.AirCraftersLLC.com

--

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum