![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was always taught that WOT was a "renter's setting" and that you should
back off to 2300-2400 if you want to get good life out of your engine. I keep running across the Advanced Pilot Seminar guys asking, "Why EVER be partial throttle in cruise? Of course, they are probably also talking about advanced engines, with GAMI, analyzers, matched injectors, etc. What about those of us flying behind the glorified lawn mower engines of simpler aircraft. I've asked the question over at the CPA forum but I'd like some opinions from this group. Should I take our 172 N above altitudes where the POH says max power is 75%, put the throttle all the way in, lean till it gets a bit rough, and then enrich until it's smooth? As long as CHT and oil temps remain in an acceptable range, can I then cruise along confident that I'm getting there fastest and getting the best life from the engine? I've often suspected this was the case. Turning faster seems intuitively to be the same as the engine working harder but the trade off is that it doesn' t work as long. Speed of metal surface over metal surface (with oil film) within normal RPM ranges doesn't seem as significant a wear factor as the total number of firing cycles and revolutions. It seems like those should be about the same whether you fly at 115 knots or 90. Figuring the RPM's out from the POH: At 4000 feet, WOT, 2500 RPM there will be 129,591 revolutions per 100 miles. At 2400 RPM, 130,896. At 2300, 131,100. Going WOT instead of 2300 REDUCES firing cycles 1.15%! If the faster speed saves a bladder break, you'll get a huge savings in engine wear avoiding a thermal cycle and restart. On the other hand, marine engine factory reps, who I have more frequent contact with, tell me that the only significant indicator of engine life (as long as temperatures remain in normal range) is the total amount of fuel that goes through it. Seems like that should be true for aviation engines as well. Slowing down from WOT to 2300 in my 172 N should reduce fuel consumption 14.5%. That's pretty significant as well as probably saving a fuel stop somewhere on a long trip. -- Roger Long |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Propellor Primer | Ebby | Home Built | 3 | November 19th 04 10:36 AM |
Australia's aquisition of cruise missiles | zalzon | Military Aviation | 21 | August 31st 04 09:26 PM |
Cruise clearance | Hankal | Instrument Flight Rules | 26 | May 22nd 04 04:08 AM |
CVN-65 Cruise 1982-1983 | Raymond D. Hodil Jr. | Naval Aviation | 1 | January 14th 04 12:01 PM |
Cessna 404 Cruise settings | Katia | General Aviation | 0 | December 19th 03 05:04 PM |