Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:46 AM - Re: E225-8 gets 260 hp (A J DeMarzo)
2. 09:12 AM - Re: E225-8 gets 260 hp (Ron Davis)
3. 11:06 AM - Re: E225-8 gets 260 hp (BobsV35B@aol.com)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: E225-8 gets 260 hp |
--> Beech-List message posted by: "A J DeMarzo" <aerome@ev1.net>
Sounds like a God-send, although ARS doesn't have the nicest of reputations
when it comes to customer service issues. I wonder if it is priced as what
the mod is worth or "whatever the market will bear"? Time will tell.
----- Original Message -----
From: <ROBINFLY@aol.com>
Subject: Beech-List: E225-8 gets 260 hp
> --> Beech-List message posted by: ROBINFLY@aol.com
>
> Finally, Jerry received FAA approval on his <A
HREF="http://www.aviation-research.com/stc.html">stc
>
> Does anyone have any field experience?
>
> Robin Hou
> 54 E35
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: E225-8 gets 260 hp |
--> Beech-List message posted by: Ron Davis <radavis2522@netzero.net>
Shelby,
There was article in the World Beechcraft Society magazine (May/June 2003
issue, pg. 37) announcing the issue of the STC to allow IO-470-N cylinders
on an E225-8 case. I don't know if it is also available for the E185-11
case, but probably not. Other changes to the plane are baffling and
exhaust, louvered cheek cowl panels, and some firewall work.
I don't know if you can still use an autogas STC or not.
Aviation Research
Sandy River Airport
42313 SE Oral Hull Rd
Sandy, Oregon 97055
503-668-4542
503-668-8359 fax
There is no mention in the article about new operating limitations, so I
conclude that you will still be limited by the current POH. However, with
more oomph you will take off quicker, climb quicker, and fly closer to those
limits with roughly 35 more horsepower available.
If you have a 35-B35, then the speed restriction AD still applies. There's
no provision in the current AD that says "If you have this STC, then you are
excused."
Since I have an E225-8 powered plane, I thought long and hard about this and
have decided ... to keep my engine the way it is. My reasons:
A) The resulting engine will be an abomination, er, hybrid, and practically
no mechanic on earth will know how to work on it without screwing something
up.
B) Selling such a hybrid (when the time comes) is always more difficult.
Value may or may not take a hit. Too soon for the market to show me what
the value of such a modified plane is.
C) The faster speeds will result in faster fuel burn, so the 50 gallons (I
have a 10-gal aux. tank) will probably not be enough anymore. I'm used to
seeing 9-10 gph, and a new beefier engine will crank that up to (probably)
12-13. That reduces my VFR range from
(50 gals / 10 gph, - 30 min reserve = ) 4:30:00 down to
(50 gals / 13 gph, - 30 min reserve = ) 3:20:00.
IFR ranges will be even less.
So I'd have to cough up a few grand more for tip tanks.
D) Aviation Research Inc. has been the subject of "controversy" among
several unhappy customers with other products they sell, so at this time it
may be a bit of a gamble to turn over my priceless gem to them and expect an
even more priceless gem to come back out. On time and within budget. If I
*really* wanted to do this, then I would probably wait a couple of years and
see how the first few customers work out.
BOTTOM LINE:
It will be easier in the long run to sell my plane, add the cost of the
upgrade, and buy a newer plane like a J or K35 that already has the IO-470
engine in it. And I like my plane too much to want to get rid of it.
Ron Davis
1954 E35 Bonanza, and happy with it the way it is (mostly)
Shelby Smith wrote:
> --> Beech-List message posted by: Shelby Smith <rvaitor@comcast.net>
>
> I'm curious about this. What does this mean in terms of speed/speed
> restriction on some of these planes? Is this retrofitting the 470 Cylinders?
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: E225-8 gets 260 hp |
--> Beech-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 7/20/03 11:13:26 AM Central Daylight Time,
radavis2522@netzero.net writes:
> C) The faster speeds will result in faster fuel burn, so the 50 gallons (I
> have a 10-gal aux. tank) will probably not be enough anymore. I'm used to
> seeing 9-10 gph, and a new beefier engine will crank that up to (probably)
> 12-13. That reduces my VFR range from
> (50 gals / 10 gph, - 30 min reserve = ) 4:30:00 down to
> (50 gals / 13 gph, - 30 min reserve = ) 3:20:00.
> IFR ranges will be even less.
> So I'd have to cough up a few grand more for tip tanks.
>
Good Afternoon Ron,
I like your comments until you get to the place where you feel you will have
a higher burn. It is my considered opinion that your burn will remain the
same or decrease slightly as long as you fly the airplane at the same indicated
airspeeds that you flew before the conversion. The high compression ratios and
the ability to get adequate cruise power at higher altitudes will allow you
to get higher cruise speeds on the same or less fuel burn.
The aircraft will have a slightly higher burn during climb, but on flights
that utilize the full fuel load, the overall burn should be less.
I have no knowledge as to how the economics of the situation will turn out,
but I think it is great that there is now another source of cylinders that can
be used on the E-series engine.
As you know, I think the nicest flying Bonanzas ever built were the first
1500.
However, putting more horsepower in them and trying to turn that higher
horsepower into anything other than climb is, in my opinion, a big mistake.
The only reason that I would put a newer, more modern, engine into those old
airframes would be to get the advantages inherent in parts availability
provided when an engine, or one of it's components, is still in production.
If you want to get the lowest overall cost of operation, I still recommend
that you buy an H35 or later airplane. If you love the early airplanes, as do
I, for what they are, then we should be happy that somebody is providing
options that may allow us to continue to keep those wonderful machines in the air.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
PS In any case, I think you should pop for those tip tanks!
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|