Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:26 AM - Re: STC for IO-540 conversion (Bill Hamilton)
2. 05:51 AM - Re: STC for IO-540 conversion (BobsV35B@aol.com)
3. 06:54 AM - (MASON CHEVAILLIER)
4. 02:38 PM - Re: TCFG Fly-In (WINGFLYER1@aol.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | STC for IO-540 conversion |
Bob,
I know of at least one 500A where IO-520s have been dropped in to replace
the IO-470Ms. The change includes a three blade prop. I have been trying to
get a straight answer from Hartzell as to whether I can run the extra 30hp
through my existing two blade props. Two blades might not be as sexy as
three, but the fewer the blades the greater efficiency, all else being
equal, as a number of early C 310 owners have found, to their great expense.
Spend all that money, and the aeroplane goes slower.
Likewise, the potential for vibration couples from going to three blade
props, again as some C310 owners have found out ---- in this case having to
ditch the three blade props.
As far as I can see, the IO-550 will drop in, with very minor modifications
to the cowl for clearance. Our experience with the 520 is that cooling is no
problem, the cowl gills have enough "latitude" to accommodate the small
increase in high power cooling demand. A mate of mine is about to do a
turbo-prop conversion to a C340A, which will leave a pair of TSIO-520
looking for a good home, I will be easily tempted.
A ripper conversion is an IO-550 in a C-182, gives a whole meaning to "get
up and go", and the conversion was easy. These have all been done to our
equivalent of a filed mod., with a DER signoff.
I note there is a AC680FPL with STC 400hp Lycomings on eBay right now.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 11:46 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: STC for IO-540 conversion
Good Morning Chris,
You already know I am an unabashed lover of the Continental IO-550-B. I have
always thought that the 550 would be a natural to replace the Continentals
that were used in a few Commander 500-A's many years ago.
How much difference is there between the mounts for Commanders with IO-470-M
Continentals and the ones with Lycomings?
I am not at all familiar with how the IO-470-M mounts. Is it the same as
most 470s? If so, the 550 should be a drop in replacement. Always nice to
have an engine with many users that is also in current production.
Just musing, but that IS always fun. Now, if we could just get rid of the
FAA ---?---
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
In a message dated 8/19/2009 7:55:56 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
cschuerm@cox.net writes:
willis robison wrote:
> Thanks Chris,
>
> Well, we may have to consider it if we ever lose the IGO-540s.
> Although I wouldnt go into producing the mounts, I would provide the
> drawings, gratis for those who also needed a conversion.
>
A good starting point might be to find a Cherokee-6/300 in a bone yard.
You'd at least have the correct engine and a mount that could be
modified. There was also a company that had an stc to put TIO-540-J2BD
350hp engines on the flat nacelle Commanders. I assume they built their
own mount and it might be closer to what's needed. Anyone know for sure
how much the firewall mount points differ between a bathtub and
streamline ==============================================
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ===============================================
- List Contribution Web Site sp;
==================================================
_____
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: STC for IO-540 conversion |
Good Morning Bill,
Totally agree about the two blade issue.
I tried to get a two blade for my Bonanza when I installed my first
IO-550-B. I was told by both Hartzell and McCauley that there was plenty
of room
on the Bonanza to swing a two blade that could easily absorb the three
hundred plus horsepower.
They didn't have any two blades approved for the installation because no
one had asked for it. They told me (this was in 1996) that the minimum cha
rge
to run the certification data would be one hundred thousand dollars and
that the test propellor would be junk. If something came up that had to
be
modified to get the approval, another one hundred thousand dollar test ru
n
would be needed. Obviously I am struggling along with three blade propell
ors
on all our 550s.
An example of how well a two blade works at those horsepowers is the Malib
u
and Mirage. Piper kept testing various propellors and that relatively
short, fat, two blade always made the best compromise between speed and
climb
performance. It wasn't until after the little German composite four blade
became ubiquitous on the Malibu that Piper succumbed to getting a three
blade
approved. The only reason we are stuck with three blade props on the thre
e
to four hundred horsepower range is because people think they look sexy.
You are probably aware that the Bonanza that is running around the country
using a Duke engine sports a two blade much like the one on an early
Malibu.
That particular engine installation was done by Darryl Greenamyer with the
after hour assistance of a team of Lockheed Skunk Works engineers. I think
they knew what they were doing!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
In a message dated 8/20/2009 3:26:54 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
wjrhamilton@optusnet.com.au writes:
Bob,
I know of at least one 500A where IO-520s have been dropped in to replace
the IO-470Ms. The change includes a three blade prop. I have been trying
to
get a straight answer from Hartzell as to whether I can run the extra 30h
p
through my existing two blade props. Two blades might not be as sexy as
three, but the fewer the blades the greater efficiency, all else being eq
ual,
as a number of early C 310 owners have found, to their great expense.
Spend all that money, and the aeroplane goes slower.
Likewise, the potential for vibration couples from going to three blade
props, again as some C310 owners have found out ---- in this case having
to
ditch the three blade props.
As far as I can see, the IO-550 will drop in, with very minor
modifications to the cowl for clearance. Our experience with the 520 is
that cooling is
no problem, the cowl gills have enough =9Clatitude=9D to acco
mmodate the
small increase in high power cooling demand. A mate of mine is about to
do a
turbo-prop conversion to a C340A, which will leave a pair of TSIO-520 look
ing
for a good home, I will be easily tempted.
A ripper conversion is an IO-550 in a C-182, gives a whole meaning to
=9Cget
up and go=9D, and the conversion was easy. These have all been done
to our
equivalent of a filed mod., with a DER signoff.
I note there is a AC680FPL with STC 400hp Lycomings on eBay right now.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of BobsV35B@
aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 11:46 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: STC for IO-540 conversion
Good Morning Chris,
You already know I am an unabashed lover of the Continental IO-550-B. I
have always thought that the 550 would be a natural to replace the
Continentals that were used in a few Commander 500-A's many years ago.
How much difference is there between the mounts for Commanders with
IO-470-M Continentals and the ones with Lycomings?
I am not at all familiar with how the IO-470-M mounts. Is it the same as
most 470s? If so, the 550 should be a drop in replacement. Always nice to
have an engine with many users that is also in current production.
Just musing, but that IS always fun. Now, if we could just get rid of the
FAA ---?---
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
In a message dated 8/19/2009 7:55:56 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
cschuerm@cox.net writes:
--> Commander-List message posted by: Chris <cschuerm@cox.net>
willis robison wrote:
> Thanks Chris,
>
> Well, we may have to consider it if we ever lose the IGO-540s.
> Although I wouldnt go into producing the mounts, I would provide the
> drawings, gratis for those who also needed a conversion.
>
A good starting point might be to find a Cherokee-6/300 in a bone yard.
You'd at least have the correct engine and a mount that could be
modified. There was also a company that had an stc to put TIO-540-J2BD
350hp engines on the flat nacelle Commanders. I assume they built their
own mount and it might be closer to what's needed. Anyone know for sure
how much the firewall mount points differ between a bathtub and
streamline ====================
=
=======================
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS
======================= -
List Contribution Web Site sp;
____________________________________
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
========================
============
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
========================
============
========================
============
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
========================
============
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 |
|
jim addington please call mason 817-877-4977
Message 4
| 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 |
|
Jim,Sue , Can you give me some info on the Fly=Inn reservations. I just may
be able to get their this year. Thanks Gil
In a message dated 6/12/2009 11:16:07 A.M. Central America Standard ,
yourtcfg@aol.com writes:
Hi Kids,
The registration packets for the Fly-In will be mailed to members this
weekend. If you don't receive one and would like one, let us know and we'll
be glad to mail it to you.
As mentioned previously we will be in Carson City Nevada this year and
will combine our Fly-in with the Reno Air Races. Because of this it is
important that you book early as rooms and cars will go fast and if you wait
until the last minute there may not be anything available.
Tentative schedule for the event is as follows:
Wednesday Arrival Day and Welcome Dinner
Thursday Seminars and Awards Banquet
Fri, Sat & Sun Attend Reno Air Races
We have booked a box seat on the flght line at the races. Cost will be
$325 per person for the entire race event and in addition to the box seat
this includes daily parking, daily pit passes and allows us to bring in a
couple of coolers each day. The box seat holds up to 15 people so we will need
to have you reserve early so if needed we can obtain another box seat.
You would also have the option of buying general admission or reserved
bleacher seating.
Looking forward to seeing you all at this event.
Jim & Sue
____________________________________
Make your summer sizzle with _fast and easy recipes_
(http://food.aol.com/grilling?ncid=emlcntusfood00000003) for the grill.
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
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! --
|