ROTAX Engines - let's hear it - good, bad, data, your experience & opinions

[Seth]

A lot of people don't like our 1950's technology lycomings and continentals. The ROTAX is proven now and has more and more airframes using it. I did not like the sound the first and only time I flew in one (RV-12) in 2018. I don't like the gear reduction drive required as it adds complexity. That said, this seems to be good a reliable engine that drinks way less fuel, is lighter, and gives a nice powerplant option for smaller and lighter aircraft. The turbo models keep power at altitude!

I'm curious to everyone's opinions and if possible, sharing objective data. Please also share personal experiences. This is not meant to bash or be a love fest thread, simply curious and I respect the opinions of MooneySpacers.

-Seth

Edited August 17, 2020 by Seth

[tmo]

It also drinks the same fuel that your car does, ethanol and all.

Running on car gas reduces the maintenance intervals to 100h.

The liquid cooled heads reduce the possibility of heat related damage, at the cost of a little additional complexity.

Generally they are replacement items at the 2400h TBO.

At the club we really like them.

Edited August 17, 2020 by tmo

[Seth]

What does it power at the club?

[Niko182]

They seem like nice engines. The lack power for anything in the general aviation world. 141HP isn't enough for anything over 2000lbs. If they made a 300HP or 350HP engine, and they were able to STC for air frames such as the 33/35/36 series, and Mooneys, and 210s and togas, I think it has some potential. They seem like reliable efficient engines. And last, they are modern. They don't have the awesome sound the 520 and 550s have, but they create a possible future for general aviation. As much as I love general aviation, environmentally, It is about as bad as it gets. Fuel still has lead in it. the emissions coming from the exhaust pipe are even worse. Someone needs to find a solution, and for once the FAA needs to work with them.

[carusoam]

Complex, small, low cost, disposable...

Water cooled, turbo, geared...

Enough to reliably Power a two seater...

initially was used in Diamond two seaters but got replaced by... Continental?

Two engines listed as options...

https://www.diamondaircraft.com/en/flight-school-solution/aircraft/da20/overview/

I did the transition training for the diamond two seater... it was on lease back at the local FBO...

Somebody goofed up the cable pull for the rudder pedal adjustment... the plane didn’t stay on lease back very long...

Engine worked as expected... it was nice to fly a newer plane than the standard C152 that were the option...

Best regards,

-a-

[aviatoreb]

I wish they made a six cylinder or an 8 cylinder higher powered version.

i always thought the diamond da42 would look and work great with a pair of them.

[EricJ]

Many people really like them and call them "bulletproof".    My hangar neighbor has an SLA with one in it and is always fiddling with it to keep it going.   The electronic ignition modules attach to the engine and cause trouble when they overheat.   The gear reduction box has a clutch system in it that saves the engine/gearbox in the event of a prop strike, but the clutch and gearbox are maintenance issues that require expensive rebuilding at, iirc, 800 hours or so?    These are just my recollections of stuff he's had to deal with, and every time I talk to him I learn something else about it that just seems very unattractive to me.    I went in thinking that they're pretty cool and popular, and have slowly changed my opinion based on what I've seen with his airplane.    It's a sample of one, which may not be representative, but certainly hasn't been impressive.    All that said, he likes it, so there's that. 

 

[kmyfm20s]

Rotax vs 0-200 both 100hp

Significantly better power to weight ratio, -50 lbs

Water cooled head with air cooled cylinder

Electronic ignition and all the benefits that goes with that

Cheaper to purchase

Less oil consumption 

More fuel options

Thousands of hours logged in UAV’s and manned aircraft

 

[Hector]

A turbocharged 6 cylinder version in the 180-220 HP range would sure make an interesting option for a lot of light GA aircraft. That’s only another 60 HP more that they are making now. It would make an interesting option for all those C172s and PA28s and even some Mooney’s if someone developed the STCs to approve hem.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[kpaul]

"Flew" the turbocharged Rotax 914F in the MQ-1.  That 115hp motor flew a 2200lb plane into the flight levels.  We flew them on an average of 22 hours per day.  That meant the engine was running closer to 23 hours.  The oil was changed after every other flight.  We had very few engine problems, if there was an issue it was usually turbo related.  A turbo failure over the high mountains was typically fatal for the aircraft as it would generally only maintain about 12,000 MSL sans turbo.

[tmo]

13 hours ago, Seth said:

What does it power at the club?

Ultralights and PPL trainers (Tecnam P2008JC).

Bigger schools have Rotax powered twins for MEP training.

[Ibra]

I flew with one in SF25C motor-glider (TMG we call them) with a friend, once we did a 3000nm out/return trip in all temperatures and sub-12kft altitudes while using mix of car & aviation fuels and turning engine on/off when conditions were good to sail, I would put them as very reliable & designed but really underpowered for heavy stuff, on fuel economy, there is a big question mark on running Rotax at 110HP and 200HP Lyco at 55% LOP? the FF is about the same IMO, I could argue the same about running an M20J at 55% vs a SF25C motorglider or PiperSport LSA...

It did quit once while taxi on idle after a long park in the heat and that was on Avgas and fuel pump OFF (as it should on ground taxi) but given the conditions I think it was normal 

Now having two of them on a DA42 airframe would be nice 

My friend sold that aircraft and now owns an PA28 Arrow which has half wingspan and 2 extra seats

Edited August 18, 2020 by Ibra