[rebel-builders] Rebel - Engine choices

[Bob Patterson]

Hi Brad !

My O-320 cruises about 116 - 118 mph at 2,450, with a 150 hp.
O-320, and a 74 x 56 Sensenich metal prop. That's the number I see
most often - summer, winter, loaded, or solo, - not as fast as some,
but realistic. Sometimes, when I'm loaded aft for Rambling, it goes
over 120 slightly ....

My old 80 hp. 912 Rebel cruised pretty consistently at 97 mph,
at 5,400 rpm - my idea of the best rpm for that engine.
GSC ground adjustable wood prop. Others see in the 90 - 95 mph
range with standard, 1,650 Rebels with the 80 hp 912 & Warp Drives.
I would expect that a 100 hp. 912-S Rebel would give about
110 mph cruise - especially if I use an in-flight variable pitch prop,
like the GSC mechanical one ( ~$1,500 !!).

You're right - the takeoff distance on wheels isn't much of a problem !
I've got video of the 80 hp 912 taking off in 129 ft. -- my O-320 Rebel
takes at least 300 ft. ... Bigger engined, heavier Rebels always have
longer takeoff rolls. So there's no problem no matter where you fly ! :-)

The old 80 hp 912 was no slouch on floats either ! It was better
than my old 85 hp. Aeronca Chief..... I have video of a 6 second
takeoff on Murphy 1500 straights - solo & very light !! Of course,
you might need a verrrry long lake on amphibs, at 1,700 lb !!! ;-)
(Not recommended ! )

--
......bobp
http://www.prosumers.ca
http://bpatterson.qhealthbeauty.com
http://apatterson2.qhealthzone.com

-------------------------------orig.-------------------------
On Monday 29 January 2007 22:58, Brad Hewlett wrote:

Bob,

Engine choices seem to be on peoples mind these days, including mine.

What do think the difference in cruise speed would be between the 912 S and
the
O-320? If a person is not going to go to floats I'm thinking that the
difference in
take-off distance on wheels shouldn't cause that much of a problem.

Brad.

Brad Hewlett
Saskatoon, SK
bhewlett@sasktel.net

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Brad Hewlett]

Bob,

Thanks for the Info. Not that it makes the decision any easier.

As many have said there is really no Bad choice.

Brad.

Brad Hewlett
Saskatoon, SK
bhewlett@sasktel.net

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Patterson" <beep@sympatico.ca>
To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Rebel - Engine choices

Hi Brad !

My O-320 cruises about 116 - 118 mph at 2,450, with a 150 hp.
O-320, and a 74 x 56 Sensenich metal prop. That's the number I see
most often - summer, winter, loaded, or solo, - not as fast as some,
but realistic. Sometimes, when I'm loaded aft for Rambling, it goes
over 120 slightly ....

My old 80 hp. 912 Rebel cruised pretty consistently at 97 mph,
at 5,400 rpm - my idea of the best rpm for that engine.
GSC ground adjustable wood prop. Others see in the 90 - 95 mph
range with standard, 1,650 Rebels with the 80 hp 912 & Warp Drives.
I would expect that a 100 hp. 912-S Rebel would give about
110 mph cruise - especially if I use an in-flight variable pitch prop,
like the GSC mechanical one ( ~$1,500 !!).

You're right - the takeoff distance on wheels isn't much of a problem !
I've got video of the 80 hp 912 taking off in 129 ft. -- my O-320 Rebel
takes at least 300 ft. ... Bigger engined, heavier Rebels always have
longer takeoff rolls. So there's no problem no matter where you fly !
:-)

The old 80 hp 912 was no slouch on floats either ! It was better
than my old 85 hp. Aeronca Chief..... I have video of a 6 second
takeoff on Murphy 1500 straights - solo & very light !! Of course,
you might need a verrrry long lake on amphibs, at 1,700 lb !!! ;-)
(Not recommended ! )

--
......bobp
http://www.prosumers.ca
http://bpatterson.qhealthbeauty.com
http://apatterson2.qhealthzone.com

-------------------------------orig.-------------------------
On Monday 29 January 2007 22:58, Brad Hewlett wrote:

Bob,

Engine choices seem to be on peoples mind these days, including mine.

What do think the difference in cruise speed would be between the 912 S
and
the
O-320? If a person is not going to go to floats I'm thinking that the
difference in
take-off distance on wheels shouldn't cause that much of a problem.

Brad.

Brad Hewlett
Saskatoon, SK
bhewlett@sasktel.net

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Wayne G. O'Shea]

Sure there is Brad...any conversion by NSI ! ;O)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brad Hewlett" <bhewlett@sasktel.net>
To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Rebel - Engine choices

Bob,

Thanks for the Info. Not that it makes the decision any easier.

As many have said there is really no Bad choice.

Brad.

Brad Hewlett
Saskatoon, SK
bhewlett@sasktel.net

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Patterson" <beep@sympatico.ca>
To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Rebel - Engine choices

Hi Brad !

My O-320 cruises about 116 - 118 mph at 2,450, with a 150 hp.
O-320, and a 74 x 56 Sensenich metal prop. That's the number I see
most often - summer, winter, loaded, or solo, - not as fast as some,
but realistic. Sometimes, when I'm loaded aft for Rambling, it goes
over 120 slightly ....

My old 80 hp. 912 Rebel cruised pretty consistently at 97 mph,
at 5,400 rpm - my idea of the best rpm for that engine.
GSC ground adjustable wood prop. Others see in the 90 - 95 mph
range with standard, 1,650 Rebels with the 80 hp 912 & Warp Drives.
I would expect that a 100 hp. 912-S Rebel would give about
110 mph cruise - especially if I use an in-flight variable pitch prop,
like the GSC mechanical one ( ~$1,500 !!).

You're right - the takeoff distance on wheels isn't much of a problem
!
I've got video of the 80 hp 912 taking off in 129 ft. -- my O-320 Rebel
takes at least 300 ft. ... Bigger engined, heavier Rebels always have
longer takeoff rolls. So there's no problem no matter where you fly !
:-)

The old 80 hp 912 was no slouch on floats either ! It was better
than my old 85 hp. Aeronca Chief..... I have video of a 6 second
takeoff on Murphy 1500 straights - solo & very light !! Of course,
you might need a verrrry long lake on amphibs, at 1,700 lb !!! ;-)
(Not recommended ! )

--
......bobp
http://www.prosumers.ca
http://bpatterson.qhealthbeauty.com
http://apatterson2.qhealthzone.com

-------------------------------orig.-------------------------
On Monday 29 January 2007 22:58, Brad Hewlett wrote:

Bob,

Engine choices seem to be on peoples mind these days, including mine.

What do think the difference in cruise speed would be between the 912 S
and
the
O-320? If a person is not going to go to floats I'm thinking that the
difference in
take-off distance on wheels shouldn't cause that much of a problem.

Brad.

Brad Hewlett
Saskatoon, SK
bhewlett@sasktel.net

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Jean Poirier]

And there is probably couple of new engines coming! Some radials and some
diesel!

Jean
Rebel 747R

Jean Poirier
Pr

[Ken]

We have been promised new better engines and diesels for years and
years. Yet the only off the shelf alternatives that are affordable and
practical for a Rebel are the Lycoming clones! Sadly I don't expect
that to change so I predict the choice will almost certainly boil down
to 4 cylinder Rotax, recycled Lyc., or Lyc. clone. Fortunately the 912S
and the clones are both good options!

Certainly there are DIY options but a lot of those eventually end up
with a Lyc anyway...

Ken

Jean Poirier wrote:

And there is probably couple of new engines coming! Some radials and some
diesel!

Jean
Rebel 747R

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Jesse Jenks]

I was looking at the Superior website and noticed they make a low
compression version of the XP-360 that is rated at 170 HP, and can run on
low octane mogas. I haven't seen any discussion of this particular model on
the list here, so I'm wondering what the experts think about it's
compatibility with the Rebel.
Now that they have the XP-320 out, there isn't a real excuse for putting the
360 in, but maybe this is a good compromise. With the price difference so
minimal between the models, it would be hard to buy the 320. I like the
theory proposed by several people that you get the 360 and run it at reduced
power for normal ops, but have that extra bit available for when things get
hairy. I forget now what someone said about the 360 power pulses being more
intense even at lower power settings, possibly putting more stress on the
tail. Would that be eased by the lower compression model 360?
Not sure I'm ready to spend over 20 grand on an engine yet, but for someone
like me who doesn't know a lot about engines, it's tempting to by a shiny
new one instead of gambling on a used one.
Jesse

From: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
Reply-To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Rebel - Engine choices
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 15:42:27 -0500

We have been promised new better engines and diesels for years and
years. Yet the only off the shelf alternatives that are affordable and
practical for a Rebel are the Lycoming clones! Sadly I don't expect
that to change so I predict the choice will almost certainly boil down
to 4 cylinder Rotax, recycled Lyc., or Lyc. clone. Fortunately the 912S
and the clones are both good options!

Certainly there are DIY options but a lot of those eventually end up
with a Lyc anyway...

Ken

Jean Poirier wrote:

And there is probably couple of new engines coming! Some radials and

some

diesel!

Jean
Rebel 747R

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

_________________________________________________________________
Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the Academy
Awards

[Walter Klatt]

There are some flying Rebels now with the 0360, and I think some are on this
list. Would be nice to hear some reports from them regarding hours todate
with the 0360, and any noticeable wear and tear on the tail. I am also
interested in replacing my 0320 with an 0360 for just that little extra
power I need on those higher alpine lakes. But, kind of hard to justify
replacing a perfectly running 0320, especially with the Cdn buck heading the
wrong way for me right now.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of
Jesse Jenks
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 7:08 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Rebel - Engine choices

I was looking at the Superior website and noticed they make a low
compression version of the XP-360 that is rated at 170 HP, and can run on
low octane mogas. I haven't seen any discussion of this particular model
on
the list here, so I'm wondering what the experts think about it's
compatibility with the Rebel.
Now that they have the XP-320 out, there isn't a real excuse for putting
the
360 in, but maybe this is a good compromise. With the price difference so
minimal between the models, it would be hard to buy the 320. I like the
theory proposed by several people that you get the 360 and run it at
reduced
power for normal ops, but have that extra bit available for when things
get
hairy. I forget now what someone said about the 360 power pulses being
more
intense even at lower power settings, possibly putting more stress on the
tail. Would that be eased by the lower compression model 360?
Not sure I'm ready to spend over 20 grand on an engine yet, but for
someone
like me who doesn't know a lot about engines, it's tempting to by a shiny
new one instead of gambling on a used one.
Jesse

From: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
Reply-To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Rebel - Engine choices
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 15:42:27 -0500

We have been promised new better engines and diesels for years and
years. Yet the only off the shelf alternatives that are affordable and
practical for a Rebel are the Lycoming clones! Sadly I don't expect
that to change so I predict the choice will almost certainly boil down
to 4 cylinder Rotax, recycled Lyc., or Lyc. clone. Fortunately the 912S
and the clones are both good options!

Certainly there are DIY options but a lot of those eventually end up
with a Lyc anyway...

Ken

Jean Poirier wrote:

And there is probably couple of new engines coming! Some radials and

some

diesel!

Jean
Rebel 747R

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

_________________________________________________________________
Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the
Academy
AwardsR http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007 ... artagline2




-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[N.Smith]

Hi Jesse

All the pure jet aircraft have a policy of reducing the thrust to the
minimum required to get off the ground (down to a minimum value), and this
saves considerably on engine wear and tear costs. The figure is obtained
from a table for each departure. It is not done to save the airframe.
With a lycoming type engine you may find however that there is little or no
reduced maintenance costs, as many of these are generated by things such as
AD's and other ongoing costs you'll get anyway.
To feel safe about the airframe you'd need to somehow measure the forces
generated by a typical 320 / prop combination, and then find the RPM setting
for your xp-360 that does not exceed any of those forces. I'm no stress
engineer, but I'd not be happy about just choosing an assumed reduced RPM
and using that all the time. As far as how often you can exceed this figure
and for how long each time !!!!!! ???????? that would take big bucks over
here to work out :-)

Nig
745E

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com]On Behalf Of
Jesse Jenks
Sent: 31 January 2007 03:08
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Rebel - Engine choices


I was looking at the Superior website and noticed they make a low
compression version of the XP-360 that is rated at 170 HP, and can run on
low octane mogas. I haven't seen any discussion of this particular model on
the list here, so I'm wondering what the experts think about it's
compatibility with the Rebel.
Now that they have the XP-320 out, there isn't a real excuse for putting the
360 in, but maybe this is a good compromise. With the price difference so
minimal between the models, it would be hard to buy the 320. I like the
theory proposed by several people that you get the 360 and run it at reduced
power for normal ops, but have that extra bit available for when things get
hairy. I forget now what someone said about the 360 power pulses being more
intense even at lower power settings, possibly putting more stress on the
tail. Would that be eased by the lower compression model 360?
Not sure I'm ready to spend over 20 grand on an engine yet, but for someone
like me who doesn't know a lot about engines, it's tempting to by a shiny
new one instead of gambling on a used one.
Jesse

From: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
Reply-To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Rebel - Engine choices
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 15:42:27 -0500

We have been promised new better engines and diesels for years and
years. Yet the only off the shelf alternatives that are affordable and
practical for a Rebel are the Lycoming clones! Sadly I don't expect
that to change so I predict the choice will almost certainly boil down
to 4 cylinder Rotax, recycled Lyc., or Lyc. clone. Fortunately the 912S
and the clones are both good options!

Certainly there are DIY options but a lot of those eventually end up
with a Lyc anyway...

Ken

Jean Poirier wrote:

And there is probably couple of new engines coming! Some radials and

some

diesel!

Jean
Rebel 747R

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

_________________________________________________________________
Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the Academy
Awards

[Jean Poirier]

Hum...

For my self, if I had to take the decision today, I would go for the
"clone" 0-320 150 hp (low compression... can run on mogas). Everyone who
fly Rebel on floats with 0-320 describe their airplanes as "top performer".
This choice will let the airplane in the designer recommendation...

Jean Poirier
Pr

[Jesse Jenks]

Thanks guys,
It's hard to get away from the "bigger is better" mentality, and I
appreciate your thoughts.
I, like Walter would be curious to hear from the guys who are already flying
with 360s to see how the airframe is really holding up.
Jesse

From: "N.Smith" <admin@airnig.co.uk>
Reply-To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] Rebel - Engine choices
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 07:39:45 -0000

Hi Jesse

All the pure jet aircraft have a policy of reducing the thrust to the
minimum required to get off the ground (down to a minimum value), and this
saves considerably on engine wear and tear costs. The figure is obtained
from a table for each departure. It is not done to save the airframe.
With a lycoming type engine you may find however that there is little or no
reduced maintenance costs, as many of these are generated by things such as
AD's and other ongoing costs you'll get anyway.
To feel safe about the airframe you'd need to somehow measure the forces
generated by a typical 320 / prop combination, and then find the RPM
setting
for your xp-360 that does not exceed any of those forces. I'm no stress
engineer, but I'd not be happy about just choosing an assumed reduced RPM
and using that all the time. As far as how often you can exceed this figure
and for how long each time !!!!!! ???????? that would take big bucks over
here to work out :-)

Nig
745E

Hum...

For my self, if I had to take the decision today, I would go for the
"clone" 0-320 150 hp (low compression... can run on mogas). Everyone who
fly Rebel on floats with 0-320 describe their airplanes as "top performer".
This choice will let the airplane in the designer recommendation...

Jean Poirier
Pr

[Ken]

Can you find out how well the superior engines are balanced and how much
they shake/vibrate compared to a Lyc.? Are soft engine mounts available?

I would expect power pulses to be similar at similar power output. It
takes more cylinders or a geared engine to reduce those much but a 3
cylinder prop should also be easier on the tail surfaces if that is the
concern.

Expect slightly higher fuel consumption due to lower compression and
higher internal engine friction on the larger engine. Generally you lose
a bit of thrust (per hp) when switching to a smaller diameter 3 blade
prop at low speeds and most 3 bladed props will also increase fuel
consumption slightly. Electronic ignition should help the lightly loaded
engine even more than the smaller engine though.

I think you will also find that you only have to be a few thousand feet
above sea level before you won't make any more power than a 0-320
anyway. However these things may all be too small to notice!

For daydreamers:
Another thought is does it matter about low octane mogas or is the
ability to run high octane mogas OK or better? Many folks burn high
octane mogas because that's what is available on the airport or because
(like here in Ontario now) the only local reasonably certain supply
that is alcohol free is high octane mogas. Will marinas be selling
regular fuel with alcohol or will they also go high octane? If you
believe that alchohol is the future (I don't) I notice that the
http://www.age85.org/ActiveProjects.htm guys are upping compression
ratio's to 10:1 for their corn lobby E85 flights of fancy . I am not
impressed with what I'm seeing here now that alcohol is mandated in our
mogas. Haven't done my homework but my suspicion is that the alcohol is
cleaning water out of tanks in the supply chain and that a significant
portion of the 5% ethanol is saturated with water! At some point I'd
expect the clones to gravitate towards high compression but with the
ability to run almost any grade of fuel and lower fuel consumption .
More difficult than for a car but surely a Lyc clone could do it with
Ion spark sensing incorporated into the electronic ignition. Saabs have
done that for years.

Ken

[quote]De : mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] De la part de Jesse
Jenks
Envoy