Auto conversion cost post

[Richard Riley]

Sometime recently (last 6 months or so) there was a post about how
much a well done auto conversion costs. The point was that if you're
doing it right - rebuild with race quality parts, proven PSRU, etc -
that the initial installation isn't significantly less than a zero
timed LyCont. (I think it's accepted by both sides that a rebuild
will be significantly less for the auto conversion, but that wasn't
the point)

IIRC, it broke down the costs to pretty small details. I've googled
but can't find it. Does anyone remember it, or is this a figment of
my sleep deprived imagination?

[Ben Haas]

Richard Riley > wrote in message >...
> Sometime recently (last 6 months or so) there was a post about how
> much a well done auto conversion costs. The point was that if you're
> doing it right - rebuild with race quality parts, proven PSRU, etc -
> that the initial installation isn't significantly less than a zero
> timed LyCont. (I think it's accepted by both sides that a rebuild
> will be significantly less for the auto conversion, but that wasn't
> the point)
>
> IIRC, it broke down the costs to pretty small details. I've googled
> but can't find it. Does anyone remember it, or is this a figment of
> my sleep deprived imagination?

Mine is running in the 14,000 dollar range. All new parts and the best
available technology one can buy. Less then half the cost of a Lyc
0-360, twice the output, no chance of shock cooling the cylinders,
safe and easy way of heating the cockpit. Rebuilds will be in the
1,100.00 dollar range. Thank god for being an American and having the
right to build an experimental plane with ANY kind of powerplant one
wants to use. Pics of the plane and motor will be in Jays site soon.
Happy holidays to all you plane lovers out there.

Ben Haas. N801BH. Jackson Hole WY.

[George A. Graham]

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Richard Riley wrote:

- rebuild with race quality parts, proven PSRU, etc -
> that the initial installation isn't significantly less than a zero
> timed LyCont.

<snip>

is this a figment of my sleep deprived imagination?
>
>

Richard, It certainly must be a figment of somebodys imagination,
and that person is convincing himself.

Horsefeathers!

George Graham
RX-7 Powered Graham-EZ, N4449E
Homepage <http://bfn.org/~ca266>

[Rick Pellicciotti]

Richard Riley wrote:

> Sometime recently (last 6 months or so) there was a post about how
> much a well done auto conversion costs. The point was that if you're
> doing it right - rebuild with race quality parts, proven PSRU, etc -
> that the initial installation isn't significantly less than a zero
> timed LyCont. (I think it's accepted by both sides that a rebuild
> will be significantly less for the auto conversion, but that wasn't
> the point)
>
> IIRC, it broke down the costs to pretty small details. I've googled
> but can't find it. Does anyone remember it, or is this a figment of
> my sleep deprived imagination?
>
Richard,

We most often agree and I really don't have a horse in this race either
way but I see one flaw in your statement.

Comparing an auto engine built up with "race quality parts" to an
aircraft engine that is "zero timed" is not fair. There is nothing in a
zero timed engine built buy lycoming or continental that remotely
resembles the latest technology or "race quality parts" that you can buy
for an auto engine. Aircraft engines are 1930's technology. Not saying
that there's anything wrong with that, I fly behind a Jacobs radial
everyday. It just isn't apples to apples in my opinion.

Rick Pellicciotti
http://www.belleairetours.com

[Corky Scott]

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 07:07:35 GMT, Richard Riley
> wrote:

>Sometime recently (last 6 months or so) there was a post about how
>much a well done auto conversion costs. The point was that if you're
>doing it right - rebuild with race quality parts, proven PSRU, etc -
>that the initial installation isn't significantly less than a zero
>timed LyCont. (I think it's accepted by both sides that a rebuild
>will be significantly less for the auto conversion, but that wasn't
>the point)
>
>IIRC, it broke down the costs to pretty small details. I've googled
>but can't find it. Does anyone remember it, or is this a figment of
>my sleep deprived imagination?

Richard, I think this depends on who does the build: someone who sells
firewall forward units, or a homebuilder who does all the work
himself.

For a firewall forward unit, I've seen pricing up to $18,000 for
something making around 200 hp. For something like the Enginair 420
hp V8, that costs around $80,000 last time I looked.

For guys who want to do the work themselves, the cost can be
considerably lower. In my case, I expect my final cost will be
somewhere between $5,000 and $6,000 for a complete 190 hp running
engine installed in the airframe. The engine should be considered
zero timed.

Corky Scott

[Peter Dohm]

Richard Riley wrote:
>
> Sometime recently (last 6 months or so) there was a post about how
> much a well done auto conversion costs. The point was that if you're
> doing it right - rebuild with race quality parts, proven PSRU, etc -
> that the initial installation isn't significantly less than a zero
> timed LyCont. (I think it's accepted by both sides that a rebuild
> will be significantly less for the auto conversion, but that wasn't
> the point)
>
> IIRC, it broke down the costs to pretty small details. I've googled
> but can't find it. Does anyone remember it, or is this a figment of
> my sleep deprived imagination?

I don't have a current interest in this issue ... yet!

However, when I do get started building, this will be a major issue, and
I have been reading, talking to chapter members and others, and even
contributing my 0.02 on occasion for some time.

Originally, I believed that the best way to convert an automotive engine was to
flip it over and drive directly through a quill shaft, in the manner of Steve
Wittman's conversion of a Buick/Olds aluminum V8 for the Tailwind. The lighter
castings in more recent 90 degree V8 and V6 iron block engines made the idea
seem reasonable for a long time. However, those relatively large, slow turning
engines that develop their peak torque at less than 3500 rpm are rapidly
becoming dinosaurs, and any dream of a retractable nose wheel starts to look
really nasty!

I still like auto engines, but doubt that the more modern ones will benefit from
the "conversion" process. Everyone who has posted here, and who claims to have
manufacturing experience, claims that they are routinely run at maximum rpm and
horsepower for extended periods during acceptance testing of the designs,
including some really atrocious warm-up procedures, and the major concern (and
proven failure mode) is the head gaskets. Therefore, the addition of racing
parts does not seem productive from my viewpoint, with the possible exception of
the head gaskets. Assuming that unleaded fuel will be available, at least most
of the time, every ECM being supplied is so much better than my own engine
management can ever be that there is no contest.

Therefore, my most recent thinking is leave the engine completely stock,
including all harmonic balancing and damping components; and supply it with an
offset reduction drive. Just my 2 cents.

Peter

Additional disclaimer: Just my current thinking, and a reserve the right to use
one of those heavy old inverted engines--resulting in a two seater with the
weight of a four seater ... or to consider a certificated aircraft engine.

[Morgans]

"Peter Dohm" > wrote

and the major concern (and
> proven failure mode) is the head gaskets.

> Peter

Proper warm up before applying high loads, make this head gasket issue a
moot point. The engine must be heat soaked, prior to runup, and takeoff.
--
Jim in NC

[George A. Graham]

On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Peter Dohm wrote:

> Therefore, my most recent thinking is leave the engine completely stock,
> including all harmonic balancing and damping components; and supply it with an
> offset reduction drive. Just my 2 cents.

I agree Peter, I also used the stock 5spd transmission as a psru, but did
use a lighter flywheel.

Over five years flying, almost 400 hours, I love it!

George Graham
RX-7 Powered Graham-EZ, N4449E
Homepage <http://bfn.org/~ca266>

[Ben Haas]

So George, fill us all in on how you took a 5 speed trans and used it
to transmit 500-600 pounds of thrust from the prop when in a car there
is no thrust loads on the output shaft at all??


George A. Graham" > wrote in message >...
> On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Peter Dohm wrote:
>
> > Therefore, my most recent thinking is leave the engine completely stock,
> > including all harmonic balancing and damping components; and supply it with an
> > offset reduction drive. Just my 2 cents.
>
> I agree Peter, I also used the stock 5spd transmission as a psru, but did
> use a lighter flywheel.
>
> Over five years flying, almost 400 hours, I love it!
>
> George Graham
> RX-7 Powered Graham-EZ, N4449E
> Homepage <http://bfn.org/~ca266>

[George A. Graham]

On 25 Dec 2003, Ben Haas wrote:

> So George, fill us all in on how you took a 5 speed trans and used it
> to transmit 500-600 pounds of thrust from the prop when in a car there
> is no thrust loads on the output shaft at all??
>


Sure Ben, Single deep groove bearings, and it is more like 300 lbs.
The stock output shaft is not used (too long).

George Graham
RX-7 Powered Graham-EZ, N4449E
Homepage <http://bfn.org/~ca266>

[Ernest Christley]

George A. Graham wrote:
> On 25 Dec 2003, Ben Haas wrote:
>
>
>>So George, fill us all in on how you took a 5 speed trans and used it
>>to transmit 500-600 pounds of thrust from the prop when in a car there
>>is no thrust loads on the output shaft at all??
>>
>
>
>
> Sure Ben, Single deep groove bearings, and it is more like 300 lbs.
> The stock output shaft is not used (too long).
>
> George Graham
> RX-7 Powered Graham-EZ, N4449E
> Homepage <http://bfn.org/~ca266>
>

George, the last I heard, you had some teething pains with that
transmission PSRU and got some busted gears. I have to assume that is
all cleared up, but what is a 'single deep groove bearing'?

--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
alleviated by information and experience."
Veeduber

[Danny Lawhon]

Does anyone know if someone has adapted a rotary to a zenair zodiac xl
sport
pilot plane yet ? I was wanting to know if its possible, also whats
average weight of a 13b with fluids,psru unit ect.. can it be done
with 300lbs or about ? they recommend 125hp max and 300 lbs , anyone
doing this right now ?


Danny..

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, George A. Graham wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Richard Riley wrote:
>
> - rebuild with race quality parts, proven PSRU, etc -
> > that the initial installation isn't significantly less than a zero
> > timed LyCont.
>
> <snip>
>
> is this a figment of my sleep deprived imagination?
> >
> >
>
> Richard, It certainly must be a figment of somebodys imagination,
> and that person is convincing himself.
>
> Horsefeathers!
>
> George Graham
> RX-7 Powered Graham-EZ, N4449E
> Homepage <http://bfn.org/~ca266>
>
>

[Larry Smith]

"Danny Lawhon" > wrote in message
...
>
> Does anyone know if someone has adapted a rotary to a zenair zodiac xl
> sport
> pilot plane yet ? I was wanting to know if its possible, also whats
> average weight of a 13b with fluids,psru unit ect.. can it be done
> with 300lbs or about ? they recommend 125hp max and 300 lbs , anyone
> doing this right now ?
>
>
> Danny..
>
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, George A. Graham wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Richard Riley wrote:
> >
> > - rebuild with race quality parts, proven PSRU, etc -
> > > that the initial installation isn't significantly less than a zero
> > > timed LyCont.
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > is this a figment of my sleep deprived imagination?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Richard, It certainly must be a figment of somebodys imagination,
> > and that person is convincing himself.
> >
> > Horsefeathers!
> >
> > George Graham
> > RX-7 Powered Graham-EZ, N4449E
> > Homepage <http://bfn.org/~ca266>

Graham probably has the best chance for hope in converting auto engines to
aircraft use. There's a Subaru conversion in Virginia that was tweaked out
and did reasonably well, but the owner finally gave in and went to an O-200,
which he says works much better for him.

[George A. Graham]

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003, Danny Lawhon wrote:

>
> Does anyone know if someone has adapted a rotary to a zenair zodiac xl
> sport
> pilot plane yet ?

I doubt it, the installation ends up weighing about the same as an
O-320 if kept light, or an O-360 if using heavy parts, which I think is
too heavy for that bird.

George Graham
RX-7 Powered Graham-EZ, N4449E
Homepage <http://bfn.org/~ca266>