VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

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

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #1  
Old 03-20-2017, 01:43 PM
mizer2167 mizer2167 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Lutz, FL
Posts: 13
Default O320-A1A Issues to look out for?

Are there any issues or problems to watch out for in earlier narrow deck Lycomings vs. newer engines like the E and D series?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-20-2017, 02:53 PM
smokyray's Avatar
smokyray smokyray is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: TX32
Posts: 1,587
Default The Mighty ND...

Quote:
Originally Posted by mizer2167 View Post
Are there any issues or problems to watch out for in earlier narrow deck Lycomings vs. newer engines like the E and D series?
Dave,
I bolted a Narrow Deck 0-320 (Dash Nada) in both my RV4 and RV6"X" Hybrid. They are great, smooth and economical options to traditional newer or larger displacement engines. I paid $5K total for 2 run-outs removed from an Apache.

Here are some things I discovered over the years (and 2K hours)

1. Depending on RV model, The finish kit for the ND is different as the lower cowl scoop, engine mount, baffling and hardware are unique. The Vetterman exhaust is also unique as 2 of the pipes aren't interchangeable with the E series.

2. The ND has smaller cylinder (hold down) flanges than the wide deck 0-320B and E series as well as smaller case through bolts. You can't use the 8.0 or 9.0:1 pistons (160/170HP) in the ND for that reason. (you can with the wide deck). You can however balance the internal parts, polish and flow the ports and get a very smooth engine that will run on MoGas or the new proposed Non Lead 89 Octane AV gas.
On the good side it's 12 lbs lighter (I hung it from a fish scale alongside an E2D) than an E series 0-320 and 15lbs lighter than an 0-360J2A. (Same test)

3. If you keep the RV empty weight down and use a wood prop you'll have a very nice flying RV. With the Hartzell 2 or MT 3 blade CS (yes they have a CS crank as they were on early Apaches) they will really perform on takeoff and climb.

Great engine and a good budget option if you so choose.
V/R
Smokey

Last edited by smokyray : 03-20-2017 at 03:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-20-2017, 03:46 PM
az_gila's Avatar
az_gila az_gila is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 57AZ - NW Tucson area
Posts: 8,433
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by smokyray View Post
Dave,
I bolted a Narrow Deck 0-320 (Dash Nada) in both my RV4 and RV6"X" Hybrid. They are great, smooth and economical options to traditional newer or larger displacement engines. I paid $5K total for 2 run-outs removed from an Apache.

Here are some things I discovered over the years (and 2K hours)

1. Depending on RV model, The finish kit for the ND is different as the lower cowl scoop, engine mount, baffling and hardware are unique. The Vetterman exhaust is also unique as 2 of the pipes aren't interchangeable with the E series.

2. The ND has smaller cylinder (hold down) flanges than the wide deck 0-320B and E series as well as smaller case through bolts. You can't use the 8.0 or 9.0:1 pistons (160/170HP) in the ND for that reason. (you can with the wide deck). You can however balance the internal parts, polish and flow the ports and get a very smooth engine that will run on MoGas or the new proposed Non Lead 89 Octane AV gas.
On the good side it's 12 lbs lighter (I hung it from a fish scale alongside an E2D) than an E series 0-320 and 15lbs lighter than an 0-360J2A. (Same test)

3. If you keep the RV empty weight down and use a wood prop you'll have a very nice flying RV. With the Hartzell 2 or MT 3 blade CS (yes they have a CS crank as they were on early Apaches) they will really perform on takeoff and climb.

Great engine and a good budget option if you so choose.
V/R
Smokey
Narrow deck O-320 models came in higher compression 160 HP versions (B and D versions), they just needed the banana shaped reinforcing plates on the cylinder mounting bolts, and longer mounting studs.

__________________
Gil Alexander
EAA Technical Counselor, Airframe Mechanic
RV-6A N61GX - finally flying
Grumman Tiger N12GA - flying
La Cholla Airpark (57AZ) Tucson AZ
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:33 PM
RV6_flyer's Avatar
RV6_flyer RV6_flyer is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Uniontown, PA
Posts: 2,569
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by az_gila View Post
Narrow deck O-320 models came in higher compression 160 HP versions (B and D versions), they just needed the banana shaped reinforcing plates on the cylinder mounting bolts, and longer mounting studs.

With the hold down plates, you can bump the compression up just like on the Wide Deck engine.
__________________
Gary A. Sobek
KVVS RV-6
Flying
3,300+ hours
Building RV-8 S/N: 80012

To most people, the sky is the limit.
To those who love aviation, the sky is home.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-20-2017, 07:36 PM
mizer2167 mizer2167 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Lutz, FL
Posts: 13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smokyray View Post
Dave,
I bolted a Narrow Deck 0-320 (Dash Nada) in both my RV4 and RV6"X" Hybrid. They are great, smooth and economical options to traditional newer or larger displacement engines. I paid $5K total for 2 run-outs removed from an Apache.

Here are some things I discovered over the years (and 2K hours)

1. Depending on RV model, The finish kit for the ND is different as the lower cowl scoop, engine mount, baffling and hardware are unique. The Vetterman exhaust is also unique as 2 of the pipes aren't interchangeable with the E series.

2. The ND has smaller cylinder (hold down) flanges than the wide deck 0-320B and E series as well as smaller case through bolts. You can't use the 8.0 or 9.0:1 pistons (160/170HP) in the ND for that reason. (you can with the wide deck). You can however balance the internal parts, polish and flow the ports and get a very smooth engine that will run on MoGas or the new proposed Non Lead 89 Octane AV gas.
On the good side it's 12 lbs lighter (I hung it from a fish scale alongside an E2D) than an E series 0-320 and 15lbs lighter than an 0-360J2A. (Same test)

3. If you keep the RV empty weight down and use a wood prop you'll have a very nice flying RV. With the Hartzell 2 or MT 3 blade CS (yes they have a CS crank as they were on early Apaches) they will really perform on takeoff and climb.

Great engine and a good budget option if you so choose.
V/R
Smokey
Thank you for the response. This engine came from an Apache. I don't know much of the history as I haven't seen the logs, but it's reportedly 5000 TT and 550 SMOH with cold compression from 76 (highest) to 70 (lowest).
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-20-2017, 08:56 PM
jpowell13 jpowell13 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 500
Default Narrow deck

No problems with my 160hp Narrow Deck 0320D2B after about 500 hours on my 6A. I bolted an aluminum Sensenich FP on it and would really like to have a CP prop, or at least, a ground adjustable prop to improve take-off performance. My static RPM is only about 2100 with the Sensenich. John

Last edited by jpowell13 : 03-20-2017 at 08:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-21-2017, 11:51 AM
mahlon_r mahlon_r is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 921
Default

n/d has conical engine mounts while the wide decks have dynafocal mounting systems. On the n/d engines you can't run the wider diameter intake pipes that the wide deck engine uses.. which may be a consideration if really pumping the HP.
Good Luck,
Mahlon
__________________
"The opinions and information provided in this and all of my posts are hopefully helpful to you. Please use the information provided responsibly and at your own risk."
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-21-2017, 03:30 PM
az_gila's Avatar
az_gila az_gila is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 57AZ - NW Tucson area
Posts: 8,433
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by mahlon_r View Post
n/d has conical engine mounts while the wide decks have dynafocal mounting systems. On the n/d engines you can't run the wider diameter intake pipes that the wide deck engine uses.. which may be a consideration if really pumping the HP.
Good Luck,
Mahlon
Mahlon, is the intake pipe size restricted by the sump used, or is there some other obstruction?
__________________
Gil Alexander
EAA Technical Counselor, Airframe Mechanic
RV-6A N61GX - finally flying
Grumman Tiger N12GA - flying
La Cholla Airpark (57AZ) Tucson AZ
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-21-2017, 04:08 PM
mahlon_r mahlon_r is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 921
Default

restricted by the sump outlet tubes and also the position of the rear outlet tubes in the sump makes it necessary for them to be smaller.
Good Luck,
Mahlon
__________________
"The opinions and information provided in this and all of my posts are hopefully helpful to you. Please use the information provided responsibly and at your own risk."
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-21-2017, 04:33 PM
az_gila's Avatar
az_gila az_gila is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 57AZ - NW Tucson area
Posts: 8,433
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by mahlon_r View Post
restricted by the sump outlet tubes and also the position of the rear outlet tubes in the sump makes it necessary for them to be smaller.
Good Luck,
Mahlon
So a later model sump could get you the bigger intake pipes?
__________________
Gil Alexander
EAA Technical Counselor, Airframe Mechanic
RV-6A N61GX - finally flying
Grumman Tiger N12GA - flying
La Cholla Airpark (57AZ) Tucson AZ
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 11:29 PM.


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.