Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Engine choice

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    6
    I like the Rotax 912 ULS. Don't own one but my brother does. It has about 250 hours on it and has been flying since 2006. We already had to change the engine mount rubbers. Engine got to flopping around particularly when it shut down. I don't like the mount on his Skyranger but the engine is fine. Zero oil leaks.
    My preference is the Lycoming O-235 IF you can handle the 240# dry weight. It has a 2400 TBO. I am building a Pietenpol Aircamper on the cheap. I have flown small Continentals more than Lycomings. The Continentals on the used market are more apt to have 6000 hour TT on them. I wanted an O-200 Continental because of the weight(200# versus 240#) but found in my price range they were bad worn.I bought a Lycoming O-235 with 2000 hours on it. Did a major on it pretty cheap because it was low time. Another thing I like about the O-235 is it is not nearly as prone to have carb ice with the carb bolted to the oil sump.

  2. #12
    dbcrn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    4
    How about a Corvair? 100-120HP, about 220# all up, smooth, cheap to build, really cheap to overhaul..... www.flycorvair.com

  3. #13
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    Quote Originally Posted by turtle View Post
    O-200, no contest. Look at the TBO, ADs and SBs for the Rotax. There's a reason most Rotax owners are first time buyers. If Diamond didn't switch to the IO-240 in the DA-20 they'd be out of business by now. Most pilots aren't used to / don't like high revving, buzzy engines.

    The Jabiru looks good on paper, if you can ignore the occasional catastrophic failures.
    Bingo. I'd prefer not to be flying around with an engine that sounds like it belongs on a Weed Whacker rather than an airplane.
    Unfortunately in science what you believe is irrelevant.

    "I'm an old-fashioned Southern Gentleman. Which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-***** when I want to be."- Robert A. Heinlein.



  4. #14
    kscessnadriver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Overland Park, KS
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by steveinindy View Post
    Bingo. I'd prefer not to be flying around with an engine that sounds like it belongs on a Weed Whacker rather than an airplane.
    The Rotax 912 is one of the smoothest, best flying engines I've ever flown behind. I'd pick a 912 over a O-200/235/240 any day of the week. Just have a mechanic who is willing to follow the book on the 912, you won't have any issues. The biggest issues is stubborn old pilots and mechanics who are too closed minded to understand the 912 and it's operational and mechanical limitations.
    KSCessnaDriver
    ATP MEL, Commercial Lighter Than Air-Airship, SEL, CFI/CFII
    Private SES

  5. #15
    CarlOrton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    DFW Area
    Posts
    729
    Quote Originally Posted by steveinindy View Post
    Bingo. I'd prefer not to be flying around with an engine that sounds like it belongs on a Weed Whacker rather than an airplane.
    Steve: Not dissing you; just giving my personal experience.

    Like you, there was no way, no how, that I'd go with a Rotax. Same thing - weed whacker "feeling".

    Until I flew one.

    Once in the air with it, I really didn't notice it. A few oddities (burping it, oil temp, etc.), but otherwise OK.

    Of course, I'm not putting one in my Sonex, but a few flights behind one definitely changed my mind about it. If you have a chance sometime, try one on. You might be surprised.

    Carl Orton
    Sonex #1170 / Zenith 750 Cruzer
    http://mykitlog.com/corton

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    I think y'all are talking past each other.

    The 912 is a four stroke engine, and a darned good one. As stated, one just has to know how to maintain them.

    The two cycle Rotax engines are the weedwhackers, and I'll agree that they're not my cup of tea, either.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  7. #17
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    Quote Originally Posted by CarlOrton View Post
    Steve: Not dissing you; just giving my personal experience.

    Like you, there was no way, no how, that I'd go with a Rotax. Same thing - weed whacker "feeling".

    Until I flew one.

    Once in the air with it, I really didn't notice it. A few oddities (burping it, oil temp, etc.), but otherwise OK.

    Of course, I'm not putting one in my Sonex, but a few flights behind one definitely changed my mind about it. If you have a chance sometime, try one on. You might be surprised.
    I've flown aircraft powered by one. I'm not impressed by it but then again I haven't found anything in that class that I am particularly thrilled with. It's one of the major reasons why I have kind of outgrown that aspect of aviation. The only reason I've bothered to fiddle around with it was my need to use building an LSA as a test run for building the real airplane that I want. It's a lot cheaper to work out the bugs in the design of subsystems (fuel tanks, etc) in something small and cheap instead having to figure it out once the primary design is actually built. Plus, I'll either have something to lower the local bug and songbird population in or something to sell to fund the construction of the primary design. If it works out well, I might create a company to sell the plans through.

    The two cycle Rotax engines are the weedwhackers, and I'll agree that they're not my cup of tea, either.
    OK....so dirtbike or snowmobile instead of a Weed Whacker. Either way, a whole lot of noise for not a lot of power.
    Unfortunately in science what you believe is irrelevant.

    "I'm an old-fashioned Southern Gentleman. Which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-***** when I want to be."- Robert A. Heinlein.



  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sidney, OH
    Posts
    444
    Another great discussion!

    I think all of the engines discussed have proven to be good choices in various aircraft and thanks to Carl for sharing his experience with the 912. Most of us have not flown anything with a Rotex engine, but if you look at all the various LSA models you'll see the 912 is the usual engine choice. That makes sense on the "turn-key" models where all the manufactures want to meet all the LSA performance specs. The lighter engine means more range and lower fuel burn, they're all stuck with 1320 lbs. GTW and a max speed of 138MPH. These same specs apply to the "you build it kit LSA's" (E-LSA). If your building a regular "Experimental" then your not limited to some FAA rules, just plain old physics regarding performance and your choice of power is wide open. It all comes down to "knowing your mission" as Steve has indicated in the post above mine.

    One last thought regarding the resale value of the R-2800 radial, I don't think they have sold enough of these to really give us a good handle, but the cost of a new engine is "competitive" with the list of flat fours. If I remember right the 2800 is a 5 cylinder so an overhaul may be higher. Just a guess on my part.

    Joe

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Dallas, Texas, United States
    Posts
    53
    An interesting alternative to all the above is a new 110hp engine from Viking built for aviation using Honda components: http://www.vikingaircraftengines.com/default.htm Half the price of Rotax 912 ULS and around the same size/weight. Might hurt resale but could be offset by the savings.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    FA40
    Posts
    767
    Quote Originally Posted by S3flyer View Post
    from Viking built for aviation using Honda components
    just so's y'know, the viking is a product from the same guy who sold subaru conversions a while back.

    http://www.meyette.us/engine.htm#egg
    http://www.meyette.us/RedLine.htm
    http://www.rv8.ch/article.php/20080529210403339

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •