What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Engine Questions IO-540 Barret

star57

Member
Fellow Aviators, I trust that among you there may be someone that has engine knowledge beyond my own, trust me its not hard.
I have contemplated for some time moving to an RV10 and came close a few times,the last time it was a nice plane with Garmin G3X and Air, but once the deal was moved to the pre-buy when I learned that the engine was a narrow deck, angled valve, I was talked out of it by some people that understood engines.
Now Im at a similar crossroads once again, I came across an OK built RV10 that has what seems to be an interesting engine set up, I would appreciate some feedback from people in the know.
The builder asked Barret to obtain a suitable core that could be used to build the engine. Barret seems to have an OK reputation in the industry . There is no “original” serial number as the engine was built from a core. Supposedly this is similar to what happens when Lycoming builds a “factory” engine from cores. All the engine history is lost as it is effectively a new engine, this is what I have been told
As far as this engine is concerned, the core / crank were overhauled prior to use. The jugs / valves etc were all new parts. For these, there is a complete list of the parts used as well as the certifications for the “core” parts. All accessories - starter / fuel injection system / prop governor etc were new. The magnetos are overhauled Bendix mags also supplied by Barret. Bendix mags, apparently can be overhauled indefinitely.
Lycoming I0-540, engine rated at 290 HP by Barrett Precision Engines, narrow deck engine.
The cylinders are Lycoming part # 05K21102 which are parallel head cylinders
Main alternator 60 amp 14 volt,with internal regulator Ignition, conventional Bendix magnetos
Left mag has an impulse coupler for engine starting
The engine incorporates a mechanical fuel pump,
Cold air induction and an Airflow Performance FM300 fuel servo system
The starter is a Sky-Tec model 149-NL
The exhaust system is a custom design Vetterman exhaust and incorporates dual mufflers
Engine controls consist of throttle, propeller, mixture, and purge valve, vernier style center release push/pull controls.
The engine cowl is from Showplanes Inc is designed for use on an RV10 using an IO-540 engine fitted with cold air induction from Barrett Precision Engines, thank you all for your comment on this set up, should I consider it or runaway, the engine has only 170 hours.
regards
 
Last edited:
Barrett

Barrett is way more than OK. They are one of the best custom engine builders in the US. Some would argue the best.
The only real issue is if you wear out the engine and the case does not survive another overhaul you are left searching for a replacement case. The narrow deck cases have not been manufactured for some time.
The data plate is pretty standard in that segment of the industry. It is now officially a Barrett IO 540, not a Lycoming.
Many of the aerobatic airplanes with similar engines are putting out around 320 horsepower. 290 is relatively conservative.
 
Barrets engines are OK. You just have to make sure they are suited to your airplane and your mission. Have you looked at the weight of the parallel valve engine and compared it to a standard IO-540 parallel valve?
And honestly, you don't need 290 horsepower in a RV-10. The 260 HP engine is just fine. After thousands of hours in many rv10's I can never think of a time when I wished I had more horsepower. Honest.
More brakes, maybe. :) But not horsepower.

Vic
 
What are your concerns. This sounds like a fairly normal set up.

Gary Specketer

Exactly. Barrett is top of the heap. Call them and ask about the engine in the airplane you're looking at. I believe they will be able to tell you all about it as it left their shop. Also, the list of accessories and related components (cowl, exhaust, etc) sounds very normal.

As to narrow vs wide deck, not an issue. The internals are the same, as I understand it. Any crankcase can fail (although they rarely do), and if that were to happen, you could take your internals (crank, cam, etc), buy a new crankcase (or a recertified one from several reputable sources) and put it right back together, although you would need new cylinders to switch from narrow to wide or vice versa.
 
Barrets engines are OK. You just have to make sure they are suited to your airplane and your mission. Have you looked at the weight of the parallel valve engine and compared it to a standard IO-540 parallel valve?
And honestly, you don't need 290 horsepower in a RV-10. The 260 HP engine is just fine. After thousands of hours in many rv10's I can never think of a time when I wished I had more horsepower. Honest.
More brakes, maybe. :) But not horsepower.

Vic

Thank you Vic, I have not compared the weights, the last RV10 that I walked away from was about 100 pounds heavier because of the engine, I dont know as much as I should on these issues, and maybe I need to research it further, this RV has 980 pounds of useful weight.
The question is, should I forgo this RV10 because of the less than conventional engine that it has, or just price it acordingly expecting to install an AeroSport engine, or similar in the future.
What would be the value of this engine if it was available in the market?

Thank you for you contribution.
 
Last edited:
Engine

How much time is on the engine? Why would you think it needs to be replaced? Given equal hours I would take the Barrett engine over any other including Lycoming. Why would you believe that Aerosport is better?
 
Thank you Vic, I have not compared the weights, the last RV10 that I walked away from was about 100 pounds heavier because of the engine, I dont know as much as I should on these issues, and maybe I need to research it further, this RV has 1007 pound of gross weight.
The question is, should I forgo this RV10 because of the less than conventional engine that it has, or just price it acordingly expecting to install an AeroSport engine, or similar in the future.
What would be the value of this engine if it was available in the market?

Thank you for you contribution.

I don't think anyone is inferring that you should runaway from it. I would encourage you to sit down and thoroughly go over the numbers, i.e., W&B, fuel burn, etc., and see how they stack up against your mission. If you are solo 99% of the time, then you will probably not ever approach gross weight and the heavier engine is probably not even a consideration. But if you are going to operate at heavy weights, then the engine COULD have an impact.

With 170 hours on it one might hope that there is a glass panel or engine monitor in the plane that you could download some data and take a look at it.

When I said Barret engines are OK, I meant OK in the sense that they are great! Inflection gets missed on emails. :( I had a Barrett engine in my RV-7A. As a matter of fact, I took the new engine from Van's and sent it to him to work his magic on it. It is still going strong with the 3rd owner.

That being said, an IO-720 built by Barrett is truly a work of art, but you wouldn't and couldn't put in on your RV-12. Get the picture? Make sure the engine is right for the airplane and mission.

Vic
 
Sounds like you ran into a unique RV-10 with the heavier angle valve engine which the majority of RV-10 builders have avoided using. The kit was designed to support the parallel valve 540 and my guess is 99% have gone that route. The popular C4B5 and D4A5 models each weigh just over 400lbs and produce 260hp @ 2700 rpm which, as Vic mentioned, is plenty. Narrow deck vs. wide deck is a non-issue. I have a Barrett narrow deck C4B5 and it is fantastic.
 
What I am reading is that you walked away from the angle valve engine and now are looking at a parallel valve engine overhauled by Barrett in a -10. Is this correct? Barrett is definitely better than OK. It is probably Dynoed at 290HP, but not rated as that. It may have higher compression pistons, but not high enough to be 290HP. Often Barrett engines Dynon at above their "rated" power. I would not hesitate to use an engine that Barrett overhauled, especially if it is parallel valve, but I would call Barrett and talk to Allen and ask him the details on the main journals and the rod journals to see if they likely will be able to be overhauled again if necessary. If they are 10 under and need to be reground at overhaul, then they would be out of spec and could not be reground. IIRC, 10 under is the max.
 
, this RV has 1007 pound of gross weight.
.

I presume you mean "useful load". If it uses the recommended 2700 lbs as gross, that puts its empty weight just a bit on the high side, IMHO, but certainly there are many out there that weigh more. But if there's extra weight in the engine compared to the IO540D4A5, you need to check the cg - it may be somewhat forward.
 
I presume you mean "useful load". If it uses the recommended 2700 lbs as gross, that puts its empty weight just a bit on the high side, IMHO, but certainly there are many out there that weigh more. But if there's extra weight in the engine compared to the IO540D4A5, you need to check the cg - it may be somewhat forward.

Sorry, quick fingers...I meant useful load,at 980 pounds, a bit more than my DA40, not much more.
Vans lists the range of empty weight at 1520 on the light side to 1630 on the heavy side, so is this AC at 1720 going to be too nose heavy? Will it affect the handling on landing, will it need a strong nose up trim like a 182....

The AC is well built, but not too fancy on the Avionics, just two AFS 4500 and a GNS430W, great 4 years ago, nothing too remarkable these days.
The prop is a 3 blade MT, a lite prop for sure...

I would rather walk away than get stuck with an AC that will undesirable to buy down the road?

Thank you all for your comments and advise
Frank Faria
 
... so is this AC at 1720 going to be too nose heavy? Will it affect the handling on landing, will it need a strong nose up trim like a 182....

Thank you all for your comments and advise
Frank Faria

The empty CG is not determined by the empty weight. You should ask the owner for the empty CG location, then post that figure here to get comparative information.
 
What I am reading is that you walked away from the angle valve engine and now are looking at a parallel valve engine overhauled by Barrett in a -10. Is this correct? Barrett is definitely better than OK. It is probably Dynoed at 290HP, but not rated as that. It may have higher compression pistons, but not high enough to be 290HP. Often Barrett engines Dynon at above their "rated" power. I would not hesitate to use an engine that Barrett overhauled, especially if it is parallel valve, but I would call Barrett and talk to Allen and ask him the details on the main journals and the rod journals to see if they likely will be able to be overhauled again if necessary. If they are 10 under and need to be reground at overhaul, then they would be out of spec and could not be reground. IIRC, 10 under is the max.

Yes Jesse, this seems to be a parallel cylinders on a narrow deck core, the AC is 1720 empty

Frank Faria
 
The empty CG is not determined by the empty weight. You should ask the owner for the empty CG location, then post that figure here to get comparative information.

I will do that, I have the complete manual, the owner/builder has created a very meticulous manual, I will go over it and publish it.
Hopefully it will put my concerns at ease...
 
Last edited:
check the engine monitor logs

Frank,

I wouldn't be concerned with the engine builder, they do a fine job and it's probably the best engine you can have in your RV-10.
However, these high compression cold air induction engines usually need to have a James cowl/plenum setup under which they tend to run hot.
This may have been fixed with the Showplanes cowling, but I would still go through the engine monitor logs to make sure it's not running hot.

Robin is running a similar setup on his 10. He ended up switching to the Showplanes cowling with probably similar results to the plane you are looking at.
Check out his site: http://www.painttheweb.com/painttheweb/rv-10/

Lenny
 
Yes Jesse, this seems to be a parallel cylinders on a narrow deck core, the AC is 1720 empty

Frank Faria

So the airplane you are discussing is 100+ pounds heavier than Van's company demonstrator, and that is with a composite propeller vs the hartzell that the demonstrator has.

Does it have air conditioning? And/or a fancy all leather interior?
With a rather basic panel it seems unexplanably heavy.
 
Engine in question

This engine is a pretty standard modification here at BPE. The narrow deck crankcase in the aerobatic and race circles is a stronger crankcase than the newer (sic) wide deck cases. The reason for this is because the case bolts are threaded into the crankcase whereas on the wide deck engines they are body fit. An additional benefit IMO is if for some reason a cylinder gets loose on the narrow deck, the opposing cylinder is not affected. ON a wide deck, opposing cylinders 'share' the same case bolts and the result can be both opposing cylinders will be loose. All narrow deck engines that leave our shop have hard dowels at the mating surface at the case bolt locations. This modification is Lycoming Service Instruction 1123D. On engines with compression ratios 9:1 or under we follow the instruction and place dowels at the center 4 case bolts. On engines above 9:1 we install dowels on all 8 case bolts. This stiffens the crankcase halves and eliminates case fretting. It makes for a virtual bullet proof bottom end.

Bottom line, this is a good engine set up. My favorite combination to build

Allen
 
Back
Top