Supercharged, stall kit, upgraded instrument panel, and a ballistic parachute. Talk about having all the bells and whistles on a Cessna 182! Beautiful aircraft.
Doug is a dork. Also, if I want to know the secrets of a glovebox, an interesting alloy wheel option anecdote or just what great value a 25 year old BMW 750i is, Doug’s great. But if I want to know how a car drives, no… just no.
Mark I subscribed when I saw your incredible videos on the differences between the Mooney models. I love that you actually fly the planes you represent and show off the various features. I am in the process of getting my PPL and your channel is a great resource and was one of the reasons I would love to own a Mooney someday. The discussion around electric vs manual flaps / gear was an honest opinion piece and I haven't seen anybody else do as an amazing job as you describing the various aspects of the planes. Thank you!!
I'm very much pretending to be a Mooney expert now that I've seen all of Mark's videos. Can spot the mods and letter changes now on just about all of them!
Hi Mark. Another guy in Colorado was working on a supercharger for the Cardinal RG but it appears he ran out of money for certification. So, I'm shooting them an email to see what's potentially available. Great video.
I recently purchased a 182Q with a IO-470F (260 hp) w/ the same super charger. I removed the super charged since I’m a low lander and usually at sea level. The biggest concern when taking off was watching RPM’s. It was easy to redline which why I suspected the engine needed a complete overhaul at 900 hrs. Other than that, the belt needs torquing every few hours which is a pain taking off the cowling to access it. All said, If I lived or move to a higher altitude, I’ll definitely reinstall it. It was great having sea level performance at6k’- 7k’
Hey Marc, Yes! You really had to watch the throttle on take off. This is my first high performance so I needed 5 hours for my checkout. The engine was spewing oil when I bought it but was able to fly it for almost 5 hours so that was the my biggest concern when flying it.
Ecstatic, would be pleased to view another. Can't help but wonder about performance numbers in regard to the BRS in a high altitude high terrain down draft.
Maybe the chute could be kind of flat in the ceiling. Of course it would help if the weight of the plane was minimal in a modern construction. The chute can also be minimal even if it means coming down at a somewhat uncomfortable speed. Doesn't have to be a rolls royce ride that one time you destroy the plane, just has to keep you from dying and injury so you can walk out of there if it's in rocky mountains.
At elevations where the normally aspirated 182 can do 24 inches of MP they all will be the same. Above that anything with forced air induction will start to show improvement on and on as it climbs. If the turbo and turbo normalized and supercharged are all at 12,000 feet and all the same plane and all doing the same MP, they will be the same. A lot of the benefits of a supercharger like this is lack of heat and maintenance. It's just a self lubricated, cold spinning belt driven air pump essentially. Turbos are always very hot.
Another nice aeroplane, super aeroplane, and another great video. Iirc, on later Spitfires, their superchargers took 300bhp to spool up, but at altitude gave so much better performance. I seem to recall too that many WWII fighters had Ethanol/Methanol water injection, so as to boost power during battle and overcome pinking/detonation issues. Superchargers being inlet/induction based, turbos being exhaust/outlet based. Please excuse my ignorance but why does the aircraft need an angle of attack indicator🤔
@@skywagonuniversity5023 They're good for flying but definitely more cumbersome to maintain than normal flight school planes, they attract a lot of wealthy fliers
Vortech is an automotive supercharger. Not sure is the relief valve allows it to shunt all the drag. I'm betting that 4 hp is the normal drag and under high load liekly more like 11-12hp subtracting from the net output. And any time you have boost it increases the air charge temp. Is this system after-cooled or intercooled? How many Psi of boost does it generate, as it may not need a cooler.
It climbs better, It is faster at altitude because of higher manifold pressures. Fuel burn is more when high because you have higher MP. It is very good but you'd really have to needs it, Like always be hot and high like living in CO or NV, WY etc.
@SU - Will u be doing a vid on the performance of that "suped-up" bird, and why no de-icing? The 182 must be forgiving as far as weight, being that that 470 must mean it's a little nose heavy.
Can you talk a bit about the performance you observed with the supercharger? I have a 63 182F and have thought about the FAT supercharger. Just not sure the juice is worth the squeeze when I could sell the 182 and get into a Bonanza for less $$ with more performance.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 I get it. Overall I like my plane. It's been reliable, comfortable, and I have the panel where I want it now. I just want some more speed out and high DA performance would be much appreciated here in Phoenix AZ. Thanks for the update. Keep up the great videos.
The limiting factor on the bost could be either the flow that the intake manifold and inlet valves can handle or the wristpins, main and rod bearings. The supercharger may deliver more boost to the intake manifold due to the supercharger pushing out cooler air. The net boost will first have to oay for the horsepower we used to drive the supercharger “fan” via the belt Mark showed us. The turbocharger is scavenging waste energy from the exhaust manifold. It is therefore more efficient but may supply less dense air since it runs at topically higher temperatures.
To find the highest net boost numbers must be put to paper. Turbos may “come on” at higher rpms, be more difficult to control and maintain than superchargers. But turbos are normally more efficient.
Just learned a little bit ago that some racing engines (F1, Indy??) used to use an electric motor to spin the super charger (bit of a hybrid system as they have a battery and electric motor(s) to help drive the car. But somehow using the electric motor to power the forced induced seemed brilliant. Any aircraft engines exploring that avenue?
It is a good idea but I have not heard if that is in planes yet. Batteries are heavy. Cars need bursts of power. Planes need long constant sources of power.
