A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Lycoming to approve 93 octane auto gas for O-360 & IO-360



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old June 24th 08, 06:25 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,886
Default Lycoming to approve 93 octane auto gas for O-360 & IO-360

rotor&wing wrote:
Newps;639635 Wrote:
This is also why owners with constant
speed props are told to always reduce manifold pressure first. If you

are at 800 psi with everything wide open and you reduce rpm you have
made the situation worse. The engine stays at the high pressures
longer, and at a different spot relative to top dead center, because
you just made the engine turn slower. All bad.


Welcome once again to "Amateur Hour".

Funny thing, most of the radial engines I've flown, not to mention
GTSIO-520's and TSIO-540's always operate at high MP versus low RPM.

Please show me in a POH where it specifically says "Do not reduce RPM
before MP."


That's not the point. You have to look at the example I gave. Every
engine is different. For a given power setting on any engine reducing
rpm makes the pressure peak last longer. Very simple since you just
slowed the engine down. Reducing rpm has no effect on the internal
cylinder pressure. Reducing manifold pressure does. If your engine is
already below the point at which detonation can occur then it is
irrelevant which you reduce first. On the IO-520 in my Bo on takeoff at
sea level standard day the engine is nibbling the edge of detonation.
You would be foolish to reduce rpm first just after takeoff. That's how
this engine is designed. You can design the engine to handle more or
less pressure, for example turbo'd engines that run 40-50 inches of
manifold pressure. Run that on my 520 and all kinds of things will go
flying out the cowl. It's not designed for it.
So it's irrelevant that some radial engine can run oversquare. So
can mine. At cruise power. But you're not going to run an IO-520 at 31
inches and 2300 rpm and get very many hours out of it.
  #22  
Old June 25th 08, 09:50 PM
rotor&wing rotor&wing is offline
Member
 
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Sep 2005
Location: florida
Posts: 38
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newps View Post
rotor&wing wrote:[color=blue][i]
Newps;639635 Wrote: [color=green][i]

But you're not going to run an IO-520 at 31
inches and 2300 rpm and get very many hours out of it.

OK, please provide the reference from the manufacturer backing this up.
  #23  
Old June 26th 08, 04:19 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,886
Default Lycoming to approve 93 octane auto gas for O-360 & IO-360

rotor&wing wrote:[color=blue][i]
Newps;641643 Wrote: [color=green][i]
rotor&wing wrote:
Newps;639635 Wrote:

But you're not going to run an IO-520 at 31
inches and 2300 rpm and get very many hours out of it.



OK, please provide the reference from the manufacturer backing this up.




The manufacturer? Are you ****tin' me? Continental and Lycoming are
the last people you go to to learn how to operate your engine correctly.
This is basic stuff. Contact Walter Atkinson and George Braly for the
details on what's going on inside your engine.
  #24  
Old June 26th 08, 01:32 PM
rotor&wing rotor&wing is offline
Member
 
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Sep 2005
Location: florida
Posts: 38
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newps View Post
The manufacturer? Are you ****tin' me? Continental and Lycoming are
the last people you go to to learn how to operate your engine correctly.
This is basic stuff. Contact Walter Atkinson and George Braly for the
details on what's going on inside your engine.
Thanks for proving my point. So now the engineers and designers that designed and certified these engines don't know how they work? Brilliant.

So using your "logic" we can only assume Beechcraft doesn't know anything about operating your Bonanza either. LOL.

Like I said earlier, welcome to "Amateur Hour"...........
  #25  
Old June 27th 08, 03:13 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,886
Default Lycoming to approve 93 octane auto gas for O-360 & IO-360

rotor&wing wrote:
Newps;641976 Wrote:
The manufacturer? Are you ****tin' me? Continental and Lycoming are
the last people you go to to learn how to operate your engine
correctly.
This is basic stuff. Contact Walter Atkinson and George Braly for
the
details on what's going on inside your engine.


Thanks for proving my point.



Keep studying. You'll get it.
  #26  
Old June 27th 08, 03:49 PM
rotor&wing rotor&wing is offline
Member
 
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Sep 2005
Location: florida
Posts: 38
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newps View Post

Keep studying. You'll get it.
Unfortunately you never will.
  #27  
Old July 8th 08, 02:58 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,886
Default Lycoming to approve 93 octane auto gas for O-360 & IO-360

rotor&wing wrote:
Newps;641976 Wrote:
The manufacturer? Are you ****tin' me? Continental and Lycoming are
the last people you go to to learn how to operate your engine
correctly.
This is basic stuff. Contact Walter Atkinson and George Braly for
the
details on what's going on inside your engine.


Thanks for proving my point. So now the engineers and designers that
designed and certified these engines don't know how they work?
Brilliant.

So using your "logic" we can only assume Beechcraft doesn't know
anything about operating your Bonanza either. LOL.

Like I said earlier, welcome to "Amateur Hour"...........





You can read up on this and when your pea brain realizes the engine
manufacturers are the last people to refer to for proper engine
operation we'll discuss the next Old Wives Tale. That you can reduce
plug fouling in a carb'd engine by leaning on the ground.


http://www.avweb.com/news/savvyaviat..._198162-1.html


  #28  
Old July 10th 08, 03:57 AM
rotor&wing rotor&wing is offline
Member
 
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Sep 2005
Location: florida
Posts: 38
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newps View Post

You can read up on this and when your pea brain realizes the engine
manufacturers are the last people to refer to for proper engine
operation we'll discuss the next Old Wives Tale. That you can reduce
plug fouling in a carb'd engine by leaning on the ground.


http://www.avweb.com/news/savvyaviat..._198162-1.html
Wow......So now Mike Busch is smarter than the people that engineered and designed the engine.

While I enjoy some of Mr. Busch's writings, he's not a professional mechanic....in fact he's never actually worked as a mechanic in his life. Besides, Mr. Busch gets a lot of his information from the manufacturer.
  #29  
Old July 10th 08, 05:57 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Matt Barrow[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Lycoming to approve 93 octane auto gas for O-360 & IO-360


rotor& "wing" wrote in
message ...

Newps;645107 Wrote:


You can read up on this and when your pea brain realizes the engine
manufacturers are the last people to refer to for proper engine
operation we'll discuss the next Old Wives Tale. That you can reduce
plug fouling in a carb'd engine by leaning on the ground.

-
http://tinyurl.com/6atqtu-


Wow......So now Mike Busch is smarter than the people that engineered
and designed the engine.


That wouldn't be hard.

While I enjoy some of Mr. Busch's writings, he's not a professional
mechanic....in fact he's never actually worked as a mechanic in his
life.


Argument from (false) authority.

Besides, Mr. Busch gets a lot of his information from the
manufacturer.


Cite?

From the article:

"Why would so many aircraft manufacturers publish such bad advice in their
POHs? Well for one thing, back in the 1960s and 1970s when many of the POHs
were written, the relationships between EGT, CHT and ICP were not as well
understood as they are today. The conventional wisdom at that time was that
richer mixtures were better for the engine, and leaner mixtures were worse.
A culture of fear evolved, promulgated by the flight instructors of the day:
If you leaned too aggressively, you'd blow up your engine.
With today's sophisticated instrumentation, we now know that this isn't
true. The hottest, most stressful mixture is about 50°F ROP, and mixtures
that are richer or leaner are better for the engine. At 75-percent cruise
power, you want to stay well away from that worst-case mixture setting,
either by operating at least 100°F ROP (preferably richer) or at least 20°F
LOP (preferably leaner), take your pick."

Just in case you didn't realize, the factory recommendation of 50 ROP, we've
come to realize, is the WORST possible setting to run. That's your
"brilliant" engineers.

To this day, IIUC, the engine manufacturers still HAVE NOT procured even
remotely the elaborate testing equipment that GAMI/TATurbo have developed.

http://www.engineteststand.com/















  #30  
Old July 10th 08, 11:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,767
Default Lycoming to approve 93 octane auto gas for O-360 & IO-360

On Jun 9, 3:16*pm, David Lesher wrote:
"JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe writes:

* If you're O-360 happens to be in a Cherokee, you can already get an auto
gas STC. *Otherwise, I wouldn't hold my breath on this Lycoming move. *The
autogas spec they're trying to get approved can contain oxygenates (mainly
ethanol, now that MTBE is gone). *


There is no real reason that FBO's can not get un-tainted gasoline. The
alcohols are added in when the truck is filled. The difficulties are
procedural not strategic...


In some states the alcholol is required by law in auto fuel. Not sure
if the refinerys are going to be interested in making a special
aviation batch when they already make 100LL.

-Robert
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
JINSA/PNAC (Israel first) Neocon Perle: Bush would approve Iran attack: [email protected] Naval Aviation 0 January 23rd 07 01:40 AM
Porterville 80 Octane! Bob Fry Piloting 1 June 14th 05 02:23 AM
80 octane extinct [email protected] Owning 3 August 18th 04 03:43 AM
Hi Octane Autogas UltraJohn Home Built 24 April 18th 04 02:43 AM
Hi Octane gas Ray Military Aviation 1 February 3rd 04 12:45 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.