• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

300 CI "Rotax" type motor

skukum12

MEMBER
The Last Frontier
As we are aware, traditional avgas is on the way out. A suitable replacement doesn't seem to be available any time soon. Rotax motors run on auto fuel, put out a fair amount of power for their size and are becoming increasingly popular. Their displacement is small at around 75 cubes therefore high rpms and gear reduction is required.

So, why not a Rotax style motor in the more traditional 300+ cubic inch range? Less rpms, no gear reduction, auto fuel, air cooled cylinders and liquid cooled heads.

NO POLITICAL COMMENTS PLEASE!!!

Why or why wouldn't this be feasible? Cost? Weight? Complexity? Let's keep it to experimental for now.
 
The main thing that needs to be done is to modernize the combustion chamber design. The frying pan design still dates back to the '30s while technology has move far beyond that. Even the angle valve engines do not use a suitable squshband combustion chamber allowing for a properly controlled flame front.
Back in the '90s Continental worked with Honda in an engineering study on cylinder heads. I have not seen any mention of this since the original external photos of the engine were released.
A properly designed cylinder head would have a higher eternal volume as we see in all the vehicles made in recent history. This can easily be compensated with a more compact ridged engine core. The crankshaft would utilize a more ridged design, narrow bearings as all engines utilize today.
There is no reason a 300 ci direct drive engine could not put out 300+ HP and accept boost or gear reduction for far more power. All of these options can live happily on 87 to 91 Oct Non Ethanol that is readily available.

To do this the world would need to allow a new and more streamlined certification program allowing for incorporating today's modern lubricants.
This can easily be done since none of this requires any ground breaking development. Just needs the freedom of a different mindset.
 
A second part to the above, to utilize current engines. Unleaded fuel utilizes thinner piston rings that what the current air engines run. The auto industry made this change about 1977. The valve train reliability would greatly benefit from eliminate lead. The small dia valve stems and narrow seat areas in modern engines would be a simple engineering change.
This would allow reuse of the current engines but without the great increase of efficiency of the modern combustion chamber designs.
 
It really seems like a no brained to switch over to MoGas. AND not being political at all, but in today’s times it seems like the certification process could be streamlined to help speed up the transition away from AVGas. It is just common sense really.

Let’s get to Turbo Fuel Injection as soon as possible.

Diamond seems to have a pretty good Diesel engine they run reliably. I am FAR from a gear head, but is that 180hp engine they run a reasonable weight? I know is sips fuel at about 7-8 gallons per hour at 75%
 
I wish Honda or Yamaha would build an airplane specific engine to give Rotax a little competition. 150-200 HP on MoGas, sipping under 5 gallons an hour. Yes, please!
 
I wish Honda or Yamaha would build an airplane specific engine to give Rotax a little competition. 150-200 HP on MoGas, sipping under 5 gallons an hour. Yes, please!
That would be sweet. We would truly need allot of reform of the certification system to make it happen.
 
Like a hand-built ported, balanced, high compression 390 with improved induction, improved injection, improved ignition, and improved exhaust? I put my money in an updated version of a legacy design and I'm all smiles. I have a lot of respect for these old airplane engines. They do the work and keep on ticking. I would enjoy a single lever controlled 300hp diesel and matched prop on my 180. Diesel torque would be sweet. No mags, no plugs, no mixture or manifold pressure to manage? Giddy up! But in the near term? A cross flow IO-550 would be fun, and that's here now. Certificated, too.
 
And how many months have you patiently waited for crank replacements and other parts.
 
So far the new motor's been great. As for the recalled one? It was part of the journey. I rolled the dice and lost. C'est la vie.
 
Let’s face it, aviation engines are decades behind the rest of the industries with regards to innovation, efficiency and dependability.

Cars in the 1960’s (the era that typical certified stuff originated) were not nearly as reliable as the current technology, not as light and not as fuel efficient.

We can do better and should expect/demand better, but it seems everyone is happy with 30-60 year old technology, go figure
 
make mine a turbine
Dave, How do you justify the fuel consumption in a small turbine? Turbines love fuel and are expensive to build. The lowest fuel burn I've seen in a turbine was 20 gph in a Soloy 206.

We can do better and should expect/demand better, but it seems everyone is happy with 30-60 year old technology, go figure
Not hard to figure with an annual market of a few hundred airplane engines while millions of auto engines are produced.
The car engines also don't have to deal with the FAA. :behead:
 
too bad Subaru engines are junk, they're about the closest to the correct configuration. UL Power engines seem like a step in the right direction.
 
Deltahawk is a diesel aircraft engine manufacturer in Racine Wisconsin. Their direct drive 180 hp two stroke diesel engine R&D project has been around since 1996. They keep promising and things are still “Just around the Corner.”

I have visited their big booth at Oshkosh and hear their open ended promises. I heard crickets when I asked them about deliveries And how long they’ve been Developing it.

However, I don’t think they are like Bede, who receive money for kit orders and Never delivered. Their latest promos say FAA certification expected in late 2020, 80 million invested so far.

I hope they come out with a 180 hp turbo charged unit around 300 pounds and under $40,000. I expect 375 pounds and $80,000.
 
Screenshot_20210109-105034.png
Just around the corner.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20210109-105034.png
    Screenshot_20210109-105034.png
    161.2 KB · Views: 161
  • Screenshot_20210109-105034.png
    Screenshot_20210109-105034.png
    161.2 KB · Views: 129
Marine outboard engines are high horsepower, lightweight, fuel efficient and it seems we could learn a lot from what they have been able to do.

Horsepower up to 450 and beyond is commonplace in a small light package.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org
 
The big 6s are anything but light! Evinrude's Etec had a weight advatage but Evinrude is history.

From the Mercury website-
 

Attachments

  • 38FF75FB-4A24-4C47-A139-41D440D948E4.png
    38FF75FB-4A24-4C47-A139-41D440D948E4.png
    272.5 KB · Views: 143
Last edited:
The big 6s are anything but light! Evinrude's Etec had a weight advatage but Evinrude is history.

From the Mercury website-

You are reading misleading weights as the weights you are looking at include an entire propulsion system as well as steering mechanisms. You need to look up the weights of just the dressed powerheads.

You will find the actual engines to be only a few hundred pounds. Pretty good for 300-400 plus horsepower!


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 
You'll need a reduction unit and radiator. Add those back in.

For sure you would need those. It’s not so much about adapting the engines themselves as it is adapting the technology to a suitable configuration. I think a aircraft engine manufacturer could replicate a lot of what the outboard industry has done.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 
What about just redesigned cyl heads? Get to a more efficient design that could handle 91 octane with even 10:1 compression or turbo normalizing
 
What about just redesigned cyl heads? Get to a more efficient design that could handle 91 octane with even 10:1 compression or turbo normalizing

You mention head design and this is exactly what I mean by looking at what is being done with outboard power. Yamahas 425 HP engine uses a direct injection on their gas engine allowing compression ratio of over 11:1 on pump gas. A lot to learn here.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 
You mention head design and this is exactly what I mean by looking at what is being done with outboard power. Yamahas 425 HP engine uses a direct injection on their gas engine allowing compression ratio of over 11:1 on pump gas. A lot to learn here.
That family of engines as well as the new Suzuki outboards are about the best engineered out there that are happy with continued high power use.
 
Back
Top