Thorp Air Command - T18.net

No one has a opinion if the o360 powered Thorp is worth the extra money, I tend to buy the lower horsepower aircraft , then wish I had gone with the higher hp. Most of my flying will be cross country and some IFR..

Well, the experts will probably be able to give better advice, but an o-320 160 hp seems pretty good to me for the thorp. Go to a fly-in and bum some rides?

I have been in both seats in the Thorp, some with the 360 fixed, some with the 360 constant speed, one with 200 Hp 320 constant speed. The 0-290 powered rigs I will have to say are the most interesting, to get so much from a Thorp with a 290 is a testament to the airframe designer. Some of the listed above have a wicked climb rate, but all of the above listed will bring a smile to your face when the nose is pointed up. I have an 0320, not the fastest, not the best in climb, but by comparison to those I have flown I am a happy man, but then I am happy in any Thorp regardless of the power because they all do so well with a given power plant. It is by shear preference that one chooses his cubic inches, economics plays a role here also. We all at one point in time would like a little more climb,or, a little less fuel burn,or, a few more knots in cruise. Whatever you choose, you will have good cross countries whether it be the 290 or the 360 or some where in between. That airframe is hard to beat in any given combination of the above listed engines. This is just my opinion derived from a few of the few experiences I have had with this fantastic airplane.......Dan

I have an O-320, 160 hp in my T-18. It is close to perfect for me, but that being said I think that 180 hp is the ultimate icing on the cake. It has been my understanding that the O-360 is the most efficient of the 4 cyl. Lycomings in specific fuel consumption. You can throttle back at any time to match the performance of a smaller engine, but that additional 20 hp really does something for a Thorp, IMHO! Let's not forget that John Thorp's personal T-18 was completed with an O-360 under the cowl.

_________________
John Evens
Arvada, Colorado
T-18 N71JE (sold)
Kitfox 7 SS N27JE

Yes ... the 180hp is worth it ... the 0320/0290 Thorps are just fine but an 0360 powered airplane will spoil you. As a kid we flew around in N51863, it had a 150hp 0320. I rode with Bob Highley in his 180hp airplane once ... a few months later we were refitting N51863 with a new motor ... there's a dramatic difference!

A pussy cat compared to a Tiger.

_________________
Lee Walton
Houston, TX
N51863,N118LW
KEFD

I have no complaints with my O360. I just got a ride in an O290 powered T18 and it don't suck either.

There are alot of very nice O320 T18s out there. A great set up would be picking up a deal on one with a wrung out O320 and building it up with 200hp.

_________________
http://www.dixiefriedfabrication.com/

Just depends on what your mission is. My 160HP O-320 does ok. A constant speed would make a world of difference. In LV, there are lots of times when I wish I could climb faster due to the mountains and density altitude. I would go with what is available for the right price.

Lee is correct. You may be satisfied with a mouse motor Thorp until you fly one with an 0-360. If you ever attempt to go cross country with a gaggle of T-18's with the 0-360's and you are attempting to keep up with an 0-320 you immediately discover you can't keep them in sight during the climb and can't keep up in cruise. Ask David Reed about going to SLC with Highley, Williams & me. In fact you can barely climb high enough, soon enough to get over the passes.

GG

Gary,
That may be so but for those of us with a mouse motor the rest of you will have the cold ones on the table waiting for us when we arrive.

_________________
Bruce Finney
N18JF T-18C #262
Yelm, WA USA

Good answer Bruce! LOL

I don't think you guys have a good grasp on this group ... By the time you mouse motor folks arrive we would have already polished off the cold ones and grub.

_________________
Lee Walton
Houston, TX
N51863,N118LW
KEFD

Hey Lou , Tommycat would do 180MPH while climbing 500 FPM! The darn thing was wicked Fast, 0320 reworked by Lycon here in Visalia- also had a constant speed. Toms airframe was,slick, to say the least it is one fine built machine always had a ball in it. Dan

Gary is right, I thought my 150 hp 0320 was great till we started getting into the higher elevations, then the difference becomes more pronounced. Gary and I had nearly identical fuel burns in the flatlands, the higher we got the more I was looking at the group from below and behind. During the rebuild I have switched to higher compression pistons so I should creep up on 160 hp now. The 150 always got me where I needed to go, it just sometimes took a bit longer, most times not that big a deal. One advantage is I always run mogas at my home field, I don't believe I could do that with a 180. I will give up 20 hp for the cost savings at least for now. When I begin to be the slowest one consistently then I may reconsider.

I have the 150 also David, and thus far it has been just fine- there will be some faster guess that's just a given. I found this out after I flew a Lancair with a 650 HP Walter turbine, with the airconditioner running it was like lightening the climb rate was exiting to say the least. This machine was smooth as silk.......Then I got back in My Thorp, Had to smile as I left the Tarmac . Built it because it's a Thorp, it does what I intended it to do. It will need a top end some day here in the next 3-5yrs as it does have 2300 hrs on it, I will put it back to 150 HP and be a little faster than some,and not as fast as others and I will always be happy with it. When I get ready for that top end I will be bugging you for some advise if ya don't mind.......Dan

Guys,
This discussion is not only prevalent here in the Thorp forum, but elsewhere, including the RV world. Both my RV's I built with Narrow Deck 150HP engines and wood props and they did fine, as mentioned above. However comma, I helped several buds purchase RV's with 180 C/S and flew them frequently. The 180 C/S is superior in STOL, climb in high density altitudes and fuel economy. Over a long journey alongside an 0-320 the 0-360 actually burned less fuel, sometimes significantly. One big drawback is the WD 0-360 weighs 12-16 lbs more than it's 0-320 counterpart. Since the two engines have identical bore, (the 0-360 with a longer stroke), my answer was to outfit my RV4 with a wide deck 0-320 with 9.4:1 pistons, flow matching and a Vetterman tuned exhaust plus an MT prop. Quantum leap in performance and efficiency however, at a price. My original $3500 0-320 and $700 wood prop would nearly triple in cost for the 175HP 0-320 C/S conversion. For what it's worth

V/R
Smokey

"With great power comes great responsibility"
Uncle Ben...Spiderman