Hay guys,
I did not intend for my question about the Eggenfellner engine to start
a war so be nice to each other.
Bob Stone
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott William" <scot...@yahoo.com>
To: "KRnet" <kr...@mylist.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 7:05 AM
Subject: Re: KR> Eggenfellner engines
> I'd sure like to see your research and sources. Subaru
> stopped producing aircraft after WW2 when it became
> the Fuji Sangyo Co. Since then, it has concentrated
> on rally cars and associated races.
>
> (Fast forward)
>
> In 1987, Subaru introduced the XT6 model as a 1988
> model with the 145 hp 2.7 L flat-six ER27.
>
>
> The SVX engine/model debuted in 1991, targeting the
> luxury segment, hence the larger engine. The engine
> specs are as follows:
> Bore x stroke : 96.9mm x 75.0mm
> Engine displacement : 3,318cc
> Compression ratio : 10.0
> Max. output (hp/rpm) : 230/5,400
> Max. torque (ft/lb-m/rpm) : 228/4,400
>
> Those specs are not that of an aircraft engine. Those
> specs clearly show that it produces torque very high
> in the RPM range, too high for a prop. The only way
> this thing was ever an aircraft engine is if the
> stroke was longer, the camshaft different, and the
> intake ports much smaller.
>
> The SVX's EG33 engine was an indirect development of
> the 2.7 L ER27 flat-6 from the XT6, expanded to 3,318
> cc (96.9 mm bore by 75 mm stroke) and equipped with
> dual overhead camshafts and 4 valves per cylinder. An
> increase in compression ratio to 10.0:1 brought power
> to 230 hp (172 kW) at 5,400 rpm and torque to 228
> ft.lbf (309 Nm) at 4,400 rpm.
>
>
> If you have better information, I'd love to see
> it....and your sources for it.
>
> Scott
>
>
> --- Dan Michaels <dmic...@grantsburgtelcom.net> wrote:
>
>> I have researched this, and the 6 cylinder subaru is
>> an horozontally opposed
>> engine same as a Lycoming. It was designed by subaru
>> for an aircraft. The
>> aircraft did not take off financially so they
>> addapted the engine for a car.
>> Eggenfellner then converted it to an aircraft
>> engine. This is not the same
>> as the 4 cylinder Subaru engine that they used to
>> use.
>>
>> Dan
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Scott William" <scot...@yahoo.com>
>> To: "KRnet" <kr...@mylist.net>
>> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 7:37 PM
>> Subject: Re: KR> Eggenfellner engines
>>
>>
>> > Dan:
>> > There's a reason Eggenfellner calls them
>> > "conversions". They weren't designed to
>> fly....now or
>> > ever.
>> >
>> > Scott
>> >
>> > --- Dan Michaels <dmic...@grantsburgtelcom.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> The newest Subaru engine that they are using is
>> an
>> >> aircraft engine, it was
>> >> designed for this purpose the plane just did not
>> >> take off. They then put it
>> >> in a car.
>> >>
>> >> Dan
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "Scott William" <scot...@yahoo.com>
>> >> To: <brokerpilot9...@earthlink.net>; "KRnet"
>> >> <kr...@mylist.net>
>> >> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 6:23 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: KR> Eggenfellner engines
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Can I simplify this?
>> >> >
>> >> > Auto engines are engineered to spend 80% of
>> thier
>> >> life
>> >> > at 20% throttle.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Airplane engines are engineered to spend 80% of
>> >> thier
>> >> > life at 85% throttle.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > See the difference?
>> >> >
>> >> > Now, some auto engines have inherent design
>> >> > charachteristics that bode them well in
>> airplanes.
>> >> The
>> >> > Corvair is one that is superb. As mentioned
>> below,
>> >> the
>> >> > 2100 VW with a good forged steel crank is a
>> good
>> >> > choice, as is the V6 GM motor.
>> >> >
>> >> > As for all the others.....look how they perform
>> in
>> >> > boats. They don't last long because of the
>> large
>> >> power
>> >> > requirements on them. Hence, you'll never see a
>> >> two
>> >> > bolt main Chevy 350 in a boat. Or a Subaru, for
>> >> that
>> >> > matter.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Scott
>> >> >
>> >> > --- Colin Rainey
>> <brokerpilot9...@earthlink.net>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Bob Lester at one time ran a Subaru engine
>> before
>> >> >> changing over to a Corvair. Problems with the
>> >> >> crankshafts due to the high rpms necessary to
>> >> >> produce enough power. Read the Auto Mathbook
>> for
>> >> >> some numbers of projected life expectancy when
>> >> >> engines are subjected to higher and higher
>> rpms.
>> >> >> The Chevy 350 is 3.48 inches in stroke and
>> will
>> >> >> reach a piston speed that at 6500 rpms will
>> >> stress
>> >> >> the crank 4 times what it is at 5500 rpms per
>> the
>> >> >> author of the book. Yet by de-stroking that
>> same
>> >> >> engine as in the Indy cars, it can be revved
>> to
>> >> >> 11,500 and reach the same piston speeds as
>> 6000
>> >> >> rpms, bringing the same stress to the crank.
>> You
>> >> >> must do the same things to your chosen engine,
>> OR
>> >> >> use an engine that develops more HP than you
>> >> need,
>> >> >> so that your rpms can be maintained at a
>> >> reasonable
>> >> >> level for longevity. The chosen engine needs
>> to
>> >> >> have a broad power band where torque is good
>> >> where
>> >> >> you plan to cruise. Peak Hp does not matter
>> if
>> >> you
>> >> >> cannot stay there for long durations. Remember
>> >> about
>> >> >> takeoffs, climbs while in cruise flight.
>> etc...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> With the complexity with running a liquid
>> cooled
>> >> >> auto engine added to an already complex task
>> of
>> >> >> setting up an engine and then matching a prop
>> to
>> >> it,
>> >> >> the idea of getting reliable information
>> >> concerning
>> >> >> PSRUs and prop matches is nothing short of
>> >> daunting.
>> >> >> The Subarus are reputed to produce X amount
>> of
>> >> HP
>> >> >> but I was not impressed with their
>> presentation
>> >> nor
>> >> >> information, or lack there of at Sun n Fun,
>> from
>> >> the
>> >> >> Eggenfellner group. They seemed full of hipe
>> but
>> >> >> would not talk real world knowledge of their
>> >> >> products. Like REAL hours of use instead of
>> >> >> projected TBO. Their full rated HP falls WAY
>> off
>> >> >> when throttled back for economy cruise. For
>> all
>> >> the
>> >> >> added extras in complexity and weight, you are
>> >> >> better off with a good 2180 VW or Corvair
>> 2.7L.
>> >> The
>> >> >> three best auto engines I have researched that
>> >> are
>> >> >> successful conversions, being used
>> extensively,
>> >> with
>> >> >> LOTS of information available are: 1) the VW
>> >> 2180;
>> >> >> 2) the Corvair 2.7L ; 3) the 4.3V6 GM. By far
>> >> these
>> >> >> engines have way over the numbers of flying
>> >> >> conversions that stay in the planes and the
>> >> owners
>> >> >> express satisfaction with their performance.
>> The
>> >> >> others have smaller numbers, and have short
>> TBOs
>> >> >> like the 2 cycle Rotax family.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> IMHO I would recommend for our birds, stick
>> with
>> >> the
>> >> >> proven power plants and you will fly sooner,
>> be
>> >> >> happier, spend less money, and perform better
>> >> than
>> >> >> these other fancy boat anchors. (Ok maybe not
>> >> boat
>> >> >> anchor, but definitely tie down anchors ).
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Colin Rainey
>> >> >> brokerpilot9...@earthlink.net
>> >> >> EarthLink Revolves Around You.
>> >> >> _______________________________________
>> >> >> Search the KRnet Archives at
>> >> >> http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp
>> >> >> to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to
>>
> === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________
> Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp
> to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net
> please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
>
