O-320 QUESTIONS

[GYPSY]

I am considering a TriPacer (at least it's a Piper) and see in the literature the O-320 was offered as A2A(150hp), B2A and B2B(both 160hp). My question(s) to you are:

1) Would I appreciably notice the 10hp difference?

2) Are there any advantages of one over the others as far as:
A) Maintainability
B) Durability
C) Fuel efficiency

3) Are there any other things to consider between these three engines?

 

[Redbaron180]

I have a buddy with a PA-18 converted to a 160 and it is a real hotrod compared to my 150 hp. His conversion was done in Australia and I wonder if they got some weird parts in it. I would love to dyno it, I bet he has 20 more hp than I do, and mine is strong. If I were sure that it would perform like his I'd convert mine......Ron

 

[Greg Smith]

No shame in owning a Tri-Pacer. If I could own 2 aircraft, that would be the other one... Well, A Pacer, anyway. That big fendered wheel on the wrong end makes the Tri-Pacer look a bit odd.

Do you plan on running auto fuel? If so, the higher compression engine requires Premium instead of Regular.

The Petersen website has a bunch of info regarding the O-320.

 

[Sam Beckett]

Do a search we have hashed this one out soooooooo many times, so here go the opinions and endorsements once again!

To answer your Question....

HUGE difference if you do all the bells and whistles within the limits of the engine and approvals..

LYCON is the best! 559-651-1070

While you are at it throw a set of VG's on her and yer'gd2go!




Sam



8)

 

[Steve Pierce]

The 160 hp O-320 has an AD on the crankshaft that would need to be researched and see how it has been complied with. Some say the power increase is noticeable and others don't. More is always better but you would have to run premium car gas if you were going that route. As far as I am concerned the Pacer/Tri-Pacer is the best bang for the buck. I can put my wife, three kids, 100 lbs of baggage, full fuel and myself in it and still be under gross and within CG.