I was reading through some old posts and came across a thread by MTV that talked about puting a continental 0-240 into a j-3, pa11 or lightweight supercub..Sounds like a lightweight, economical (gas wise) engine, especially without electrical. Sounds like a heckova idea. Anybody done this or know much about these engines or a conversion like this on an experimental?
Thanks
Wadecalvin
How about the turbo rotax with 115 hp for 167 lbs.? Now we're talking lightweight and low fuel consumption. 4.5 gph.
I looked into this. It would make a great powerplant for a 1500 lb. cub. I was looking into it for my J-5. After looking at the HP/weight ratios of several engines I decided that it was pretty close to an 0-290.Originally Posted by wadecalvin
Tim
Piper J-5A C-90 N40877
J-5 Project Pictures
the Rotax would be great - but maybe to expensive?-
I thought I read on a post somewhere around here that the 0-290 weighed quite a bit more than the 240, but I guess it puts out a few more ponies too
I have heard that the ROTAX tbo is around 3-500 hours. Personally, ill keep their engine in my snowmobile.
Tim
Piper J-5A C-90 N40877
J-5 Project Pictures
The Rotax TBO of 300 hours is for their two stroke models.
Rotax makes aviation specific engines, and I believe the TBO for the 914 is around 1500.
Kenyacub-
Thanks for the update. What is the HP/weight/torque of the 914?
Tim
Piper J-5A C-90 N40877
J-5 Project Pictures
Specs for the standard Rotax 914 UL
100% Power - 5800 rpm - 102.6 ft.lb - 115 hp - 9 gph
75% Power - 5000 rpm - 77.6 ft.lb - 74 hp - 5.7 gph
65% Power - 4800 rpm - 70.1 ft.lb - 64 hp - 4.8 gph
The new 914 UL2 DCDI with the turbo and reduction gear has max torque at 4900 rpm at 106 ft.lb. I can't seem to find the fuel burn for this model.
You can see more info on
http://www.rotaxservice.com/rotax_engines/rotax_914.htm
And TBO is 1200 not 1500.
http://www.kodiakbs.com/engines/datasheets/914.pdf
Personally, I'm more interested in these.
http://www.brp.com/en-CA/Innovation/...ft.Engines.htm
Stewart
TBO on the Rotax 912 and 914 has been increased to 1500 hours, per Rotax service bulletin SB-912-041 and SB-914-027 respectively. You can view these SBs (and all other service info) at http://www.rotax-owner.com/
Cheers!
Joe
Those Bombardier engines do look nice, but I believe they weigh close to 400 lbs.
There is pic. of a exp. Rotax powered Canadian Cub on floats in the Piper Cub builders yahoo files section. Its hard to tell where the radiator is but its looks like a nice airplane. I rode in a Zenith 701 with a Rotax 912, it was a smooth engine. The owner tells me the published fuel burn is the truth, not a sales brochure figure. The down side is the cost.
Might have it all off on this one but, would the rotax engine with 106 ft.lb of torque with the reduction gear of 1 : 2.43 put out 106 x 2.43 = 257.58 ft.lb at the prop?
Yes, minus friction losses in the reduction gear.
Gordon N4328M
My SPOT: tinyurl.com/N4328M (case sensitive)
....at what rpm? 2016 RPM??
....and is 257.58 ft./lb.s enough poop to spin a big flat prop that'd yank a 1500 lb. Cub to TO speed in less than 100 feet??
Horsepower = Torque X RPM / 33000 when torque is measured in ft-lb.
Gordon N4328M
My SPOT: tinyurl.com/N4328M (case sensitive)
Guys,
Have you checked the prices of a new Rotax engine lately? The cost puts it out of my interest range.
Mike
O.K., I've got to ask.... Where would one go about getting an O-240?
I'm not aware of any production airplane that uses this engine, and I'm only vaugely aware that it is something like an O-200 case with O-360 cylinders... I didn't think Continental was in production with this engine. Maybe for military drones??
John Scott
While I respect the folks that use Cubs to make a living, my uses are for recreation and leisure - AND I'M NOT ASHAMED!!!
I have seen a few for sale. You can can contact premium aircraft parts. They had one for sale about a year ago...i think the rebuilt price was around $14K I think the IO-240 is more common though.
Tim
Piper J-5A C-90 N40877
J-5 Project Pictures
A nyone know the difference between an 0-240 and an IO-240?
The IO-240 is a certified engine from Continental. I seriously doubt it's going to be cheaper than a Rotax.
Take a look at Teledyne Continental Motor's web site.
It's installed on the Katana
MTV
I looked at the IO-240 to upgrade my O-200 PA-18 and did not like the new price of $32,000. It would have bolted on to my engine mount and fit under my modified PA-12 cowl and required a fuel pump for the injectors. There was not a good prop for the Cub application so it will have to be a 150/160 upgrade and everything new firewall forward for me.
The 240 was also used for a number of years on the European version of the Cessna 150, manufactured under license by Reims Aviation.
I'm betting there are rebuilders around somewhere on the used market, and new parts are available.
MTV
I'm sorry if I am stepping on others toes, but I just have to chime in here: Have you even looked at a Rotax 912/914 engine? Just looking at one of them is scarey. They are the most complex aircraft engine going, with many, many failure points that many other brands don't have. Sooner or later, it just may bite you in the a$$. I won't fly behind one of them. If going Experimental, the Jabiru engine looks much more like an aircraft engine than the Rotax's. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but this is just my 2c worth.
Mike
I did some googling on this subject not long ago. according to my research, at least some of the Reims F-150's used a 130 horsepower Rolls Royce (aka Continental) O-240, not an IO. I have to assume that the O-240 was a bored and/or stroked O-200. The IO-240 uses different style cylinder heads, etc. It is to the IO-360 what the O-200 is to the C-145/O-300.
The O-240 would be a cool replacement engine for O-200 C-90, etc if it was available. But never heard of any available on the used market, new from TCM, or of them being used on anything other than Reims 150's.
Rooster
The 240 induction system layout isn't compatible with a J3.
JimC
I know a guy nearby who has a NEW in the crate carbureted Rolls Royce 0-240.Been meaning to go check it out.I bet it would fit my cub with few mods.
I'm interested in knowing what cylinders they used.I know the IO-240 uses the cyl with the intake on the top.I think I could make that set-up work.
In the March 2006 Trade-A-Plane Mattituck TMX experimental engines lists a TMX IO-240B for $18,575 and a TMX IOF-240 for $24,990 I am sure they are higher today. Kenny
Mike, I flew a Rotax 912 on a Kitfox amphib for 600 hours, never a burp. It's a fine 4 stroke engine once you get used to the way it sounds. 5200 rpm cruse, 5800 on takeoff. Bill
I have to agree. They may be fine engines, with a good track record, but they're just way too "busy" for me: reduction drive, water cooling,dual carbs, ..... I like the Jabiru much better. If they made a lower rpm version of the 3300 that would make less hp but more torque,and turn slower so you can use a longer prop- that'd be the ticket. The 6-cyl Jabiru is 3300cc, aka 201 cubic inches-- kind of a modern,CNC-machined O-200.
Rooster
We have flown just over 5000 hours training on the 912 engine and have changed 5 engines...............Do the maths. Not one of them yet has been re-buildable. Smooth , reliable , powerful and economical yes, but durable it ain't !
So what happened? Any catastrophic failures, or just wore out fast?
Gordon, torque is measured in pound-feet rather than foot-pounds.
And the equation is
Hp = Torque*RPM/5252
5252 rather than 33,000
So,
Torque = 5252*Hp/rpm
JimC
The Jabiru isn't with out it's faults either. Jabiru recommends a wood or composite prop because their crank is not heavy duty enough to swing an aluminum prop.
Also the electronic ignition needs to be spun over fairly fast in order to start, so no hand proping.
They're said to be hard starting in the cold.
This all came from Legend Cub who has been working with them for a while.
Crash
JimC - Yes, you're right about the constant - I neglected to include the 2pi. Thanks. However ft lb and lb ft are equivalent.
Gordon N4328M
My SPOT: tinyurl.com/N4328M (case sensitive)
Crash,
The legend rep also told me they had issues with cooling on the Jabiru also but had gotten it under control and recommended CHT gauges for all cylinders. He also said it was a wonderful engine and had gobs of power for their application.
Keith
I am sure it is a nice engine for some applications but no aluminum prop and no had propping takes it off my list.
Out in the bush you need an engine you can start by hand if your battery ever gets drained.
Last winter I hand propped the IO-520 in my C-180 at -35 below for two days before I got a new battery.
Hand propping is a "must be able to" for me.
Crash
From what I understand, you can't prop a 912 either. Don't know if it's an ignition speed thing, a clutch in the reduction drive, or just what.
Think I'd stick to the good old Continental C85/C90/O-200 series for that power range-- tough to beat, and "Powerful as the Nation" too!
Rooster
How would a guy go about getting an engine to run if you couldn't prop it?
Is there some sort of push button gizmo that does it for you?
I think you have to use "the force". My CFI, Obey Juan Canopy, taught me how to do this as part of my tailwheel checkout years ago....
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks