What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

200hp RV9?

As you probably know, the RV-9 was designed for engines between 115 and 160 HP.

If you are asking if there are -9's with the IO-360 angle valve engine, I haven't heard of any. The challenge is the weight of this engine.

There are a number of RV-9's and -9A's with the (I)O-360 parallel valve engines. These can easily be modified to produce over 200 hp.

The challenge you will have is that in cruise you can bump up against the Vne, which is based on True Airspeed, not indicated.

My O-360 powered -9, at 75% power, will cruise at 175 knots at 8,000' DA. This is five knots short of Vne.

To fly at those speeds, I am drinking fuel (~13 GPH) and since I only carry 36 gallons, it is not worth it to go that fast. However, it is worth the bragging rights.

Typical cruise is 150 to 160 knots, LoP, and burning just over 7 GPH.
 
Thanks for the info. I haven't heard of one either but had to ask.

I have an O-360 too and have never seen 175kts at 75%. I cruise at 2400 rpm (fixed pitch)
and get about 161 kts. with about 9 gph. I don't run LoP.
 
I flew a Cessna 206 to BBQ today and we were burning 14gph at times doing 135kts down low. It was just wrong from an RV perspective...

My RV9 was on the right wing sipping fuel, having a coffee break.

Don't mess up a good thing :).
 
I flew a Cessna 206 to BBQ today and we were burning 14gph at times doing 135kts down low. It was just wrong from an RV perspective...

My RV9 was on the right wing sipping fuel, having a coffee break.

Don't mess up a good thing :).

It is good to fly a Cessna every once in a while to remind you why you built your RV!
 
Thanks for the info. I haven't heard of one either but had to ask.

I have an O-360 too and have never seen 175kts at 75%. I cruise at 2400 rpm (fixed pitch)
and get about 161 kts. with about 9 gph. I don't run LoP.

I too have a fixed pitch prop (Catto two blade). To get to 75% power, go to 8,000' DA and push the black knob all the way in and lean for best power. I'm spinning at around 2750 RPM to do it, which is one reason I don't fly there very often.
 
I posted the other day about slowing the -9 down to around 135 knots and discovering my range extended out to a bit over 1000 NM's.

I'm sipping fuel at those power settings!
 
I flew a Cessna 206 to BBQ today and we were burning 14gph at times doing 135kts down low. It was just wrong from an RV perspective...

My RV9 was on the right wing sipping fuel, having a coffee break.

Don't mess up a good thing :).

Well yeah, but it would take two -9s and a -4 with no back seat to carry a matching load. What would that fuel burn equal?

It's all about the mission.
 
The 9 I would imagine is a nice docile plane more aimed at the novice flyer who doesn't want to aero or go like a scolded cat, that's the aim of Vans in the first place I believe.
Like another poster touched on, VNE is a very big misunderstood phenomenon, that's probably the one thing that a high powered 9 might touch on, dangerously!
 
I've got 180hp in my 9A, and I've rolled this over in my head a half a hundred times about how to put more horsepower in it - and every time I end up back at the same place - it's not needed.

With 180hp and a constant-speed prop, I can climb into the flight levels with 2 butts and full fuel, and I have to carefully monitor power versus airspeed on descents. There's just no need for more than 180.

The 160hp Vans recommendation is a good one - but the extra 20hp sure makes for a spirited climb and acceleration for very little weight gain in the IO360 parallel-valve engine. I just don't see the benefit of adding another 20 with the weight gain that would go with it.

Now WANT versus NEED is a very real thing - do you what you WANT to do, but it's certainly not needed.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top