Warrior cruise RPM settings

[lardsoup]

I rent a Warrior from a local FBO and usually set the RPMs to 2400 in
cruise. It gets about 110kts at
2400. But that seems too slow. Heck I've been getting 110kts from one of
their C152s. Rereading the
POH I see that the cruise RPM settings can be 2500 or 2600. So I'm curious.
Where do others run their
Warriors while in cruise. I'm not concerned about fuel burn because fuel is
included in the rental price
and my typical flight is around 2 hours. I know an old Warrior is no SR-71,
but I want to at least try for
some more speed. Thanks.

[[email protected]]

In my experience with rental Warriors, 110kt is about right considering
these planes often have tired higher time engines subjected to endless
T&G landings and are often missing wheel fairings. However, I've flown
one with a new engine (no wheel fairings) and saw 120 indicated in
level cruise.

[Jay Honeck]

> their C152s. Rereading the
> POH I see that the cruise RPM settings can be 2500 or 2600. So I'm curious.
> Where do others run their
> Warriors while in cruise. I'm not concerned about fuel burn because fuel is
> included in the rental price
> and my typical flight is around 2 hours. I know an old Warrior is no SR-71,
> but I want to at least try for
> some more speed. Thanks.

We ran our old Warrior pretty much wide open most of the time, unless
we weren't in a hurry. The Lycoming O-320 is a bulletproof, detuned
engine that was designed to turn 2700 RPM all the way to TBO -- and
does.

Unless you're trying to save gas, there's not much point in throttling
back in a Warrior.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Nick]

When I used to rent a Warrior 160hp, I would usually fly it with the
throttle firewalled.

Does the Warrior you fly have wheel pants on? If not that would cost
you a least 5 knots.

Nick
PA28-180 'D'

lardsoup wrote:
> I rent a Warrior from a local FBO and usually set the RPMs to 2400 in
> cruise. It gets about 110kts at
> 2400. But that seems too slow. Heck I've been getting 110kts from one of
> their C152s. Rereading the
> POH I see that the cruise RPM settings can be 2500 or 2600. So I'm curious.
> Where do others run their
> Warriors while in cruise. I'm not concerned about fuel burn because fuel is
> included in the rental price
> and my typical flight is around 2 hours. I know an old Warrior is no SR-71,
> but I want to at least try for
> some more speed. Thanks.
>
>
>

[Seth Masia]

This is one reason I no longer lease back my airplane -- because people ran
it without regard for fuel burn, and the FBO charged me for the waste. When
I fly it, I get 150knots at 10.5 gph, but I saw renters burn 40 gal every
three hours. Nuts.

Seth
Comanche N8100R

"Nick" > wrote in message
...
> When I used to rent a Warrior 160hp, I would usually fly it with the
> throttle firewalled.
>
> Does the Warrior you fly have wheel pants on? If not that would cost you
> a least 5 knots.
>
> Nick
> PA28-180 'D'
>
> lardsoup wrote:
>> I rent a Warrior from a local FBO and usually set the RPMs to 2400 in
>> cruise. It gets about 110kts at
>> 2400. But that seems too slow. Heck I've been getting 110kts from one
>> of
>> their C152s. Rereading the
>> POH I see that the cruise RPM settings can be 2500 or 2600. So I'm
>> curious.
>> Where do others run their
>> Warriors while in cruise. I'm not concerned about fuel burn because fuel
>> is
>> included in the rental price
>> and my typical flight is around 2 hours. I know an old Warrior is no
>> SR-71,
>> but I want to at least try for
>> some more speed. Thanks.
>>
>>

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Seth Masia wrote:
> This is one reason I no longer lease back my airplane -- because people ran
> it without regard for fuel burn, and the FBO charged me for the waste. When
> I fly it, I get 150knots at 10.5 gph, but I saw renters burn 40 gal every
> three hours. Nuts.



I generally run at 65-75% power, with whatever fuel burn keeps the mags from
loading up. And if I'm flying something with a constant speed prop, I try to
run the power at whatever combination will allow the slowest RPM (for reduced
noise). 2100 RPM is quite a bit easier on my ears than 2400 RPM.... and I can
still pull 65% power if I don't go too high.

I never saw much sense in running balls to the wall on a rental. Sure, I'm
paying for it, but I'm also depending on it.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[lardsoup]

No wheel pants. Thanks for the replies. Gonna throttle up next time I fly.

[Seth Masia]

See? Made my point for me. There's economy power, and speed power . . .
and rental power.

Seth

"lardsoup" > wrote in message
...
> No wheel pants. Thanks for the replies. Gonna throttle up next time I
> fly.
>
>

[[email protected]]

>>>I get 150knots at 10.5 gph, <<<

Hmmpf. Gotta get me one of those Comanches. The Lance I fly burns 16gph
at that speed and I'm carrying two extra empty seats... Is that a
PA-24-180?

>>>This is one reason I no longer lease back my airplane <<<

I can think of several other reasons not to leaseback a Comanche - fuel
being the least of them <grimace>

[John Clonts]

>I generally run at 65-75% power, with whatever fuel burn keeps the mags from
>loading up. And if I'm flying something with a constant speed prop, I try to
>run the power at whatever combination will allow the slowest RPM (for reduced
>noise). 2100 RPM is quite a bit easier on my ears than 2400 RPM.... and I can
>still pull 65% power if I don't go too high.

What does "mags loading up" mean?

Thanks,
John

[George Patterson]

wrote:
>>>>I get 150knots at 10.5 gph, <<<
>
> Hmmpf. Gotta get me one of those Comanches. The Lance I fly burns 16gph
> at that speed and I'm carrying two extra empty seats... Is that a
> PA-24-180?

According to Clarke's book, the PA-24-180 cruises at ~130 knots. The 250 hp
version cruises at ~157 knots. That plane has an O-540 in it. There's also a 260
hp model that gets a couple knots more out of an O-540. Post-1966 models are
fuel injected.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[lardsoup]

Sorry but I don't see your point.

[Still learning]

On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 16:34:57 GMT, "lardsoup" > wrote:

>I rent a Warrior from a local FBO and usually set the RPMs to 2400 in
>cruise. It gets about 110kts at
>2400. But that seems too slow. Heck I've been getting 110kts from one of
>their C152s. Rereading the
>POH I see that the cruise RPM settings can be 2500 or 2600. So I'm curious.
>Where do others run their
>Warriors while in cruise. I'm not concerned about fuel burn because fuel is
>included in the rental price
>and my typical flight is around 2 hours. I know an old Warrior is no SR-71,
>but I want to at least try for
>some more speed. Thanks.
>
>
I am learning on a Warrior PA28 161 which has no wheel fairings.
I am told that cruise is between 2200 and 2300 rpm which gives around
100kts ias. I am told only to use full power on take off and climbing
It could be that here in the UK avgas is 1.20 UK pounds per litre at
my airport so I guess economy is a factor.

[Nick]

Sounds like you should have charged more for wet fees.
I know the several Warrior II (PA28-161) planes I rented, both the
owners and FBO made money off them. As for flying with the throttle
firewalled (75% power or less depending upon altitude) versus reduced
throttle there wasn't much difference in economy even with proper leaning.

I would believe most owners (including myself) are more concerning with
proper leaning, cold shock, and sloppy pilot landings & takeoffs. Those
factors will bite into an owners & FBO's pocketbook.

Nick
PA28-180



Seth Masia wrote:
> This is one reason I no longer lease back my airplane -- because people ran
> it without regard for fuel burn, and the FBO charged me for the waste. When
> I fly it, I get 150knots at 10.5 gph, but I saw renters burn 40 gal every
> three hours. Nuts.
>
> Seth
> Comanche N8100R
>
> "Nick" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>When I used to rent a Warrior 160hp, I would usually fly it with the
>>throttle firewalled.
>>
>>Does the Warrior you fly have wheel pants on? If not that would cost you
>>a least 5 knots.
>>
>>Nick
>>PA28-180 'D'
>>
>>lardsoup wrote:
>>
>>>I rent a Warrior from a local FBO and usually set the RPMs to 2400 in
>>>cruise. It gets about 110kts at
>>>2400. But that seems too slow. Heck I've been getting 110kts from one
>>>of
>>>their C152s. Rereading the
>>>POH I see that the cruise RPM settings can be 2500 or 2600. So I'm
>>>curious.
>>>Where do others run their
>>>Warriors while in cruise. I'm not concerned about fuel burn because fuel
>>>is
>>>included in the rental price
>>>and my typical flight is around 2 hours. I know an old Warrior is no
>>>SR-71,
>>>but I want to at least try for
>>>some more speed. Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>
>

[vincent p. norris]

>Gonna throttle up next time I fly.

What's your hurry? If you enjoy flying, why be so eager to get back
on the ground?

vince norris

[Ben Hallert]

When running it with the throttle firewalled, don't you introduce a
real risk of overspeed? Will the engine really make it to TBO running
at max RPMs (especially considering the effects of ram-air and whatnot
at speed)?

Finally, if you owned instead of rented, would you do the same?

Ben Hallert
PP-ASEL

[Morgans]

"Nick" > wrote

> I would believe most owners (including myself) are more concerning with
> proper leaning, cold shock, and sloppy pilot landings & takeoffs. Those
> factors will bite into an owners & FBO's pocketbook.

How does cooling shock show up, in a diagnostic/ overhaul/ shortening of
engine life, if you know what I mean? What parts suffer, and how do you
know other than tearing down the engine? (short of having it seize on you)

I have my guesses, but am probably at least partially wrong, and possibly
totally wrong. <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"Ben Hallert" > wrote

>(especially considering the effects of ram-air and whatnot
> at speed)?

Ahhh, the big ram air fallacy. Anyone have those calculations handy, that
show how many inches (fractions) that the ram air increases the manifold
pressure at various typical airspeeds?
--
Jim in NC

[lardsoup]

I rent so the plane has to be back by a certain time. I've been trying to
land at all the airports in the state so, and I've gone to all the ones that
are close, so now I need to cover more distance. I know it's not that much
more speed but......

[Jay Honeck]

> When running it with the throttle firewalled, don't you introduce a
> real risk of overspeed? Will the engine really make it to TBO running
> at max RPMs (especially considering the effects of ram-air and whatnot
> at speed)?

What is "overspeed" on a fixed prop?

"Max RPMs" on an O-320 (and, in fact, all aircraft engines) are so retarded
that the engine is really just loping along at 2700 rpm.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:Z7b1f.400967$x96.209528@attbi_s72...
> What is "overspeed" on a fixed prop?

Same thing it is on a constant speed prop: the engine exceeds its maximum
allowed RPM.

> "Max RPMs" on an O-320 (and, in fact, all aircraft engines) are so
> retarded that the engine is really just loping along at 2700 rpm.

That's simply not true. In fact, the engine manual for any engine has very
specific guidelines about what the true maximum RPM is and how much you can
exceed that for how long before requiring some kind of maintenance. These
numbers are not far above the indicated redline.

Pete

[Jay Honeck]

>> What is "overspeed" on a fixed prop?
>
> Same thing it is on a constant speed prop: the engine exceeds its maximum
> allowed RPM.

Let me try that again. How can you overspeed an engine with a (properly)
fixed pitch prop?

>> "Max RPMs" on an O-320 (and, in fact, all aircraft engines) are so
>> retarded that the engine is really just loping along at 2700 rpm.
>
> That's simply not true. In fact, the engine manual for any engine has
> very specific guidelines about what the true maximum RPM is and how much
> you can exceed that for how long before requiring some kind of
> maintenance. These numbers are not far above the indicated redline.

I'm just passing along what my A&P has told me. He's got 42 years in the
engine rebuilding business, and is an award winning home builder and antique
aircraft restorer. According to him, our Lycoming/Continental engines are
purposefully designed to be slow-turning engines -- even at full throttle --
in order for them to survive all the way to TBO.

There is no harm running an O-320 with a fixed pitch prop at full throttle.
You'll make more noise, burn more gas, and go (a little) faster.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:GZe1f.405624$_o.128570@attbi_s71...
> Let me try that again. How can you overspeed an engine with a (properly)
> fixed pitch prop?

In level cruise, full throttle is sufficient in some aircraft (may or may
not be in the particular Warrior in question). Even if full throttle is
not, anything that increases airspeed at full throttle is sufficient:
descent (intended or not) or wind shear, for example.

A propeller -- fixed-pitch, variable pitch, constant speed, whatever --
provides a load on the engine which in turns keeps the RPM below the
designed maximum. As airspeed increases, this load is reduced. Some
propellers (constant speed, for example) can increase blade pitch to
compensate and maintain a constant load on the engine. But a fixed-pitch
propeller does not have this option; RPM is determined solely by airspeed
and power setting. If you increase airspeed without reducing the power
setting, the RPM will increase (and of course, as I stated above, in some
installations full-power throttle is sufficient to exceed the designed
maximum RPM when in level cruise flight).

> I'm just passing along what my A&P has told me. He's got 42 years in the
> engine rebuilding business, and is an award winning home builder and
> antique aircraft restorer. According to him, our Lycoming/Continental
> engines are purposefully designed to be slow-turning engines -- even at
> full throttle -- in order for them to survive all the way to TBO.

Your interpretation of even the statement you're attributing to your A&P
(and that's assuming you understood him correctly) doesn't support your
previous statement. An engine designed to turn at low RPM does not preclude
it being harmed at high RPM, and in fact if the design calls for low RPM
it's entirely possible (likely, even) that exceeding that low RPM would harm
the engine.

Beyond that, the reasoning given in your description of his statement is
flawed in any case. The primary reason aircraft engines turn slowly is so
that they match the needs of the propeller without adding a gearcase to the
installation.

> There is no harm running an O-320 with a fixed pitch prop at full
> throttle. You'll make more noise, burn more gas, and go (a little) faster.

Provided you do not exceed the manufacturer-determined maximum RPM, I will
agree with you 100%. However, one needs to be careful not to exceed that
maximum RPM, and running full-throttle makes it easier to exceed that
maximum RPM.

Pete

[Jose]

> Let me try that again. How can you overspeed an engine with a (properly)
> fixed pitch prop?

Push the nose down?

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[George Patterson]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> What is "overspeed" on a fixed prop?

Anything past redline on the tach.

> "Max RPMs" on an O-320 (and, in fact, all aircraft engines) are so retarded
> that the engine is really just loping along at 2700 rpm.

But the valve train on aircraft engines is deliberately lightly built. The
valves will "float" at a much lower rpm than a similar sized car engine. With
some aircraft, that's the limiting factor; with others, the prop tips might go
supersonic. Those are the two main limiting factors.

Granted, exceeding redline by 50 rpm or maybe 100 isn't likely to cause either
problem, but you don't know how far you can go before something comes apart.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[Ben Hallert]

Hence my question, because if I leave the throttle firewalled in either
the '67 172 (w/ 6 cyl continental) or the 81 Cherokee 161, the needle
WILL pass redline in level flight.

Ben Hallert
PP-ASEL

[George Patterson]

Ben Hallert wrote:
> Hence my question, because if I leave the throttle firewalled in either
> the '67 172 (w/ 6 cyl continental) or the 81 Cherokee 161, the needle
> WILL pass redline in level flight.

Then don't do that. I've been told that the camshaft is the weak point on the
Lycoming engine. Being familiar with the problem of stuck valves on a
Continental O-200 (which has the same cylinders as the O-300), I expect that the
valves and rockers are the problem area there, but I'm not sure.

In any case, if you routinely exceed redline on the tach, you will learn what
your glide ratio is sooner than later.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[vincent p. norris]

>I rent so the plane has to be back by a certain time. I've been trying to
>land at all the airports in the state....

I hope you live in Rhode Island, not Texas or Califorinia!

I've been flying since 1946, and I STILL haven't been to every airport
in PA!

vince norris

[Jay Honeck]

> Hence my question, because if I leave the throttle firewalled in either
> the '67 172 (w/ 6 cyl continental) or the 81 Cherokee 161, the needle
> WILL pass redline in level flight.

Perhaps you have a cruise prop on both aircraft, Ben? You shouldn't be
exceeding red line simply by going to full throttle in level flight,
*unless* your prop has been pitched differently than stock.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> That would be a climb prop, wouldn't it?

E-yup. I don't know why I ever try to post after 11 PM...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Morgans]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote \\

> Perhaps you have a cruise prop on both aircraft, Ben? You shouldn't be
> exceeding red line simply by going to full throttle in level flight,
> *unless* your prop has been pitched differently than stock.

That would be a climb prop, wouldn't it? I thought a cruise prop had more
pitch to keep from overspeeding during level cruise, and a climb prop had
less pitch (or diameter) to let the engine spin up to maximum RPM's (and HP)
during the normally slower RPM, higher load climbs.
--
Jim in NC

[Seth Masia]

Mine's the 250. I lean it pretty aggressively, and cruise high. Of course,
I'm based at 5300 feet.

Seth

"George Patterson" > wrote in message
news:yIS0f.2531$ar6.1471@trndny01...
> wrote:
>>>>>I get 150knots at 10.5 gph, <<<
>> Hmmpf. Gotta get me one of those Comanches. The Lance I fly burns 16gph
>> at that speed and I'm carrying two extra empty seats... Is that a
>> PA-24-180?
>
> According to Clarke's book, the PA-24-180 cruises at ~130 knots. The 250
> hp version cruises at ~157 knots. That plane has an O-540 in it. There's
> also a 260 hp model that gets a couple knots more out of an O-540.
> Post-1966 models are fuel injected.
>
> George Patterson
> Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your
> neighbor.
> It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[Seth Masia]

Cooling shock is, IMHO, an overblown issue in normally aspirated airplanes.
Coming east over the mountains, I regularly descend from 13,000 to land at
5300 -- and my cylinders are still tight 500 hours over TBO. It's a plain
vanilla O-540, severely understressed, and I baby it by running lower rpm
most of the time.

Seth
Comanche N8100R

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Nick" > wrote
>
>> I would believe most owners (including myself) are more concerning with
>> proper leaning, cold shock, and sloppy pilot landings & takeoffs. Those
>> factors will bite into an owners & FBO's pocketbook.
>
> How does cooling shock show up, in a diagnostic/ overhaul/ shortening of
> engine life, if you know what I mean? What parts suffer, and how do you
> know other than tearing down the engine? (short of having it seize on you)
>
> I have my guesses, but am probably at least partially wrong, and possibly
> totally wrong. <g>
> --
> Jim in NC
>

[lardsoup]

New Jersey. So far, 20 public fields, one landing at Lakehurst NAS and a
low approach at McGuire AFB.

[Seth Masia]

Then you're burning more fuel than you need to for no perceptible
performance gain.

"lardsoup" > wrote in message
...
> Sorry but I don't see your point.
>
>

[Greg Copeland]

On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:44:27 -0700, Seth Masia wrote:

> Cooling shock is, IMHO, an overblown issue in normally aspirated airplanes.
> Coming east over the mountains, I regularly descend from 13,000 to land at
> 5300 -- and my cylinders are still tight 500 hours over TBO. It's a plain
> vanilla O-540, severely understressed, and I baby it by running lower rpm
> most of the time.

IIRC, Rod Machado also has the same sentiment about the subject. His take
is if shock cooling was a major factor, twins used for training should
constantly have a problem with once engine dying before the other....but
as he sees it, most training twins see TBO or better for both engines.

Greg