Jump to content

How hard would it be to get 350hp?

Niko182

By Niko182
in General Mooney Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

Bravoman Mentor

Bravoman

Posted
Posted
On 8/22/2019 at 6:34 AM, M20Doc said:

If only Lycoming would make cylinders for Continental, most of the issues would be gone.

Clarence

 When  to hear guys like you say stuff like that, it confirms my belief that I am on the correct side of the “Ford vs Chevy” debate. 

aviatoreb Grand Master

aviatoreb

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Chessieretriever said:

To clarify: The M20M (not L) with the TSIOL-550 is "de-rated" to 335HP from the original 350HP by reducing the speed to 2600 from 2700. I can't speak for the "L" as it has other components that may be a little different than the "M" (like the gear etc.). The charts from TCM (I have them) go above 400HP if the manifold pressure is increased to 40" at the rated speed of 2700RPM (the Extra 400 operates with this set up). I have owned our Liquid Rocket more than 10 years and have enjoyed a dispatch performance that is as good or better than my fellow aviators on the field with TSIO-550's. In 600+ hours I have never experienced a cooling related problem. It appears that the expertise associated with maintaining these engines is the differentiating factor in availability and reliability (not too much experience in the field with details like how to properly de-aerate the cooling system at each cylinder head or how to re-fill it etc.) From discussions with Conrad one of the areas of concern with higher power ratings  on my particular airplane (it was the one used to get the STC and was flown to 35,000ft) is tail authority when just getting into motion and low speed conditions. This is the reason why the TBM 950 does not produce the full 950HP until after it attained a minimum airspeed. I hope this helps clear a few questions up. Cheers, OFB

I would love to hear about your performance numbers, fuel flow, speeds, etc flying your liquid rocket.  Those are rare birds - I hear there were exactly 5 built.

N201MKTurbo Grand Master

N201MKTurbo

Posted
Posted

So, even though these engines have been derated, can’t you run them in cruise at the un-derated power? If the un-derated power is 350 HP, can’t you run 75% of 350 HP in cruise?

It seems to me the only advantage of un-derating the engine would be in the climb and not in cruise.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

That looks fast.  Do tell more!

Garrett installed a TPE331 as a flying test bed back in the sixties.  Supposed to have exceeded 40,000’ in testing.  I’ll look to see if I can find the story.  Eventually the airplane was returned to the original Lycoming.

Here is the magazine with the story on what they called the Comanche 600.  It starts on page 39

https://www.comancheflyers.com/publication/view/comanche-flyer-january-2016/

Clarence

aviatoreb Grand Master

aviatoreb

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, M20Doc said:

Garrett installed a TPE331 as a flying test bed back in the sixties.  Supposed to have exceeded 40,000’ in testing.  I’ll look to see if I can find the story.  Eventually the airplane was returned to the original Lycoming.

Here is the magazine with the story on what they called the Comanche 600.  It starts on page 39

https://www.comancheflyers.com/publication/view/comanche-flyer-january-2016/

Clarence

Neat.  Well they were on to something since eventually setp became very popular 25 years later.

kmyfm20s Veteran

kmyfm20s

Posted
Posted
On 8/22/2019 at 3:34 AM, M20Doc said:

If only Lycoming would make cylinders for Continental, most of the issues would be gone.

Clarence

There are a lot of optimistic people out there hoping the new Continental plant will produce better cylinders.

 

jetdriven Grand Master

jetdriven

Posted
Posted

The complexity that engine looks pretty amazing too, direct injected diesel, turbo charged, gear drive,  probably has four valves per cylinder and a bunch of timing chain and gears too.  

triple8s Mentor

triple8s

Posted
Posted
On 9/25/2019 at 5:38 AM, Herlihy Brother said:

I have two 350hp lycs on my a* and they're great! Reliable, fuel efficient and so powerful. I would put one of those on my mooney. 2500 hours on them and running like champs. 250 knots no problem, anytime. Tio540u2a is the model, roll your own turbos, mine have twin rajays. They're quiet too, much quieter than the io360. They are super flexible too---you can run them at 42gph extra rich climbing with no airflow and stay cool or lop as low as 10gph.  I fly mine at 14gph. You can fly them down low or up high. Idk why rocket chose the continental....considering this lyc has been making speed freaks happy for so long. And the parts for them are cheap and plentiful, and you hardly need to ever buy parts cuz they're so reliable. As long as the cam don't spall haha. Do the math, you can get darn close to a cj1 block time with this setup for a fraction of the cost. Add a little proseal and bleed air and we can chase lanceair ivps.

I wonder why they didnt or why these couldn't be put on an M22?

aviatoreb Grand Master

aviatoreb

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, jetdriven said:

The complexity that engine looks pretty amazing too, direct injected diesel, turbo charged, gear drive,  probably has four valves per cylinder and a bunch of timing chain and gears too.  

You are suspicious of it?  Are you worried it will not be reliable?

E

shorrick mk2 Contributor

shorrick mk2

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, jetdriven said:

The complexity that engine looks pretty amazing too, direct injected diesel, turbo charged, gear drive,  probably has four valves per cylinder and a bunch of timing chain and gears too.  

Same design as the Mercedes Benz OM668 that morphed into the Centurion engines, and these show by now a reliability avgas Lycontis can only achieve in a wet dream. Sure, you can't fix them in the field with a hammer and pliers, but if they don't fail... no need to :-)

jetdriven Grand Master

jetdriven

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

You are suspicious of it?  Are you worried it will not be reliable?

E

Yes, it is so complex the reliability suffers. Remember thet had a turbo diesel 182 a while back as well. But the problem was any one  of 20 couplers underneath of the cowling come off and it shuts down. It will not run at annient pressure.  After a couple of in-flight engine shut downs the project was scrapped. 

Edited by jetdriven
aviatoreb Grand Master

aviatoreb

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

Yes, it is so complex the reliability suffers. Remember thet had a turbo diesel 182 a while back as well. But the problem was any one  of 20 couplers underneath of the cowling come off and it shuts down. It will not run at annient pressure.  After a couple of in-flight engine shut downs the project was scrapped. 

I don't know - I would have to defer to you and others on that regard.  Mercedes has certainly proved an amazing reliability for their turbo diesels.  But the road environment is not the same as the environment at 20,000 ft.  SO I don't know.

The fuel specifics are out of this world amazing.  Two numbers that strike me - 

relative to the 305hp TSIO520nb on the front of my M20K

- the are listing 228hp which is my 75% setting.  On my engine that calls for 21gph by POH.  EPS calls for 10.7gph for the same 228hp and that drives this little airplane to 200tas depending on altitude.

-the EPS lists 298hp which is close to the 100% setting of 305hp on my tsio520nb that eats 31.6gph.  But the EPS uses 14.24 at this what they call 85% setting and they can cruise like that all day.  So I have never done it, but the POH of the rocket claims that 100% power at 24k (I am not sure how that works since I thought critical altitude is 23), goes 248TAS.  Well wouldn't it be fun to go 248kts (or even close) on 14.24gph?

-even higher power settings are available - 90%...316hp all day and 15.62gph and presumably faster than 250kts?

screenshot_241.thumb.png.0269ce7e37a89389fe0fa1c053f236fb.png

  • Like 1
shorrick mk2 Contributor

shorrick mk2

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

I don't know - I would have to defer to you and others on that regard.  Mercedes has certainly proved an amazing reliability for their turbo diesels.  But the road environment is not the same as the environment at 20,000 ft.  SO I don't know.

 

The Centurion aviation version of the MB engine is also pretty much bullet - proof. When is the last time you heard "top overhaul", "cam spalling", "magneto overhaul" etc etc from the Diamond crowd? Not that often. Not that often that we hear about their engines stopping in flight either (in fact thanks to ekectronic engine management Continental can now show you the up-to-date IFSD rate for their diesels and it is pretty impressive. If they were that bad they wouldn't have sold that many.

  • Like 1
Jerry 5TJ Grand Master

Jerry 5TJ

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, shorrick mk2 said:

The Centurion aviation version of the MB engine is also pretty much bullet - proof. When is the last time you heard "top overhaul", "cam spalling", "magneto overhaul" etc etc from the Diamond crowd? Not that often. Not that often that we hear about their engines stopping in flight either (in fact thanks to ekectronic engine management Continental can now show you the up-to-date IFSD rate for their diesels and it is pretty impressive. If they were that bad they wouldn't have sold that many.

Have you owned and flown one of these?

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.