VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Model Specific > RV-10
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 02-02-2013, 07:27 PM
N427EF N427EF is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,510
Default

Quote:
Dam right, you would not want to be hanging by your...errr, somewhere sensitive would you? But have you ever been mad enough to certify such a thing with the FAA? I might get an update for you in about 6 weeks when I get inside the Ada skunkworks again
I get your point.

While we are at it let's compare the whole picture.
The OP stated:
Quote:
Considering the ultimate plite of 100LL I would suspect that this might be a good direction to go.
We are discussing fuel and options right?
I have come to realize that promoting the use of mogas makes one some sort of an oddball in this forum but while we are comparing numbers here is what you might see next the above comparisons.

HP: 260 hp run at 161HP (61.9%)
161HP 62% Cruise: guessing 185mph
Range: 1027 mi
Consumption: 10.8 gph / 65 lbs/hr
Cost Per Gallon: $4.25 ( its less but why exaggerate )
Fuel Cost Per Hour: $45.90
Fuel Cost Per Lifetime (5,000 hr): $229,500 or $52,000 less than the SMA
__________________
Ernst Freitag
RV-8 finished (sold)
RV-10 Flyer 400 plus hours
Over 2500 Gallons of E10 mogas burned
Don't believe everything you know.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-02-2013, 08:34 PM
N208ET N208ET is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: St. Helens OR
Posts: 400
Default In my opinion

Diesel is the easy winner, its everywhere. The engine is dirt simple, a lycoming simplified, no ignition, one less thing to go wrong, takes no power to run, as long as its mechanical injection that is, and they red line in the right area, 3200ish RPM, no gear box, one less thing to go wrong, one less thing consuming wasted power, more efficient, less fuel consumption-flying further. Figure out how to make it light and you'll be a rich man.

I really like my Lycoming, don't get me wrong. But looking at what makes the most sense. Hands down! And dyed diesel isn't anywhere near 5 bucks a gallon.

Randy
8A
0-360
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-02-2013, 08:48 PM
bird's Avatar
bird bird is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: lake charles, La.
Posts: 699
Default

Adept air has a very interesting concept, I just went to their website. They are planning a lower, at least initially, cost than lycoming. The prsu seems to be on the same principle of the rotax, that is a good thing. The weight should be in the ballpark. I think they should send me one and I will stick on my 8 and give it a whirl!

Bird
__________________
Bird
rv8 entire airframe at airport now, painting done, intersection and gear upper and lower fairings done, maybe order engine around first of year or before the next rate increase.
"to fly is a privilege that I am so thankful to God for"
http://www.mykitlog.com/tcb328/
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-02-2013, 11:27 PM
N427EF N427EF is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,510
Default

Quote:
Diesel is the easy winner, its everywhere.
So is 91 octane.
But there is no diesel engine for the RV-10.
It's like saying you have the best race car driver but you don't have a race car.

Quote:
Adept air has a very interesting concept, I just went to their website. They are planning a lower, at least initially, cost than lycoming.
Same here, just a concept and lots of huff and puff, I've watched these developments for 20 years and nothing has ever come out of it or come even close to a Lycoming in the 260 HP range. I especially like when the marketing hype includes prices less than a Lycoming.

I am quite certain that G100UL or one of those fuels will eventually make it to the market but if you want an alternative to expensive avgas, use mogas, it's everywhere and always less than diesel.
Quote:
And dyed diesel isn't anywhere near 5 bucks a gallon.
You are right but it's always more than 91 octane.

I argued from your side for many years but have always been let down by companies who promote this kind of low cost and super efficient aircraft engine hype.
As they say"show me the money" or the engine in this case.
__________________
Ernst Freitag
RV-8 finished (sold)
RV-10 Flyer 400 plus hours
Over 2500 Gallons of E10 mogas burned
Don't believe everything you know.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-03-2013, 05:43 AM
N208ET N208ET is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: St. Helens OR
Posts: 400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by N427EF View Post
So is 91 octane.
But there is no diesel engine for the RV-10.
It's like saying you have the best race car driver but you don't have a race car.



Same here, just a concept and lots of huff and puff, I've watched these developments for 20 years and nothing has ever come out of it or come even close to a Lycoming in the 260 HP range. I especially like when the marketing hype includes prices less than a Lycoming.

I am quite certain that G100UL or one of those fuels will eventually make it to the market but if you want an alternative to expensive avgas, use mogas, it's everywhere and always less than diesel.

You are right but it's always more than 91 octane.

I argued from your side for many years but have always been let down by companies who promote this kind of low cost and super efficient aircraft engine hype.
As they say"show me the money" or the engine in this case.
I am looking at the logic. The engine I think is the future of GA is diesel, and to my knowledge, does not exist. I do however believe that someday the technology will exist to make this happen and for a craft that is dependant on propulsion as an aircraft, making this engine as simple as possible is going to be the winner. And I would argue your fact that dyed diesel is always more expensive than 91 octane, the cheapest 91 octane around here is 3.49 a gal, cheapest on road diesel is 3.77, take the road tax off it which is probably like 50 cents a gallon and your at 3.27 for dyed diesel. Go look at European gas prices and see which is cheaper. When I say everywhere, I mean everywhere on planet earth. Not the lower 48.

I am merely trying to look in the future and not use what we have already and keep making it work, I am looking at what makes the most sense to work, I am looking at what would make it better.

I am not arguing for any company here, I have no money to be made. But if I'm going to spend my time trying to develop something it isn't going to be a replacement fuel, its a replacement engine, something that makes more sense to me. And your right there is no Diesel engine for the RV 10, or my RV 8, or alot of other planes, just like for a long time there wasn't a person on the moon. Bring a guy to the table like Van, put him in the engine development market, and build a better "mouse trap engine"


I think it will happen someday.

Randy
8A
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-03-2013, 06:33 AM
RV10inOz's Avatar
RV10inOz RV10inOz is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brisbane Qld. Aust.
Posts: 2,057
Default

Ernst, you are a classic guy!

Quote:
We are discussing fuel and options right?
I have come to realize that promoting the use of mogas makes one some sort of an oddball in this forum but while we are comparing numbers here is what you might see next the above comparisons.

HP: 260 hp run at 161HP (61.9%)
161HP 62% Cruise: guessing 185mph
Range: 1027 mi
Consumption: 10.8 gph / 65 lbs/hr
Cost Per Gallon: $4.25 ( its less but why exaggerate )
Fuel Cost Per Hour: $45.90
Fuel Cost Per Lifetime (5,000 hr): $229,500 or $52,000 less than the SMA
I would say that while the mogas STC path has never been for IO's your pump/return system is about as close as it gets.

Hard to argue with the numbers.

I am sure you have told me before, but which grade of Mogas are you using? And is that MON or RON or (R+M)/2

Just for the apples v apples.
__________________
______________________________

David Brown


The two best investments you can make, by any financial test, an EMS and APS!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:50 AM
aerhed aerhed is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Big Sandy, WY
Posts: 2,566
Default

I think I got my first Zoche diesel hat in 84 (he had the best hats). 29 years ago. Don't see many flying. Continental's GAP diesel? Thielert? Why is it so hard to accept that the lycoming configuration we have fits the mission? Specific power? Durability? Installation ease? Give it up. Also, diesel stinks. So does jet. Nasty, messy stuff. Stone age fuel.
__________________
Actual repeat offender.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-03-2013, 11:13 AM
N427EF N427EF is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,510
Default

Quote:
Go look at European gas prices and see which is cheaper. When I say everywhere, I mean everywhere on planet earth. Not the lower 48.
You are right, a quick google searched showed the price of diesel just a few
"slotskis" lower than high octane gasoline.
I based my assertion on some recent complaints from european pilots who report diesel prices climbing higher than gasoline prices. An increase in use will have that effect I guess.
Quote:
I am merely trying to look in the future and not use what we have already and keep making it work, I am looking at what makes the most sense to work, I am looking at what would make it better.
I share your hopes and I wish for the same thing.
Quote:
Bring a guy to the table like Van, put him in the engine development market, and build a better "mouse trap engine"
Ironically it was a write up in Vans Rviator a few years ago where Van himself answered the relentless onslaught and demand for an alternative engine that finally put me in the Lycoming camp. I can't recall his exact words but a diesel engine was the last of a list of possible solutions to a lightweight, inexpensive and reliable engine solutions.
Found this on the Adept airmotive website???
Incidentally it sound almost exactly what Van described in his opinion about a diesel option.
Quote:
Question: Why is the ADEPT Airmotive not a compression ignition (diesel) engine?

Answer: Although diesel has certain advantages with regards to fuel consumption and economy, we don’t believe that compression ignition technology is best suited to GA applications. Among the reasons for this are:

Poor relationship between torque and power
Diesel engines have to be heavier to contain higher bearing loads
Diesel engines have poor power to weight ratios
Vibration
Satisfactory power generation generally requires high turbo boost with related reliability problems
Diesel fuel weighs more than gasoline
Quote:
I am sure you have told me before, but which grade of Mogas are you using? And is that MON or RON or (R+M)/2
It's (R+M)/2 which when compared using the same metric as avgas turns into something like 87 Octane.
Quote:
Using a low-octane gasoline whose ignition temperature is too low causes pre-ignition. Low-octane automotive gasoline (87-octane) has a typical ignition temperature of 300 degrees Celsius; high-octane (93-octane) automotive gasoline has a typical ignition temperature of 400 degrees Celsius. Aviation gasoline is blended to ignite at 500 degrees Celsius. High compression and high cylinder temperature will cause the fuel to ignite before the sparkplug fires.
Classic guy? Oz, what are you talking about I fly LOP and over square and I invested in a state of the art engine monitor
__________________
Ernst Freitag
RV-8 finished (sold)
RV-10 Flyer 400 plus hours
Over 2500 Gallons of E10 mogas burned
Don't believe everything you know.

Last edited by N427EF : 02-03-2013 at 04:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:42 PM
RV10inOz's Avatar
RV10inOz RV10inOz is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brisbane Qld. Aust.
Posts: 2,057
Default

Quote:
Classic guy? Oz, what are you talking about I fly LOP and over square and I invested in a state of the art engine monitor


Not meaning classic as in old timer old ways and not up to speed you silly head

Classic as in....well pick your hero...but you know, Burt Reynolds or John Wayne....

Aussie sense of humour failure again!



Ohhhand you run mogas.......you should have burned that engine up hours ago with all that engine abuse! :-)
__________________
______________________________

David Brown


The two best investments you can make, by any financial test, an EMS and APS!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-04-2013, 07:44 AM
Toobuilder's Avatar
Toobuilder Toobuilder is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Mojave
Posts: 3,794
Default

Just as a point of order, this fuel discussion appears to be trying to price out "on road" diesel fuel. I believe however, that "aviation" piston diesels are supposed to run on Jet-A. And that stuff is quite a bit cheaper than 100LL around here.
__________________
WARNING! Incorrect design and/or fabrication of aircraft and/or components may result in injury or death. Information presented in this post is based on my own experience - Reader has sole responsibility for determining accuracy or suitability for use.

Michael Robinson
______________
Harmon Rocket II -SDS EFI instalation in work
RV-8 - Flying
1940 Taylorcraft BL-65 -flying
PA-20-inspired "family truckster" -in work
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:51 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.