# O-100-- interesting new engine

### Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

#### Dana

##### Super Moderator
Staff member
This is interesting... a 100ci 60HP (claimed) engine using two cylinders from a Continental O-200 and other components:

Introducing the Pegasus Power O-100 Light Sport Aircraft Engine

#### Jay Kempf

##### Curmudgeon in Training (CIT)
Neat idea, and we need more motors in this power range. But not if it's another $7000 motor by the time you're done. If I buy two I am still ahead of an 0-200. Sheesh. So why is an O-200 like 10s of thousands? If these guys are that good they should build an O-200 for$4500. Adding two more cylinders can't be as much as the R&D to make a whole engine.

#### Topaz

Staff member
Log Member
If I buy two I am still ahead of an 0-200. Sheesh. So why is an O-200 like 10s of thousands? If these guys are that good they should build an O-200 for $4500. Adding two more cylinders can't be as much as the R&D to make a whole engine. You'll note that their kit is not for a complete engine. As for the additional costs of a certified, production motor, you have the requirement for a large factory to make the original parts, product liability insurance, and other such overhead to blame for that. #### rtfm ##### Well-Known Member You mean a 1000cc engine, don't you (not 100cc) Looks really cool though. Wouldn't mind one up front of the Razorback... Cheers, Duncan #### Dana ##### Super Moderator Staff member You mean a 1000cc engine, don't you (not 100cc) Looks really cool though. Wouldn't mind one up front of the Razorback... Cheers, Duncan Oops... I meant 100 cubic inches, not cc... that's 1639cc. -Dana Scientists cause cancer in laboratory animals. #### KeithO ##### Well-Known Member http://www.airpowerinc.com/productcart/pc/cylinders.asp?catid=70&subcat=86&prodid=325501 Looks like$830 each for the cylinder assemblies. So $1660 +$2500 and what else is needed ?

Looks like you need a camshaft and 4 lifters 4 push rods and push rod tubes
Oil pump and pickup tube
Drive gears for oil pump and camshaft ?
2x connecting rods + all bearing shells
Carb + heat box and exhaust

It looks to me that unless someone does a package deal (Vans for example) this could be pretty expensive. If the quality of the parts is good, and this turns out not to be a scam, it could be a good engine. The weight seems in the right ball park too, bit of course what did they weigh ? Just the parts they sell in the kit ? Hope not.

#### Grimace

##### Well-Known Member
I wonder how many of the cannibalized parts are highly likely to be reusable from a worn out engine? If all/most of the parts tend to be ones that are serviceable during an overhaul, then scrounging for run out O200s might allow you to get the parts for cheap.

#### Autodidact

##### Well-Known Member
With all of these airframes suitable for it, and several more besides, I think there might be a potentially decent market for it. I hope it's real.

Bristol Cherub,

Dry Weight: 98 lb
Power : 36 hp @ 3,200 rpm

Used in,

Avia BH-2
Avro Avis
Beardmore Wee Bee
Bristol Brownie
Cranwell CLA.2
Cranwell CLA.3
Cranwell CLA.4
Dart Pup
Granger Archaeopteryx
Halton Mayfly
Halton Minus
Hawker Cygnet
Messerschmitt M17
Meyers Midget
Cherub-powered Short Satellite
Mignet HM.14 Pou-du-Ciel
Parnall Pixie
Powell Racer
RAE Scarab
RAE Hurricane
Short Cockle
Short Satellite
Supermarine Sparrow
Vickers Vagabond
Westland Woodpigeon
Westland-Hill Pterodactyl

ABC Scorpion,

Dry Weight: 90 lb
Power : 30 hp @ 2,750 rpm

Used in,

ABC Robin
Boulton Paul Phoenix
BFW M.19
BFW M.23
Comper Swift
de Havilland Humming Bird
Hawker Cygnet
Heath Parasol
Hendy Hobo
Kay Gyroplane
Luton Minor
Mignet HM.14 Pou-du-Ciel
SAI KZ I
Short Satellite
Snyder Buzzard
Westland Woodpigeon

Aeronca E-113/J-99 (J.A.P.),

Dry Weight: 118 lb
Power : 36-40 hp @ 2,400-2,520 rpm

Used in,

E-113

Aeronca C-3
Aeronca K
Welch OW-6M

J-99 (J.A.P.)

Aeronca 100
Aeronca 300
Britten-Norman BN-1
Currie Wot
Dart Kitten
Hants & Sussex Herald
Heath Parasol
Hillson Praga
Luton Minor
Peterborough Ely
Slingsby Motor Tutor
Taylor J.T.1 Monoplane (prototype)
Tipsy Junior

#### litespeed

##### Well-Known Member
Interesting idea.

If we used scrounged timeout or other parts that are servicable such as rods etc and just rebuild other needed parts then a cheap motor could be possible.

A reasonable alternative to a VW kit engine at the lower power ranges and a lot lighter

The quality kit VW motors are far from cheap, so it may be competitive depending on local parts availability.

If it weighs only 100 pounds ready to fly then, it has a good potential.

Pity they do not do a kit as $5000. That might be a winner #### Jan Carlsson ##### Well-Known Member I don't buy the info on estimated 60 hp at 2800, sure 50 rpm more, but, first an O-200 is hardly 100 hp, and with half the cylinders the power is less then half, due to longer intervalls between working stroke, 3 gallon (at cruise) 3*6=18 lb / 0,5 = 36 hp or at / 0,45 = 40 hp BUT it sure looks attractive. #### Dan Thomas ##### Well-Known Member I don't buy the info on estimated 60 hp at 2800, sure 50 rpm more, but, first an O-200 is hardly 100 hp, and with half the cylinders the power is less then half, due to longer intervalls between working stroke, 3 gallon (at cruise) 3*6=18 lb / 0,5 = 36 hp or at / 0,45 = 40 hp BUT it sure looks attractive. I do agree that 100 hp for an O-200 is optimistic. I have flown 150s and Champs with O-200s, and an Aircoupe with the C-90. The C-90 left the others in the dust, and at the same power-to weight ratio, too. Dan #### Jan Carlsson ##### Well-Known Member I do agree that 100 hp for an O-200 is optimistic. I have flown 150s and Champs with O-200s, and an Aircoupe with the C-90. The C-90 left the others in the dust, and at the same power-to weight ratio, too. Dan When doing prop calculations on a O-200 we use 85 hp as standard, (depends on how it is equipped) The few first O-200 prop we made, we used 100 HP as input naturally, The first installed was on a Varieze, it never flew with that prop. the Mk2 was a success, I think there was 3 Mk2 models for different O-200 planes of this early propellers made by Hercules Props is UK. learning money! There have been just a few airplanes with the same engine/plane combination, so a flexible software and manufacturing system (CNC) is a must. The Silent Twister team in UK is unusual, buying several props of same kind. #### KeithO ##### Well-Known Member The question is whether the use of an electronic ignition coupled with fuel injection would in fact boost the power output to 60hp ? That certainly looks a lot more feasible, but of course can't be directly compared to the old O200 then. #### Jan Carlsson ##### Well-Known Member question is, have it been running yet? the picture is a artist conseption, it say dual magneto ignition. Its a new conscept and a new tread we have to wait for result. #### Dan Thomas ##### Well-Known Member Millennium Cylinder Kit - O200 - Cylinders - Air Power, Inc. Looks like$830 each for the cylinder assemblies. So $1660 +$2500 and what else is needed ?

Looks like you need a camshaft and 4 lifters 4 push rods and push rod tubes
Oil pump and pickup tube
Drive gears for oil pump and camshaft ?
2x connecting rods + all bearing shells
Carb + heat box and exhaust
Couple of magnetos, \$1500?

Dan

#### KeithO

##### Well-Known Member
How about someone who is actually at Oshkosh visiting the display and reporting back on this ?

I think the last thing we want to do is hand money to anyone who does not have the parts sitting on the shelf ready to go. I have lost count of the number of those companies we have seen in the last 10 years.

Anyone remember ATP (affordable turbine power ?)

##### Well-Known Member
The HP numbers may have a bit of fuzzy carbon cub math, It may take a whooping for a few minutes to climb to get the HP #. This will be a uneque camshaft for 2 cylinder. Sustained power may be a smidge less.
>Crankcase
>Crankshaft
>Camshaft
>Timing components (maybe)
>>> Only that makes the engine a 2 cyl. is all I would expect in the kit.... [See artist rendering]

Not saying this is not a great ball park to be in.... Make sure it is real before you send and wait for parts.....

#### SVSUSteve

##### Well-Known Member
If all/most of the parts tend to be ones that are serviceable during an overhaul, then scrounging for run out O200s might allow you to get the parts for cheap.
Just for the sake of argument, think of it this way: Do you really want to bet your life on something that was scavenged from an engine that can't pass a basic mechanical check?

The C-90 left the others in the dust, and at the same power-to weight ratio, too.
The C-90 is what I finally settled on with regards to the Vireo. It's horsepower range is about the lowest power range that is useful for the top end of LSA weight and performance limits not to mention that it's the lightest engine that will do the job. 116 knots cruise at under 6 gph is a pretty good option in my book. It makes the Vireo somewhat useful for a couple who wants to travel in nice weather because it works out to similar "miles per gallon" to a car (133 statute miles in an hour at 5.3 GPH= roughly 25 miles per gallon). The targeted range (simply because of weight limits) was 400 miles plus VFR reserves. The following map shows that from several locations (all of which are the locations of airports near colleges I am considering for the rest of my education)

Last edited:

#### Grimace

##### Well-Known Member
Just for the sake of argument, think of it this way: Do you really want to bet your life on something that was scavenged from an engine that can't pass a basic mechanical check?
Are you aware that there are limits for mechanical parts, and if they are within tolerance, the parts will be reused? That's what you do when you overhaul an engine. You don't just go around replacing everything. You keep the good, toss out the bad. That's standard practice. Not all parts are time-limited. In fact, on certified engines, most are not.

The fact that the engine, as a whole, can't pass a mechanical check has nothing to do with the quality of each individual part within that engine.

If the manufacturer's specification and test criteria is met for a particular part, and the tests come back indicating that the part is serviceable, then yes, I would be happy to reuse those parts. Manufacturers publish those specs for a reason.. because if the parts meet the spec, the manufacturer says the parts are safe to reuse.

On the other hand, if you and other pilots feel differently, then by all means, I ask you to send me your run-out engines, and all the engines you can find that can't pass "a basic mechanical check". I'll be happy to pay the shipping, tear down the motor, inspect the parts, keep the good parts, and assemble an overhauled, in-spec, functional engine from the in-spec pieces from all those engines that can't pass "a basic mechanical check". The typical run-out Lycoming/Continental has many thousands of dollars of serviceable parts left in it.

If everybody thought like you, nobody would ever overhaul an engine.. they'd just buy a new one once it couldn't pass a basic mechanical check. The fact that people pay to have their engines torn down and overhauled, rather than just scrapping them entirely and buying a new one, would tend to indicate that your notion of safety is flawed and doesn't match up with the realities of operating certified engines.

Last edited: