REFLECTOR:Engines
Ronnie Brown
reflector@tvbf.org
Thu, 22 Apr 2004 07:54:15 -0400
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C4283F.023820A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Joe,
Alan Shaw once had a standard with an IO540 on it. I heard a =
presentation he did at Sun-n-Fun a few years back saying that this was a =
great combination (although I'm not sure which prop he used). He says =
the CG box is very conservative and that the standard can actually =
handle the added weight of the 540. But, I do know the 173 wings are =
heavier and places more weight aft of the CG than the standard wings. =20
Craig Catto can make a 3 blade prop for the 540. =
http://www.cattoprops.com/=20
And of course the 173 wings are the same as the XL, so that shouldn't be =
an issue.
You'll have a real screamer - for certain. From my owner list, I count =
at least 4 540's on standard fuselages - and Alan Shaw's was a 173.
Ronnie
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Joe=20
To: reflector@tvbf.org=20
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 8:14 PM
Subject: REFLECTOR:Engines
I am considering engine options for my 173 Elite RG.
Option 1. Does anyone know of a used Franklin 220 available. My =
current preference is a Franklin 220 with an IVO In-flight adjustable =
prop, but don't know if I can find a Franklin.
Option 2. Has anyone heard of installing an O-540 (250 Hp version) in =
a 173 RG. Here is my thinking (shoot holes in the theory as required) =
I do not want to pay the high price of an MT (a real budget buster.) =
The majority of my flying will be long cross countries so a fixed pitch =
prop optimized for cruise would be preferred. With that prop I realize =
the trade off is longer takeoff distance and reduce climb performance. =
So in comes the O-540, the additional horsepower will compensate for the =
lower climb performance prop. (Lower climb fuel economy is OK.) Other =
disadvantages: modifying the cowling (its only time), increased empty =
weight (81 pound, I can live with that), more front ballast required =
when flying solo (can live with that too.) Possible advantages: =
increased engine life (will be running slower than normal operating =
limits, lower CHT etc.), high density altitude or short strip - will =
have a little extra HP available.
I welcome anyone's opinions or comments on #2.
Thanks,
Joe
------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C4283F.023820A0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.100" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Hi Joe,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Alan Shaw once had a standard with an IO540 on =
it. I=20
heard a presentation he did at Sun-n-Fun a few years back saying that =
this was a=20
great combination (although I'm not sure which prop he used). He =
says the=20
CG box is very conservative and that the standard can actually handle =
the added=20
weight of the 540. But, I do know the 173 wings are heavier and =
places=20
more weight aft of the CG than the standard wings. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Craig Catto can make a 3 blade prop for the =
540. <A=20
href=3D"http://www.cattoprops.com/">http://www.cattoprops.com/</A> <=
/FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>And of course the 173 wings are the same as the XL, =
so that=20
shouldn't be an issue.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>You'll have a real screamer - for certain. =
>From my owner=20
list, I count at least 4 540's on standard fuselages - and =
Alan Shaw's=20
was a 173.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Ronnie</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Djewen@comporium.net =
href=3D"mailto:jewen@comporium.net">Joe</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dreflector@tvbf.org=20
href=3D"mailto:reflector@tvbf.org">reflector@tvbf.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, April 21, 2004 =
8:14=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> =
REFLECTOR:Engines</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT><FONT size=3D2></FONT><FONT =
size=3D2></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am considering engine options for =
my 173 Elite=20
RG.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Option 1. Does anyone know of a =
used=20
Franklin 220 available. My current preference is a Franklin 220 =
with an=20
IVO In-flight adjustable prop, but don't know if I can find a=20
Franklin.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Option 2. Has anyone heard of =
installing an=20
O-540 (250 Hp version) in a 173 RG. Here is my thinking (shoot =
holes in=20
the theory as required) </FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I do =
not want to=20
pay the high price of an MT (a real budget buster.) The majority =
of my=20
flying will be long cross countries so a fixed pitch prop optimized =
for cruise=20
would be preferred. With that prop I realize the trade off is =
longer=20
takeoff distance and reduce climb performance. So in comes the =
O-540,=20
the additional horsepower will compensate for the lower climb =
performance=20
prop. (Lower climb fuel economy is OK.) Other =
disadvantages:=20
modifying the cowling (its only time), increased empty weight =
(81 pound,=20
I can live with that), more front ballast required when flying solo =
(can live=20
with that too.) Possible advantages: increased engine life (will =
be=20
running slower than normal operating limits, lower CHT etc.), high =
density=20
altitude or short strip - will have a little extra HP =
available.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I welcome anyone's opinions or =
comments on=20
#2.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Joe</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C4283F.023820A0--