Thorp Air Command - T18.net
http://t18.net/thorpforum/

Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
http://t18.net/thorpforum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7351		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Ryan Allen [ Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
Just curious about this, but would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
Author:  SHIPCHIEF [ Mon Aug 05, 2013 11:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
I voted O-360, but that's because I have an O-290, and I can't keep up with my son's RV-4 :P
I'm always "shopping" for a conical mount O-320 or O-360...I would prefer not to remake the engine mount.
It looks like helicopter engines have conical mounts, so I wouldn't have to go with a 'Narrow Deck' enigne.
Author:  smokyray [ Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
SHIPCHIEF wrote:
I voted O-360, but that's because I have an O-290, and I can't keep up with my son's RV-4 :P
I'm always "shopping" for a conical mount O-320 or O-360...I would prefer not to remake the engine mount.
It looks like helicopter engines have conical mounts, so I wouldn't have to go with a 'Narrow Deck' enigne.



Hi Scott,

I just converted my "RVX" (6 fuse, 4 wings and tail) from a ND 0-320/Catto to a 0-360J/Catto. I too didn't want to swap mounts and researched Lycomings extensively to located the right engine at the right price. The 0-360J is a conical mount 0-360 with lightweight cyllinders and was installed in late model R22's horizontal mount with a MA-4SPA carb(0-320) and max RPM of 2550 (derated) Frank Robinson wanted to extend the TBO with lower HP but retain the 0-360 torque. I installed an MA4-5 (180HP carb)Vetterman (new design) tuned exhaust and a B&C SD8 lightweight alt and Skytech starter/odessey battery. The weight gain was less than 5 lbs over my 0-320. Cowling fit, baffling and mounting were very easy, the 0-360J bolted right up, my old baffling would have fit with few mods but the guy who bought my 0320 wanted everything FWF, so I ordered a new baffle kit from Van's and used the old one as a pattern. Hopefully you can use your old one. Email me anytime with questions. smokyray@rocketmail.com

Sorry I missed prime time at OSH, had to work early in the week and arrived Saturday to volunteer at Itec's booth. I did get to watch watch a "mass Thorp exodus", sounded great!

V/R
Smokey
Author:  SHIPCHIEF [ Tue Aug 06, 2013 6:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
Thanks Smokey;
This is the second time you've offered assistance, and I appreciate it.
I've watched HIO-360's come and go on Barnstormers, and found Type cert data on helicopter engines. It's been a hoot figuring out the rated HP, at what RPM, & altitude / manifold pressure. As usual, I'm swamped in aircraft projects, my tubocharged RV-8 being but one of them.
I'm getting good service out of the O-290 in 'Feisty'. So I'm collecting upgrade parts as I find them, toward the day when I can have everything as ready as possible before taking it out of service.
O-360J you say... ;)
Author:  WISC [ Sun Nov 17, 2013 3:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
Related topic to this thread which I have gotten mixed reviews, so I thought I would pitch it to you guys:
Aircraft A has 0320 FP Aircraft B has 0320 C/S.
All things being equal I assume the c/s wins.
Yet aircraft A has 1000 less hours on the engine.
How much of a factor are the hours?
Other people have also stated less hours sound good but engines liked to be utilized and low hours could actually be a warning flag.
Thoughts?
Author:  Rich Brazell [ Sun Nov 17, 2013 9:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
FP O-360 . Less maintenance ! ???

RB O:-)

Higher and Faster

With an AD prop
Author:  Fraser MacPhee [ Mon Nov 18, 2013 11:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
1000 hours is a lot of hours - depends on whether the low hour plane has been sitting around for awhile....and even then, who built it, was it pickled, when was the oil changed last, conditioned hangar, dry climate, bla, bla, bla....as far as constant speed goes, what is your mission?....I'm up high - home field at 4630 MSL - I like to fly formation - I like constant speed for those two reasons.....BUT...it's heavy, so more weight - battery in back = PITA, light planes are fast planes. C/S props can be dialed down and run at 2200 RPM - I lose speed at that RPM, but it's smooth, quiet and if you do the math, that is a significant number of LESS engine revolutions over the engines life. Fixed pitch props are less expensive to buy AND maintain.

I just replaced a cylinder assembly on a 120 hour 0-320 motor that sat for a few years. 1020 dinars and some labor - it's running fine now.

Lots to think about. Personally, for me the ideal set up on a T-18 would be an IO-360, 180 HP with a composite 3-blade electric C/S prop. Then all the hot chicks would flock to me instead of always flirting with that damn limp throttled silver T-18 with the tiger flag all the time!!!

I'm taking donations.......
Author:  Rich Brazell [ Mon Nov 18, 2013 11:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
Get that motor out and start it at least once a month , even if you don't fly it ! Move that oil around (and heat it up!) and coat the metal and keep the rust and corrosion off the vital parts . It will also help to keep the seals in good shape . 8) If you buy an AC that has been sitting for quite a while , have the cylinders bore scoped for rust and pitting ! ;) First sign of trouble . :o

RB O:-)

Faster and Higher
Author:  dan [ Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
Hours being a Factor: I have a 0-320e2d, 2300 hrs, It was built in 1968 I have the Logbook on it. Oil changes every 25hrs the maintenance was well documented best I can tell. The case hasn't been split since it was built and the top end is original. It still had the disposable mags on it when I got it. I have changed out the mags, installed all new intake rubber and gaskets, replaced the front crankseal( it spit the old one out) and replaced the pushrod tube seals.I have seen to it that all of the ADs were answered, I have put the second harness on it since it was new, and I overhauled the carb. This engine sat on a tire on the floor of a hanger In Bullhead city Calif for ten years before I got my hands on it,it was covered with a plastic tablecloth and when I picked it up it had 2090 hrs on it. Compression on the thing was low to mid 70s when we checked it, screens were spotless. Oil analisis revealed normal wear about a month ago, 50-60 # oil preasure at I dle hot, and 75 when shes spooled up. Opinion: Hours do mean something, Maintenance means everything, Rich is right, these old buggers were built to run, when one is well built and run offen it will remain happy for decades, add a good and consistant maintenance schedule to that and never expect it to do more than it was intended to do, and the world will be well under the cowl......and the burgers will taste great.......Dan
Author:  Lou [ Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
Mr Scott I wouldn’t turn my nose up at a narrow deck motor for the right price.
Dan is a lucky son of a gun. Rust on the cam suxs! That is all.

Why choose, I’ll take one of each! A blond, and a red head.
Author:  James Grahn [ Wed Nov 20, 2013 3:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
I'll have whatever Scott Ginn has in that monster I flew before OshKosh. Wow!
Cubes
Author:  Bill Williams [ Wed Nov 20, 2013 4:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
It all boils down to how much money you have.
I like my 0360 CS, it goes fast in all directions, straight and level ,up and down.
I have seen 0320 FP out run my Thorp.
The difference between a narrow deck and wide is in the cylinder bases. Nothing wrong with either.
Author:  Hagle347 [ Thu Nov 21, 2013 6:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
With the engine choices out there, I'm leaning towards a Lyc IO-320D1A, 160hp and using the new Sensenich Ground Adjustable Composite prop. If I can keep 218TH light enough - the 160 hp should move it along just fine without the extra heft of the 0-360.

Terry
N66WT
N218TH
Aiming for completion of both in 2014
Author:  Gary Green [ Mon Nov 25, 2013 1:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
Without hesitation I'd go for the fixed pitch O-360. I ain't sure whose prop I'd select since Mike Demuth is no longer with us. Probably a Catto. But it would definitely be a fixed pitch wood/composite prop.
GG
Author:  SHIPCHIEF [ Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Would you rather have a CS 0-320 or FP 0-360?
My wife is using the new Sensenich Ground Adjustable Composite prop on her 160 HP RV-4.
She loves it. Prior to that, she had the metal Sensenich fixed pitch, which is limited to 2600 RPM.
If I were to upgrade 'Feisty' I think an O-360 with the Sensi ground adjustable would be a contender. Being able to make pitch changes to fine tune things is very nice. The performance seems very good, and it's very smooth running.
I have a 68x68 Ted Hendrickson wood prop, which is about perfect for my O-290. I appreciate the simplicity.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/