View Single Post
  #8  
Old March 7th 15, 07:47 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 25
Default Boost performance of Solo 2350 turbo (sustainer)

Any idea if the gliders by Alexander Schleicher Asw-28 E and Asg_29 E solo 2350 engines are also similarly restricted in power?


On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 3:30:52 PM UTC-8, Charlie Papa wrote:
On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 2:14:12 AM UTC-5, wrote:
Wondering if anyone has boosted the horsepower of a Solo 2350 turbo (or sustainer engine) to get better high and hot performance? If anyone has done this would like both positive and negative comments as to the work done, the results and what they did to boost engine performance.


Yes indeed, I have done it. It is not to INCREASE the horsepower so much as it is to RESTORE the horsepower that the 2350 was originally built to. It was de-tuned by tack welding a pair of constricting rings into the exhaust, and then reducing the jet size by one.

Mine is installed in a Discus 2cT, and as such, it is a sustainer. That means no throttle, no choke, no generator, - just the simplest get-you-home and lightest possible. If I understand correctly, the LBA required that it be able to sustain level flight, presumably in controlled airspace. With the full 28 HP it was built to, in level flight it would overspeed, which cuts off the ignition.

But using it in controlled space requires the use of headphones; a non-starter for me. I just stay out of controlled space. However, with the horsepower estored from the diminished 22 to 28, does it climb better. You better believe it.

The restrictor rings are tack welded in and very vulnerable to a Dremmel tool. Then you must remove the two jets, move the larger one in the rear (larger to overcome how much hotter it will run with already heated air from the front cylinder passing over it) and move it to the front, and then put the next larger size in the rear.

Don't mix up the covers for the pulse diaphragm that 'injects' the air/fuel; the front one should not have the hole that would make it vulnerable to the prop wash.

The result: MUCH improved climb, - perhaps 300 - 350/fpm vs. ~200. Hard to be exact as the vibration shakes the hell out of the varios.

And in ~1100 hours, there is less than 10 hours on the engine, because it is just a sustainer, and because I start it right off tow each day (because it's complicated and it starts faster if it has already run.