skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
Did you do a compression check on #3? Sounds like exhaust valve is leaking.
Interesting read on that Vans site. thanks for the info
JP
You should be burning more fuel than that wide open on take off climb,
Is your fuel flow calibrated correctly?
if so, you're too lean.
divided by 10. 160/10=16gph The Lycoming manual says 13.6 gallons per hour at 2700 rpm/160 hp.Rule of thumb - full rich, you should be burning almost a gallon per horsepower
divided by 10. 160/10=16gph The Lycoming manual says 13.6 gallons per hour at 2700 rpm/160 hp.
Go to sections 32, 33, and 34, in the installation manual. It explains the 'K factor' for the fuel flow sensor and how to check/adjust it to match actual fuel usage.
Web
divided by 10. 160/10=16gph The Lycoming manual says 13.6 gallons per hour at 2700 rpm/160 hp.
“Almost” ;-)
ive heard this figure quoted before, seemed to ring true.
My (lycon) 160 cub burns 14.5 gph
Maule O540 23 gph
whats an educated guess on a general rule of thumb
for sea level carbureted engine?
My post was only to adjust your rough rule of thumb calculation not meant to be precise.“Almost” ;-)
ive heard this figure quoted before, seemed to ring true.
My (lycon) 160 cub burns 14.5 gph
Maule O540 23 gph
whats an educated guess on a general rule of thumb
for sea level carbureted engine?
Random question: do you have a -12 or a -32 carb?
What’s your O-320-xx nomenclature?
The -12s run leaner than the -32s. Depending on your oil sump you may need a tapered adapter between the carb and the oil pan
I'll have to look at the carb.
It's an E2A motor
I'm pretty happy with the plane. Had it about 6 months now. Have put 50 hours on it.
Gotta finish up the EDM 350 probes. Put the whirlwind prop on. Put in a new windshield.
Maybe buy a second set of rims, and some 31s.
I'm pretty content. I'd never say i'm 'done' . but it will be pretty much what I had imagined. It's a far cry from my 100hp C-140 that was my first plane for 3 years.
Oops.. forgot the Clamars I'm looking at. But that's down the list after I save up for an older Prevost Bus.
JP
I agree that you want a PA-18 airbox, but it will fit any of these carbs.
In my opinion, the advantage of the 10-3678-32 carb is that it flows more fuel at full throttle and therefore provides better cooling on climbs. It also has a unique economizer feature that leans the mixture somewhat at partial throttle.
An O-320 E series engine from a Cessna probably has a 10-5009 or 10-5062. These run leaner at full throttle than the -32. This can be fine in a Cessna because it has a better cooling system than a Cub.
Replacing a carb can be pricey. I would try the carb you have but keep a watch on the CHTs during climb. If they are getting hot – over 400 – I would ream out the main jet a little and try it again.
A Service Instruction (SI-1305C) was issued for the 10-5009 and 10-5062 that calls for the replacement of the main jet with a new nozzle to provide better fuel atomization. You want this mod if you use one of these carbs. It helps equalize the fuel distribution between cylinders to keep some from running lean and hot. If the carb number is 10-5009N or 10-5062N, it already has the mod. If you need to ream that nozzle to get better cooling, try reaming it to .096. If that is not enough, try .099.
In terms of other carbs for your engine, I believe that the 10-5135 is the 5009 with the new nozzle installed at the factory. The 10-5217 is the latest version of this series and has replaced the 10-5135. These are good carbs and include later engineering than the -32 models which were designed in the 50s. I would give the carb you have a try for your project.
Bob
Was that the major change - repitching the prop?
Did the new nozzle seem to make any difference?
On another note, Props make a huge difference on CHT'S. Change the pitch on a Borer 3 degrees and you can see a 20 degree CHT temp change.
DENNY