Modern Aircooled 4-Cylinder Aircraft Engine Using Contemporary Engine Technology

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Toobuilder

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Wow is right! Where the hell did that come from?

cheapracer

Well-Known Member
Log Member
... and not before time.

The question is why it took someone so long to do it, take an 0-200 (whatever) and modernise it and especially get rid of the 1940's junk combustion chamber. My goodness you only have to grab an LS3 Chev head and copy it.

Note the vertical valves, I presume and hope a modern bathtub squish chamber tumble and dump port arrangement, but then again who would want more power on less fuel and better cooling ...

Now we just await the price, they seem to be suggesting 12,000 ("half price 0-200")? That will rock the market if true, maybe the greatest rock ever.

Monty

Well-Known Member
And a monolithic all aluminum barrel/head. No more cracked heads...Probably Nickasil. Should wear very well and be easy to recondition.

I can't say that the fins look ideal. Not enough density for optimum cooling drag. but manufacturing concerns drove that I'm sure. If it means saving $12K.... a VERY reasonable compromise. rv6ejguy Well-Known Member 'bout time. Yeah, I'm highly doubtful of the stock O-200 hp claims. I estimated ours was right around 85hp corrected from the rpm were were turning on a Rotax prop. Last edited: Monty Well-Known Member I've been working on a clean sheet engine design for a year or two, for something completely unrelated. It will say that I was amazed at how easy it is to do things now. Between CAD/CAM and FEA you can do a really good job on the design side with a relatively small team. All this IC engine stuff is well plowed ground. The aftermarket support is amazing. You can get off the shelf parts for just about anything you want. The depth of the IC engine supplier base is truly amazing. My conclusion is that Lycoming and Contenental are just lazy dinosaur organizations who can no longer innovate. They just spend their time keeping legacy aircraft owners over a barrel because of regulations requiring you buy their products. Their products are terrible, ancient tech, and horribly overpriced. The only reason they get away with it is the silly religious fervor about "aircraft quality"....which is anything but. mcrae0104 Well-Known Member HBA Supporter Log Member :shock: Outstanding! Would love to see 2 more cylinders as a follow-on product. Edit: Scratch that about a 6-cylinder. I should have read more carefully: We subjected all critical components to extensive FEA in order to maximize reliability and to provide sufficient strength margins for future developments, including a 160+ HP turbocharged version with a constant-speed hydraulic propeller. Last edited: Aerowerx Well-Known Member Price tag? cheapracer Well-Known Member Log Member Price tag? They are suggesting$12,000, it will rock the establishment if so.

With respect, I would be very concerned if I was one of the smaller players right now, Jabiru, Viking, Automomentum, D Motor, UL etc.

I know it's just print and speculation at the moment, but hey this is the Internet, so if really happens why would you bother with one of the others.

BBerson

HBA Supporter
Even at a price of $8k, they would still have a winner if they made a two cylinder 60hp engine. tspear Well-Known Member A turbo charged 160 HP version would through my calculations off on which kit to build. Could be fun... Tim Cy V Well-Known Member They are suggesting$12,000, it will rock the establishment if so.

With respect, I would be very concerned if I was one of the smaller players right now, Jabiru, Viking, Automomentum, D Motor, UL etc.
I would think that price, if true, would all put a major dent in the "Fly Corvair" movement too.

cheapracer

Well-Known Member
Log Member
:shock:

Outstanding!

Would love to see 2 more cylinders as a follow-on product.

Edit: Scratch that about a 6-cylinder. I should have read more carefully:

Just curious, would you prefer an 0-300 6 cylinder, simply a bigger 4 (read 0-320) or the turbo 0-200? (based on this engine, not the Conti).

tspear

Well-Known Member
Just curious, would you prefer an 0-300 6 cylinder, simply a bigger 4 (read 0-320) or the turbo 0-200? (based on this engine, not the Conti).
From a weight perspective, I would guess the Turbo 200 would be a better choice. Plus, you can potentially over size the turbo and carry more power higher.
The downside is more complexity.
Without numbers, there is no real way to compare. You have to balance, weight, price, and complexity.
I think it will depend on which of the three variables is more important to you. Currently in the planes I am comparing: price, followed by weight, lastly is complexity.

Tim

Toobuilder

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Just curious, would you prefer an 0-300 6 cylinder, simply a bigger 4 (read 0-320) or the turbo 0-200? (based on this engine, not the Conti).
I'd be much more interested in a NA 6. If the HP scaling holds true, that would be north of 200 HP.

don january

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
What a sweet engine. I'd be happy with half on my T-mono

Hot Wings

Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Just curious, would you prefer an 0-300 6 cylinder, simply a bigger 4 (read 0-320) or the turbo 0-200? (based on this engine, not the Conti).
Turbo. Provided the existing cooling is up to the task of more Hp.

It's all about weight. Adding weight in the same ratio to Hp to get more Hp just means more airplane to carry the weight. Turbos seem mysterious and 'complex' but need not be. But the market place will make the final decision. :depressed

BoKu

Pundit
HBA Supporter
I'd be much more interested in a NA 6. If the HP scaling holds true, that would be north of 200 HP.
If this engine is successful, I'd guess that they will probably go after the O-360 niche next. Maybe with a 4cyl 320ci 210hp unit. My thinking is that they'd want a drop-in replacement that fits the 320/360 engine mount and puts the prop flange in the exact same spot. Sixes are nice and smooth and all, but a bigger four that fits an established niche would probably be the best bang for their development buck.

And after that, then maybe we'd be looking for a 480ci 310hp NA six, maybe 375hp with turbo.

But that's probably getting way ahead of things.

--Bob K.