I knew this would be a thing when I got into GA in 89. At that time crop dusters were trying big block Chevy race motors because they were cheaper than the round motors. The gearboxes however were being driving from the front of the crank which was not able to handle the load. Turning the auto engine around was the obvious solution. Although the crop dusters in our area all went turbine instead. I'm not surprised this package has been reliable given the engine speed and lack of reduction gearbox. I don't have much gearbox experience, but I do have experience with the gearboxes on every airplane that had them. 3500 is loafing for a race bottom end. You could even go real light on the valve springs and cam timing to make a racing valve train bullet proof. Nice installation, great airplane.
I like his attitude about overhaul time. Think about how they're run on the road. If your car averages 30-40 mph (pretty typical for cars once all idle/city/highway time is lumped together) and you change oil every 5000 miles, that's about 125-165 operational hours between oil changes and if the engine lasts 200,000 miles, that's around 5000-7000 hours MTBO. So assuming the duty cycle isn't much higher (direct drive and cammed for towing torque, getting 4-5 gph at a steady 2000-2200 rpm seems reasonable, and is like crusing in overdrive for all the engine cares), I could see that thing lasting a good long time. I would probably want fuel injection and a modest turbo, too, though.
Fuel injection, sure. Automotive carbs don't work upsidedown. But turbos? Pfft nah. No need for a snail. Would invest in an all-angle dry sump oiling system too. Aircraft can fly upside down(and WILL fly upside down if I'm at the controls) so making sure the engine doesn't go bang when upsidedown is important. I'd be half tempted to try this with a ford 300 since they're already pretty much cammed for it(The one in my F150 turns 1750RPM at 75MPH and loves it!) and would need minimal modification for air use, but those things are FUCKING HEAVY.
Cool video. I also had an O-235 in my Long Ez that I built. Almost went to an LS while I was building my Velocity but came across a good O-360 at a decent price.
Affordable auto Engine. Good choice, simlicity is the key. You have direct drive, Props efficiency top off at @ 2600 RPM, Whats your Max engine RPM? Two barrel carb. makes sense.
This engine is direct drive, no reduction system? That's good from a reliability standpoint, but 3500 rpm is really pushing it for propeller tip speed. I guess with the propeller blade length that tip speed can be computed. Use shorter blades and more of them. Those Reno formula one racers turn those O-200's even faster, so he must be under supersonic speed at his blade tips.
It also weighs likely double, is designed for a useful load of thousands of pounds, has a frontal area and coefficient drag that reflect its use. It has little to do with the engine, and lots to do with what the engine is inside of.
Beautiful Bird ....and some Swweeeet Ford! Some people have a few good ideas, but Ford's engines in the old V-8....289-302.... Built Ford Tough....then something happened with the mustang.... Old Crow Pilot Bud Anderson flew in to history... but did you know that he was working with Caroll Shelby on the new Ford Mustang... back in the early 60's... Bud Anderson built Ford's Mustangs into a rare Stang... only a few built in his garage... The Reno. Air Race i always wanted to attend.... Oshkosh fly in is on the bucket list too.. Aviation and Kid's...CYS is home for me...set your altimeter and check out the Wyoming Windsock at NOAA... I have seen some incredible Aviation History there... incredible History B-1 flyby.. Boeing 777 flight testing...touch and goes... rough landings and.. High Crosswinds... But what does a kid do... planes...trains and automobiles
Even though a prius engine is not a performance demon, it's built to be efficient, running an atkinson cycle that's a little weaker than the normal otto cycle but efficiency as high as 35% instead of your normal V8 that might be 8% efficient. Such a 4 banger could make a LongEZ instead a range monster... and the speed might still be just short of 300km/h. Maybe 275. Imagine a longEZ going 15000km on a tank :)
35% to 8% efficiency? Nope. The Atkinson cycle of the type which is "faked" on the Prius and other engines is a function of camshaft timing, to mimic a longer expansion cycle versus the compression cycle. And note that airplane engines, unlike car engines, can be run at very stable speeds, allowing mixture to be adjusted for best economy; my little airplane got 16 mpg at 130 mph.
While the mixture in your engine may be adjustable, so is the mixture on any modern fuel injected engine. Only it's done electronically. Also, if you think that auto engines can't be run at constant rpm, you are mistaken.
Not what I said; I said that airplane engines were DESIGNED to do so, over a very narrow operating range. This is not true of auto engines. I am, however, a fan of higher-speed geared engines, and some auto conversions (the Austro diesels, etc.) are working out beautifully.
Was that a direct prop mount? I am also an Engineer (Automotive) and I would never mount a prop directly on an automotive engine. There's not nearly enough support there for a rotating mass even if the blades are glass or carbon.
I have a Ford Small Block with an aftermarket aluminum block. Weighs about 300 for the long block, with intake and huge racing oil pan. I was thinking something like this would be great for that. With the larger bore from the aftermarket block it displaces 358 ci (5.8L).
That FRAM Oil Filter needs to go in the garbage and replace it with a NAPA GOLD. FRAM Oil Filters are one of the worst Filters in the industry. I saw an orange oil filter so I'm assuming it's a FRAM. Cool plane though.
Napa has gone downhill so hard between hiring rude and inept retail staff and cheaping out on their formerly great store brand items that I just don't go there anymore. I miss Kragen but tolerate o'Reilly. And if you want a quality filter, look for Wix.
Don't like canards. A bit lower fuel consumption, but NODDY problems and degrading of the the canard can get you diving into the ground as you haul hard on the stick, wishing you were not flying a canard. John Denver showed how it is done - "Lets guess how much gas in this new plane I just bought. Maybe enough; maybe not. Don't bother learning fuel tank switch." Fuck around and flying will kill you. The choice is yours.
You do realize why a speed brake is installed on a long right? It has like a 3 degree descent rate idlimg, that's not nose into the ground by my standards
This dude clearly doesn't understand how aircraft engines are designed and how they work. They are designed like generators essentially to produce 100% of their horsepower all the time. Automobile engines cannot do that.
Aircraft engines are not designed to run at 100% horsepower. Throttle at cruise vs throttle on takeoff is completely different for most aircraft. Moreover, auto engines are built to closer tolerances, go through dramatically more testing, and are all around much more sophisticated machines than a standard air cooled carbureted aviation engine. Liquid cooling means that the engine operates at a much more uniform temperature across a variety of environments. Given that aircraft, by their nature, experience greater temperature differentials than automobiles, water cooling is potentially much more beneficial for aircraft than automobiles. As for an automobile engine being able to perform at a percentage of peak power for a given amount of time, this would depend very much on the engine in question and its implementation. The engine failures in modern high performance engines at the limits are often the result of insufficient cooling, or a failure of the cooling system itself (e.g. a hose), which would be a consideration. However, stock engines can be abused quite a bit (and often are) without failing.
Lycoming and Continental engines are so behind the time's and are OUTRAGEOUSLY over priced for 1950/60's technology. I'm building a small kit plane now a "Precision" it's a clone of a small RV, I have a Honda 1.5 litre FIT engine in it, such a simple design w/all the modern accessories, only trouble I'm having is the "knock sensor" and the "timing sensors" because of the computer. but Viking Aircraft engine's have all the replacement part's to correct the problem, plus I've decided to just cough up the cabbage and get those and a nice oil bath gear to gear reduction unit from them, they're not cheap but proven, after its all done I figured I saved enough by using that Engine to dam near pay for my plane.. about 6 month's to go, it should be ready, baring any other problems.
1.5 liters isn't really enough displacement. You will be running at high fucking RPM to suck in the same amount of air as an real airplane engine. Have fun with that. 1950s/60s technology is not bad at all. Air-cooled and pushrod engine? Thanks, I like it simple.
