Modern Aircooled 4-Cylinder Aircraft Engine Using Contemporary Engine Technology

wonder what the story is here also..

thoughts on this?

 

From the post & comments alone, new folks wouldn't even necessarily know a competitor & i don't see a direct link to a website.

it was a simple technical comparison for me, didn't even know who from until there were other comments about it.

I also wasn't aware of how far the fuel efficiency went in comparison including being able to go with auto fuel.

Then recently, i saw that a similar rotax turbo engine goes for 38K???

 

My thought is that I'd wait and see if this new engine actually develops the problems that pfarber says it will be susceptible to rather than dismiss the engine. I am not aware of the high failure rate he mentions nor what he considers a "high" failure rate.

I'd also be inclined to give a guy like Jack Kane the benefit of the doubt vs. Internet critics. This also extends to basic design choices such as air cooling, direct drive, the number of valves, &c. Mr Kane is quite aware of the design tradeoffs and is not a Luddite on the basis that this isn't a geared, water-cooled engine.

Depending on an engine's design requirements, operating requirements, manufacturing requirements, operating environment, operating costs, available maintenance, and so on, there is no single correct answer to engine architecture.

 

Dunno about "high failure rate" but certainly aware of issues with the through bolt setups on cert engines, which can also end up being a total pia to fix.

 

Qualified motorcycle and car mechanic here, my Dad was a mechanic, I did my first paid mechanical repair at 12 years old (Briggs & S lawn mower valve regrind)

My engines have won a number of Australian, State and Club Championship Motorcycle road race, motocross, and car race, speedway and rally titles. At one time I was rebuilding an engine a day, day in day out, as well as 15 years importing and selling JDM engines.

Note I do not post in wooden planes forums here, and rarely in composites, because I don't have a clue about those subjects, unlike engines, that I have wasted a good half of my life on.

Hope that helps, and I am well aware of some of the other Members of HBA's backgrounds as well.

Also note I am in complete support of this engine, but that doesn't change facts in comparisons to other engines.

BTW, since you're taking a side, what's your engine experience/background to critique one side's position over another?

No, he's a smart businessmen, a (reputed) $12K motor of that ilk will fly out the door to the Luddites - maybe you missed who I was referring to as Luddites.

I wish I was selling them, I can't see how it can fail.

There's a few choices, highly unlikely I would choose air cooled myself, I've seen too much of this ...

Go down the page to item 3 http://www.myulpower.com/p/blog-page_27.html

This engine will certainly serve a purpose, and will sell well, but as stated, factually it is incapable of serving it as well as other designs could when properly executed.

 

Actually I haven't but thank you for making your opinion clear.

 

It is one of those things I had heard from pretty good sources many, many years ago - but seem to be forgotten in the world of today. Ed Cole was a pilot (Beach Bonanza at that time) and had his crew design the engine IIRC to use the Reynolds 390 system (aluminum bore) but this was too early (later used in the CanAm race engine that is now the Orenda/Trace fully certified and the Vega). They had some head sealing problems and built a LOT of test engines with cast aluminum head in unit with barrel (I think THIS is where the Reynolds idea came in) that ended up with iron sleeves in a very aircraft-like configuration. I very much remember (I think from an interview) him stating the engine was hoped to be developed to compete with genav engines then in production.

It MIGHT appear in some books about Cole, but since he has been gone for 43 years, I can't ring him up to confirm.

 

on the long through bolt issues:
the reason one DOES want to do this is that due to different rates of thermal expansion, short fasteners (especially short fat fasteners) change tension dramatically with temp cycles. Long ones (especially long skinny ones) can stay withing their elastic range with far less tension increase with temperature. Also, in may cases, having said fastener anchored in aluminum when the material looses strength as the fastener load increases with temperature is no where near as safe as a long bolt with a nice steel nut on the other end to deal with the cycling dimensions.

Since it seems one has to throw his manhood on the table for a quick measure on this thread: I started building high perf air cooled engines about 54 years ago and can count in the many hundreds. If you now assume VW you know that this particular fastener issue is something very important to making one of those things last at ANY power level. I am also the fastener Nazi for a large engineering concern.

 

This needs a personal 'Like".

 

Sorry I came across as self promoting. It was not my intent to promote our engines specifically, I was intending to state the advantages of liquid cooled geared engines like Rotax 912iS and many others. From the calculations that I have run the lifetime cost advantages are overwhelming. Do you have other technical or economic data that you can present?

As I said, I think the EPI developed engine is great. I think EPI is maybe the premiere light aircraft engine engineering and design firm. I reference their web site's technical information often. My guess is their client determined the configuration. And I would also guess that the client's target market pushed the client to that configuration. I have a slight hope to slowly push the market perception towards higher efficiency liquid cooled geared engines.

 

First cost is primary. The average Homebuilt sport plane is flown less than 50 hours per year. Usually much less than 50 after a few years.

 

Unless it's the secondary costs that keep them to flying 50 hours a year.

Brandon

 

It's all good. For the record, I'm a big fan of what you are doing with the Suzuki conversions.

Things can occasionally be a little difficult to interpret online.

 

You're good, Mark. Personally, I look forward to every post from you.

 

Sure was, see it next to the door everyday as I enter and leave my factory. Between creating another successful business that is still expanding and nearly dying (that was an annoying delay and over a year wasted), it's a side project at the moment that I chip away at occasionally for fun. It interests me greatly, but I can't deny making money is also of great interest to me. How do you think I fund my kit plane project

Also one reason I stopped was due to getting involved in another engine project which I felt was a better thing at the time, after 5 years of design and development, it's been on the dyno for some time now, and as Gump says: That's all I've got to say on that

 

I second that. I never feel Mark's opinions are swayed by his own business interests. If i were in the market for this sort of motor i would choose an Aeoromomentum over his competitor because id feel safer with his integrity. In fact i very nearly did until i ended up with an unfinished project with a different converted engine (diesel).

 

Yes

 

I re-read the page about the new wunder motor and I really have to give it a big meh.

First, props for spending the money for a new motor. But that's about where my interest ends.

This statment bothers me: feasibility of designing and developing a clean-sheet aircooled engine to replace the ancient

First and foremost.. there is NOTHING NEW ABOUT THIS MOTOR. Sure, it touts 'high strength' this and that, but it still a conventional split case bolt on jug form factor with the same mechanical issues and old tech.

" These features include:" ummm.. everything on this new wunder motor is available now.

"{never mind aircraft quality standards}." lol does a tolerance spec mean something new when you use the magical word 'aircraft' in front of it?

"That (very expensive) experience convinced the client to move as much of the critical manufacturing processes as is practical to in-house facilities in order to assure the highest quality standards" Horn, toot theyself.

If they can get the price down to $12k then yay? Price was not on the page, but I read sub-$12k here IIRC. Its still a motor for small 2 place E/AB. I have yet to read anything regarding new technology.

I've read a lot of EPI's site and they make every everyone ELSE did sound like pure junk, and only they are the chosen ones. Yeah, not buying it. I'm not seeing the motor of the future here.

Again, props for a low cost motor, but its a warm 'meh' at best.

 

pf:

Have you selected an engine for your airplane? What is it?


BJC

 

I wouldn't put much stock in what EPI says and instead look at who's funding this and what they've done. Based on what I've seen so far of the company I have a lot of respect for Vashon and the fact that they seem to underpromise and overdeliver. Rare among homebuilt startups.