Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:28 AM - Andair boost pump and filter (Terry Moushon)
2. 06:50 AM - Re: Choosing the switches (Geoff Combs)
3. 09:39 AM - Re: Choosing the switches (Bill Watson)
4. 10:13 AM - Re: Choosing the switches (Robin Marks)
5. 12:23 PM - o-540 (JHearnsberger)
6. 12:51 PM - Safety Wire for Plane-Power Alternator Installation (Jeff Carpenter)
7. 12:55 PM - Re: Safety Wire for Plane-Power Alternator Installation (Kevin Belue)
8. 01:10 PM - Re: o-540 (Rhonda Bewley)
9. 01:46 PM - Re: o-540 (speckter@comcast.net)
10. 02:22 PM - Re: o-540 (Jesse Saint)
11. 02:23 PM - Re: o-540 (Kelly McMullen)
12. 02:51 PM - Re: Safety Wire for Plane-Power Alternator Installation (tsts4)
13. 05:44 PM - Re: o-540 (JHearnsberger)
14. 07:04 PM - Re: Re: o-540 (davidsoutpost@comcast.net)
15. 08:25 PM - Re: Re: Safety Wire for Plane-Power Alternator Installation (Kelly McMullen)
16. 08:27 PM - Re: Re: o-540 (Don McDonald)
17. 08:34 PM - Re: Re: o-540 (Kelly McMullen)
18. 10:26 PM - Re: Re: o-540 (Albert Gardner)
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: | Andair boost pump and filter |
> I have just started my RV10 fuselage and plan to use an IO540. I already p
urchased the Andair FS20X7-T (looks very well engineered).... and I am leani
ng toward using the Andair PX500-TC Pump and FX500-MK filter. Would like to
better understand why the fuel filter on most -10s are in the tunnel. What
drawbacks would there be for an "out of the cockpit" solution for the filte
r. Appreciate any/all thoughts.
I will be at Osh...looking forward to put faces with names.
Terry Moushon
Peoria Illinois
Builder 41393
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: | Choosing the switches |
Love the rockers but also have a few toggles
Geoff Combs
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 10:11 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Choosing the switches
What do you know about electronics?
Robin
Do Not Archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob-tcw
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 4:26 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Choosing the switches
I used the Aveo switches and had a few custom laser engraved.
Bob Newman
TCW Technologies, LLC.
From: Robin Marks <mailto:robin@PaintTheWeb.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 12:44 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Choosing the switches
RV-10 Build:
RV-8A Build
Robin
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carlos Trigo
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 2:32 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Choosing the switches
Guys
It's time to choose the switches for the RV-10 panel, and I wonder which
ones are more popular between the RV-10 builders:
For the Master and ALT field, have you used the Cessna split rocker or just
2 separate toggle switches?
For the magnetos and starter, did everybody use the ACS combined keyed
switch, or is it better to use 2 toggles and one push-button momentary
starter switch?
And for the lights and other electrical equipment, which has been the
choice: the classic rocker switches or the color coded toggle switches?
Thanks for your opinions
Carlos
===================
bsp; - The RV10-List Email Forum -
o browse
scription,
, Chat, FAQ,
/span>
tronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Lis
t
===================
bsp; - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
eb Forums!
.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
===================
bsp; - List Contribution Web Site -
o:p>
bsp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
tronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================
_____
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
r>
_____
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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: Choosing the switches |
On 7/7/2013 8:11 AM, Jesse Saint wrote:
> The classy rocker switches are very nice to look at, and I like the
> way they can be labeled right on the switch, but they are more
> expensive and harder to add or remove. I recently worked on a plane
> that had all rocker switches (the big black ones that were engraved
> with labels. There are 4-5 switches that aren't used any more and if I
> remove them, there will be big holes in the panel.
>
I used white Honeywell rockers (AML34,24) with labels and backlighting.
All the above certainly applies though I haven't had to face any of that
yet beyond initial expense. My selection was based purely on personal
desire with the knowledge that toggles would be easier, cheaper, and
more flexible. But since I did my own panel, I enjoyed the challenge
and the finished appearance.
I didn't include a split rocker, nothing missed there.
I did use the ACS key switch and find it a good selection for my '10.
It's easy to leave the baggage key dangling outside unless you have to
have it to start the plane (there are other approaches to this problem
but this one works). Since you need a key for the baggage door, using
the same for ignition and just plain requiring a key ring is a handy
thing (my fuel key is on the ring too which is a great reminder).
Re the Honeywells - finding the right switches for a couple of functions
required some searching, e.g. AP source switching, flaps. Newark
Electronics turned out to be a great (stocked) source for switch items.
Cutting rectangular holes in an aluminum panel turned out to be
surprisingly easy with a hand file. The lights for the switches turn
out to be troublesome... it takes some fooling around to get the little
lights to consistently stay lit in a vibrating environment. There are
LED lights available as well as the standard incandescent. I use the
LEDs but went to incandescent for my LRC3 low voltage lights in order
for them to function properly. B&C can tell you how to make the LEDs
work there as well.
I used AML41 indicators for the idiot lights. Very handsome when
combined with the rockers.
I used dimmers on all switches and 2 of the idiot lights.
No VPN, did use Faststack, fuses along with 4 breakers, Z-14
a few pics here
http://www.mykitlog.com/users/category.php?user=MauleDriver&project=224&category=5253
(I should include a pic of the whole panel)
Bill "300+ hours and still haven't replaced stick-on panel labels" Watson
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 |
|
| Subject: | Choosing the switches |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Message 5
| 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 |
|
I have an A&P friend whom I trust that has offered to help me rebuild an o-540.
He said he has two o-540's in his shop and that we could go with the 235hp
or we could change the pistons in one to make it a 250hp. He mentioned that with
the 235hp you would have the ability to use auto gas in case you got in a
bind somewhere. I've been planning on spending around $50,000 for a new io-540.
If I go this route with my friend, it could save me probably 35-40%.
How will using an 0-540 235hp or 250hp affect my fuel efficiency over a 260hp io-540?
What kind of extra work will be required on the firewall, cowling, etc. for using
a carbureted engine instead of a non-carbureted engine?
I'm open to suggestions.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404218#404218
Message 6
| 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: | Safety Wire for Plane-Power Alternator Installation |
Does anyone have pics of their safety wiring the tension arm bolts? The distance
between them seems a bit much to tie one to the other.
Jeff Carpenter
40304
Message 7
| 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: Safety Wire for Plane-Power Alternator Installation |
Safety wire the bolt to the arm....
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 8, 2013, at 2:51 PM, Jeff Carpenter <jeff@westcottpress.com> wrote:
>
> Does anyone have pics of their safety wiring the tension arm bolts? The distance
between them seems a bit much to tie one to the other.
>
> Jeff Carpenter
> 40304
>
>
>
>
Message 8
| 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 |
|
I believe there's more involved than a simple piston swap to convert it
for 250 or 260 hp use, depending on the engine model. (I assume they are
-A1A5?) Still might not be a bad way to go, but make sure you not just
putting a heavy 8.5:1 piston in it.
Rhonda Barrett-Bewley
Barrett Precision Engines
2870-B N. Sheridan Rd.
Tulsa, OK 74115
(918) 835-1089 phone
(918) 835-1754 fax
www.barrettprecisionengines.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JHearnsberger
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 2:23 PM
Subject: RV10-List: o-540
<jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>
I have an A&P friend whom I trust that has offered to help me rebuild an
o-540. He said he has two o-540's in his shop and that we could go with
the 235hp or we could change the pistons in one to make it a 250hp. He
mentioned that with the 235hp you would have the ability to use auto gas
in case you got in a bind somewhere. I've been planning on spending
around $50,000 for a new io-540. If I go this route with my friend, it
could save me probably 35-40%.
How will using an 0-540 235hp or 250hp affect my fuel efficiency over a
260hp io-540?
What kind of extra work will be required on the firewall, cowling, etc.
for using a carbureted engine instead of a non-carbureted engine?
I'm open to suggestions.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404218#404218
Message 9
| 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 |
|
Save 35-40%?=C2- Yes you will save but you are not comparing= .=C2- I
n the one case you have a new engine with factory warranty =C2-and in the
other you have something all together different.=C2-One is fuel injected
the other is carbureted . =C2-Not that going the mod route is bad, it is
just that the savings you anticipated =C2-is because you changed the end
result,=C2- not because of actual savings on equal engines.
Extending that out to the ridiculous you could save 60 or 90%, but again yo
u wouldn't be comparing = engines
Gary Specketer
----- Original Message -----
From: "JHearnsberger" <jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2013 2:23:18 PM
Subject: RV10-List: o-540
m>
I have an A&P friend whom I trust that has offered to help me rebuild an o-
540. =C2-He said he has two o-540's in his shop and that we could go with
=C2-the 235hp or we could change the pistons in one to make it a 250hp.
=C2-He mentioned that with the 235hp you would have the ability to use au
to gas in case you got in a bind somewhere. =C2-I've been planning on spe
nding around $50,000 for a new io-540. =C2-If I go this route with my fri
end, it could save me probably 35-40%.
How will using an 0-540 235hp or 250hp affect my fuel efficiency over a 260
hp io-540?
What kind of extra work will be required on the firewall, cowling, etc. for
using a carbureted engine instead of a non-carbureted engine?
I'm open to suggestions.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404218#404218
===========
===========
MS -
===========
e -
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt Dralle, List Admin.
===========
Message 10
| 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 |
|
I agree mostly with what others have said. The 235HP engine is 7:1 (or 7.2:1, maybe)
compression pistons running at 2575 RPM max. The 250HP is 8.5:1 pistons
running at 2575 RPM max. The 260HP is 8.5:1 running 2700 RPM max. Some engines
have cast connecting rods and others have forged connecting rods (according to
Allen Barrett). The counterweights are also different between engines. If you
put 8.5:1 pistons in that engine, and run it at 2575 RPM, it will make roughly
250HP. This is what we have in N256H and have 1,350 hours on it. We may be
slightly outclimbed by someone with 260HP for 1-2,000 ft, but then it would equal
out, because once you pull the RPM back under 2575, the rest is equal with
8.5:1 pistons.
The Carburetor vs Fuel Injection this is just a matter of personal preference.
I would highly recommend Fuel Injection. That way you can lean much better and
can tune your injectors for smoother running and overall better leaning yet.
This shouldn't make any difference on HP.
What engine would you be getting? Is it a new engine or a used engine? If you were
expecting $50,000 on a new IO-540, then I would expect at least a 50% savings
going with a used engine, and that should include new cylinders, new accessories,
and a new fuel injection system. If it is a newly overhauled engine that
he is trying to sell you, then 35-40% is reasonable, but it should also include
new cylinders, new accessories (or overhauled) and a new or overhauled fuel
injection system.
There shouldn't be much difference on firewall, cowling or baffles with this engine,
whether with a carburetor or fuel injection system. The baffles fit slightly
different on different cases, but it's not a big deal. All parallel valve
540's should fit on the -10 just about the same. Some people have had to slightly
modify their engine mount for different cases, but you could run into that
with any engine, as I understand. I have never run into that, and have put lots
of different sub-model-number 540's on -10's.
Again, there should be nothing wrong with running either of his engines on your
plane, but the cost of the engine and what you are getting is the biggest issue.
Feel free to call me at my cell number below once you have information on
what he has and we can talk further.
The lower compression pistons will let you run low octane mogas, but if you are
planning to have that just so you can get out of a jam, it really won't help.
If you have to lug gas cans from a gas station to your plane because the airport
doesn't have gas, then you are most likely going to be hauling gas with ethanol.
If so, then why have pistons that can run 87 octane when you could just
get the 91-93 octane gas from the same station with high compression pistons?
That is the only benefit of the low compression pistons. I have an RV-9A that
I put low compression pistons in because the no-ethanol mogas that we can get
here in Florida is max 89 octane, and you need 91 or better for 8.5:1.
There is possibly another difference in the cylinders that won't allow higher compression
pistons, but I don't know for sure. If you are paying that much for
an engine (and airplane as a whole, for that matter), throw a new set of 8.5:1
jugs on and a fuel injection system. You will be glad you did.
By the way, most of this information I learned from Allen Barrett, and I hear he's
a pretty smart guy when it comes to engines.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
C: 352-427-0285
F: 815-377-3694
On Jul 8, 2013, at 3:23 PM, JHearnsberger <jakehearnsberger@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have an A&P friend whom I trust that has offered to help me rebuild an o-540.
He said he has two o-540's in his shop and that we could go with the 235hp
or we could change the pistons in one to make it a 250hp. He mentioned that
with the 235hp you would have the ability to use auto gas in case you got in
a bind somewhere. I've been planning on spending around $50,000 for a new io-540.
If I go this route with my friend, it could save me probably 35-40%.
>
> How will using an 0-540 235hp or 250hp affect my fuel efficiency over a 260hp
io-540?
>
> What kind of extra work will be required on the firewall, cowling, etc. for using
a carbureted engine instead of a non-carbureted engine?
>
> I'm open to suggestions.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404218#404218
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 11
| 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 |
|
Some, not all 235 hp O-540s can run on 80/87 or most any grade mogas.
Most 250/260 hp (I)O-540s can run on 91+ octane mogas as they were
certified on 91/96 avgas, and have same octane requirements as the
O-360, 180hp engines with the same cylinders that have STC's for mogas,
like the Cherokee 180.
As Rhonda says, you would need to be certain that the parts used were
appropriate to the C4B% or A4D5 versions of the engine. There are a lot
of different cranks that depend on the application and balance wts for
the prop being considered. Then there are issues with ADs specific to
certain models, what size/style mounting ears the engine has. While they
can be changed, just another thing to get right from the start.If the
mechanic is experienced, has all the needed micrometers and other
measuring tools, to build a quality, new limits (not service limits)
overhaul, it can be a good deal, but there are a number of pitfalls for
someone that isn't familiar with the precise version engine you need.
The lower compression engine version of the 235 will not be as fuel
efficient, but is very durable.
On 7/8/2013 12:23 PM, JHearnsberger wrote:
>
> I have an A&P friend whom I trust that has offered to help me rebuild an o-540.
He said he has two o-540's in his shop and that we could go with the 235hp
or we could change the pistons in one to make it a 250hp. He mentioned that
with the 235hp you would have the ability to use auto gas in case you got in
a bind somewhere. I've been planning on spending around $50,000 for a new io-540.
If I go this route with my friend, it could save me probably 35-40%.
>
> How will using an 0-540 235hp or 250hp affect my fuel efficiency over a 260hp
io-540?
>
> What kind of extra work will be required on the firewall, cowling, etc. for using
a carbureted engine instead of a non-carbureted engine?
>
> I'm open to suggestions.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404218#404218
>
>
Message 12
| 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: Safety Wire for Plane-Power Alternator Installation |
Ran into the same issue a few months back. Just drill some small holes into the
tension arm and run the safety wire from the bolt to the hole and tie it off.
--------
Todd Stovall
aka Auburntsts on EAA, AOPA, Purple Pilots, VAF, and RVairspace
RV-10 N728TT
Empacone, Wings, Fuse, Finishing
www.mykitlog.com/auburntsts
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404239#404239
Message 13
| 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 |
|
Thank you guys for your responses. I've brought up several topics. I should have
kept my question to fuel efficiency only. Comparing the 235 to the 260.
--------
Jake Hearnsberger
RV-10 Wings
Springhill, LA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404242#404242
Message 14
| 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 |
|
You can throttle back on the 260 hp models to get the same hp and fuel burn as
the 235 hp if fuel burn is of concern. Its nice to have those extra ponies available
though for when you need them.
David Clifford
RV-10 Builder
Howell, MI
----- Original Message -----
From: "JHearnsberger" <jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2013 8:43:56 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: o-540
Thank you guys for your responses. I've brought up several topics. I should have
kept my question to fuel efficiency only. Comparing the 235 to the 260.
--------
Jake Hearnsberger
RV-10 Wings
Springhill, LA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404242#404242
Message 15
| 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: Safety Wire for Plane-Power Alternator Installation |
While it may be "okay" to drill a hole, there is no need to. You can easily
safety directly to the arm. That is done all the time on certified aircraft.
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 2:50 PM, tsts4 <tsts4@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> Ran into the same issue a few months back. Just drill some small holes
> into the tension arm and run the safety wire from the bolt to the hole and
> tie it off.
>
> --------
> Todd Stovall
> aka Auburntsts on EAA, AOPA, Purple Pilots, VAF, and RVairspace
> RV-10 N728TT
> Empacone, Wings, Fuse, Finishing
> www.mykitlog.com/auburntsts
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404239#404239
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
Message 16
| 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 |
|
Every RV'er that has ever gone with less hp or smaller displacement, always
pays the price. They have to run a higher percentage of power just to keep
up, and because of that they also end up burning more fuel. Also if you're
carbeurated you have more difficulty running lean of peak, which also means
you burn more fuel.
A friend of mine with a new Mattituck, carbed 540 has an avg cruise fuel burn between
11 and 12 gph.... whereas I burn between 9.6 and 10.2.... do the math,
I now have over 500 hours, at a 1+ gph more fuel burn, that would cost you around
$2,800 in additional fuel cost..... so over the life of the TBO, over $10,000!!!!!!!!
Don McDonald
Message 17
| 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 |
|
Actually, the 260 operated at 176 hp, or 75 percent for a 235, will get
better economy because of the higher compression.
For example, a Mooney 201 with 200 hp Lycoming will out run a Mooney 231
with Continental turbocharged 210 hp engine below 8000 ft, simply because
the turbo isn't producing any more power there than the normally aspirated
engine. The Lyc is 8.7 to 1 while the Cont is 7 to 1. Lyc operates at
atmospheric pressure, Cont at 39 inches to make up for the lower
compression. The Lyc burns 11 gph in cruise ROP, the Cont burns 12-13 at
same power. The 231 doesn't shine until it gets above 10,000 ft where it
can produce more power than the normally aspirated 201. Their airframes are
pretty identical outside powerplant differences.
Another example...Bonanza with IO-470 260hp engine will burn more fuel on
all but very short flights than one with STC'd IO-550 310 hp, especially if
they both operate at the same indicated airspeed, just because the bigger
engine breathes more efficiently and can get up to altitude faster.
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 7:03 PM, <davidsoutpost@comcast.net> wrote:
> You can throttle back on the 260 hp models to get the same hp and fuel
> burn as the 235 hp if fuel burn is of concern. Its nice to have those
> extra ponies available though for when you need them.
>
> David Clifford
>
> RV-10 Builder
> Howell, MI
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"JHearnsberger" <jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>
> *To: *rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Sent: *Monday, July 8, 2013 8:43:56 PM
> *Subject: *RV10-List: Re: o-540
>
>
> jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>
>
> Thank you guys for your responses. I've brought up several topics. I
> should have kept my question to fuel efficiency only. Comparing the 235 to
> the 260.
>
> --------
> Jake Hearnsberger
> RV-10 Wings
> Springhill, LA
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p= &=
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
Message 18
| 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 |
|
Performance Engines out of La Verne, CA built my IO-540. With 10:1
compression and 1 Lightspeed they rated it at 310 HP. With 799 hours on it I
have put 8003 gallons of 100LL in, just about exactly 10 GPH average. (I'm
not going to tell my wife how much 8K gallons of gas costs)
Albert Gardner
N991RV
Yuma, AZ
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don McDonald
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 8:27 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: o-540
Every RV'er that has ever gone with less hp or smaller displacement, always
pays the price. They have to run a higher percentage of power just to keep
up, and because of that they also end up burning more fuel. Also if you're
carbeurated you have more difficulty running lean of peak, which also means
you burn more fuel.
A friend of mine with a new Mattituck, carbed 540 has an avg cruise fuel
burn between 11 and 12 gph.... whereas I burn between 9.6 and 10.2.... do
the math, I now have over 500 hours, at a 1+ gph more fuel burn, that would
cost you around $2,800 in additional fuel cost..... so over the life of the
TBO, over $10,000!!!!!!!!
Don McDonald
_____
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! --
|