N546RV
Well Known Member
So this is just an informational post for anyone who might be interested in this information now or in the future.
In another post about the HRT props and James cowl, it was pointed out that WW now has wording on their site about how they no longer support the IO-370 and -375 engines. This is of interest to me since that's exactly the combination I've been planning on for my build.
Anyway, I reached out to them to try and find out the reasoning behind this decision, and got this reply today:
So, long story short, there's no "ticking time bomb" thing going on here, they just strongly suspect that longevity of their props will suffer in front of thee engines, and they won't be responsible for shorter overhaul/maintenance intervals resulting from this combination.
So just an FYI for anyone else considering this combination and wondering what's up.
In another post about the HRT props and James cowl, it was pointed out that WW now has wording on their site about how they no longer support the IO-370 and -375 engines. This is of interest to me since that's exactly the combination I've been planning on for my build.
Anyway, I reached out to them to try and find out the reasoning behind this decision, and got this reply today:
Hello Mr. Clifton,
Yes, since [last summer] Whirl Wind Aviation has decided not to support the IO-370 and the IO-375 engines.
Because of higher torsional vibrations of the IO-370 and IO-375 engines there is a strong possibility that they will need more frequent tear down inspections due to blade grease leaks. The grease leaks are not a safety issue but just a nuisance for the owner and we will not be pro-rating early tear down fees on the props on -370 and -375’s.
Additionally, there could be premature wear of the blade bearing races, retainers and possibly even the hub sockets that could lead to earlier, higher maintenance costs.
We have no objective data defining if or when such things will happen. They may never, but we know based on our vibration studies of these engines that the possibility exists.
So, long story short, there's no "ticking time bomb" thing going on here, they just strongly suspect that longevity of their props will suffer in front of thee engines, and they won't be responsible for shorter overhaul/maintenance intervals resulting from this combination.
So just an FYI for anyone else considering this combination and wondering what's up.
Last edited: