Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:04 AM - Engine Wanted ()
2. 02:03 PM - Re: Re: Lycoming Cylinder question (Dan Rogers)
3. 02:57 PM - Re: Re: Lycoming Cylinder question (Kelly McMullen)
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 |
|
Yes, everyone needs one. I am interested in a Lycoming TIO-360 Turbo or
a good rebuilt Continental TSIO-360 Turbo. If Continental, you must
provide proof of the crank upgrade. Note, I am looking for a good
engine, not a core (unless you want to get rid of it cheap).
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: Lycoming Cylinder question |
Thank you, Gary and Bill,
I have now studied the Lycoming website engine lists and can see a clear
relationship between comp ratio, engine width and weight. There is also
power corelation, but because of turbo and various RPM combinations, it
is not as clear cut.
Thanks again,
Dan
Gary Casey wrote:
>
> I'm not "the" Lycoming expert, but as far as I can tell everything with
> a power rating of 300 or more has the angle-valve cylinders. A
> sure-fire way to tell is to look at the Lycoming spec sheet on their
> website and the parallel-valve engines are narrower. Other than that
> the model numbers don't give much of a clue unless you just know which
> is which. As Bill said, the angle-valve heads flow better. The
> naturally-aspirated versions have a 8.7 compression ratio vs. the 8.5 of
> the parallel-valve engine, and that also helps to produce slightly more
> power. With more space between the valves the angle-valve engine
> requires less pressure drop for cooling, theoretically reducing cooling
> drag. But they are heavier, to the tune of 4 or 5 pounds per cylinder
> and the angle-valve engines don't have the same reputation for longevity
> as the parallel-valve engines. An expert told me that there is nothing
> to be gained by porting and polishing the angle-valve cylinder, while
> the parallel-valve version can be ported to achieve almost the same
> airflow as the angle-valve cylinder.
> Gary Casey
> Parallel-valve IO-540 with 10:1 compression dyno tested at 305 hp
>
>
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: Lycoming Cylinder question |
Probably just as important, the angle valve engines are designed for
more cooling, both in the cylinder head design, and with oil squirt
nozzles spraying oil on the bottom side of the pistons. The weight
increase is unfortunate, as it somewhat degrades the performance
increase. I would think that the angle valve cylinders would be more
desirable for turbocharging, with the better heat dissipation
capability. The one factory TIO540 with parallel valve cylinders that
I am familiar with, had to be retrofitted with oil cooled valve guides
to make the valve stems and guides last.
On 3/20/07, Dan Rogers <drogers@maf.org> wrote:
>
> Thank you, Gary and Bill,
>
> I have now studied the Lycoming website engine lists and can see a clear
> relationship between comp ratio, engine width and weight. There is also
> power corelation, but because of turbo and various RPM combinations, it
> is not as clear cut.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Dan
>
> Gary Casey wrote:
> >
> > I'm not "the" Lycoming expert, but as far as I can tell everything with
> > a power rating of 300 or more has the angle-valve cylinders. A
> > sure-fire way to tell is to look at the Lycoming spec sheet on their
> > website and the parallel-valve engines are narrower. Other than that
> > the model numbers don't give much of a clue unless you just know which
> > is which. As Bill said, the angle-valve heads flow better. The
> > naturally-aspirated versions have a 8.7 compression ratio vs. the 8.5 of
> > the parallel-valve engine, and that also helps to produce slightly more
> > power. With more space between the valves the angle-valve engine
> > requires less pressure drop for cooling, theoretically reducing cooling
> > drag. But they are heavier, to the tune of 4 or 5 pounds per cylinder
> > and the angle-valve engines don't have the same reputation for longevity
> > as the parallel-valve engines. An expert told me that there is nothing
> > to be gained by porting and polishing the angle-valve cylinder, while
> > the parallel-valve version can be ported to achieve almost the same
> > airflow as the angle-valve cylinder.
> > Gary Casey
> > Parallel-valve IO-540 with 10:1 compression dyno tested at 305 hp
> >
> >
>
>
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! --
|