turbo
Well Known Member
a nice 100 hp $13,000 engine.http://www.vikingaircraftengines.com/ 6 in rv-12 so far. 65 sold so far. show specials available to save $.
Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Honda fit engine
- Thread starter turbo
- Start date
a nice 100 hp $13,000 engine.http://www.vikingaircraftengines.com/ 6 in rv-12 so far. 65 sold so far. show specials available to save $.
Phyrcooler
Well Known Member
I am a conservative "use an airplane engine in an airplane" KISS oriented person. However, i support experimental aviation for what it is supposed to be. As such, I wish them well and hope that this engine works well, and their PSRU doesn't create heartache like so many before them.
DJ
DJ
John Clark
Well Known Member
On its side.
There is a tank below the engine in the photo that looks like it might be for a dry sump system. I would be interested to know where the CG of the engine is relative to the centerline of the crank. But then, I suppose the other side of the cowl will be full of radiators.
John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
There is a tank below the engine in the photo that looks like it might be for a dry sump system. I would be interested to know where the CG of the engine is relative to the centerline of the crank. But then, I suppose the other side of the cowl will be full of radiators.
John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
Wet Sump
Looking at the drawing on Viking's website, the valve cover is definitely a gravity drain back to the bottom mounted oil tank. Their spec's do not indicate a dry sump or scavenge pump(s). It looks to me like the oil pan gravity drains into the bottom mounted oil tank. I would be surprised if it is a dry sump system or that the valve cover or oil pan are scavenged.
Looking at the drawing on Viking's website, the valve cover is definitely a gravity drain back to the bottom mounted oil tank. Their spec's do not indicate a dry sump or scavenge pump(s). It looks to me like the oil pan gravity drains into the bottom mounted oil tank. I would be surprised if it is a dry sump system or that the valve cover or oil pan are scavenged.
kristoffon
Member
I wonder why Eggenfellner chose to sell the Honda engine under a different name. When I last checked his website (maybe six months ago) it had info on that engine which linked to the Viking Engine website. Now the Eggenfelner website only shows info on Subarus and no word on the Honda. Yet it's him behind the Honda as well as seen on the contact page...
Canadian_JOY
Well Known Member
It's a matter of history...
I've been following this engine development since a few days after Jan Egg announced his intentions to go this route. At that time he announced it on his Egg website, and had a link to a yahoo discussion forum. That forum was lively, and at some point before OSH 10 Jan migrated to a separate website for the Viking. Of course it took a while for him to come up with the Viking trade name, but once that was settled on it seemed like there was clear intent to keep the Egg and Viking names separate. Maybe this desire is driven by the mixed emotions the Egg name conjurs up in the aviation industry.
With respect to the engine itself, it seems like one of the few good candidates for conversion from auto to aircraft. I say this because, unlike many auto engines, the Fit engine has seen extensive service in applications requireing continuous high output power. In the case of the Fit, Honda has used it as a marine engine. How many marine engines spend much time running at less than 100% power? Keep in mind that in the marine application the engine stands on its end, so oil flow in a at least one alternate orientation has already been proven. When I asked Jan about the oil flow/scavanging issue his comment was that he had done a test by putting in a measured amount of oil, then ran the engine, then drained the engine and the filter. The difference between oil put in and oil drained was pretty minimal, something like 1/4 quart if memory serves.
Like most folks, I'm always very leery of auto conversions because some of them have had a less-than-stellar record in their aircraft incarnations. The re-drive is always something that gives me the willies, too. In this instance I think the base engine is a solid engine. While I don't have a need for a $13K auto conversion right now, the Viking looks like one that's worth keeping an eye on.
I've been following this engine development since a few days after Jan Egg announced his intentions to go this route. At that time he announced it on his Egg website, and had a link to a yahoo discussion forum. That forum was lively, and at some point before OSH 10 Jan migrated to a separate website for the Viking. Of course it took a while for him to come up with the Viking trade name, but once that was settled on it seemed like there was clear intent to keep the Egg and Viking names separate. Maybe this desire is driven by the mixed emotions the Egg name conjurs up in the aviation industry.
With respect to the engine itself, it seems like one of the few good candidates for conversion from auto to aircraft. I say this because, unlike many auto engines, the Fit engine has seen extensive service in applications requireing continuous high output power. In the case of the Fit, Honda has used it as a marine engine. How many marine engines spend much time running at less than 100% power? Keep in mind that in the marine application the engine stands on its end, so oil flow in a at least one alternate orientation has already been proven. When I asked Jan about the oil flow/scavanging issue his comment was that he had done a test by putting in a measured amount of oil, then ran the engine, then drained the engine and the filter. The difference between oil put in and oil drained was pretty minimal, something like 1/4 quart if memory serves.
Like most folks, I'm always very leery of auto conversions because some of them have had a less-than-stellar record in their aircraft incarnations. The re-drive is always something that gives me the willies, too. In this instance I think the base engine is a solid engine. While I don't have a need for a $13K auto conversion right now, the Viking looks like one that's worth keeping an eye on.
You'd be surprised how many auto engines have a marine version and work just fine with minimal internal changes. As I've said many times before, most modern auto engines are quite capable of running at sustained high power and rpm levels for hundreds of hours and are carefully validated and tested under these conditions before production release- far more stringently than traditional aircraft engines in fact.
I'm happy to see Jan's new gearbox employs a proper TV damper. I'd hope to see many hundreds of hours of flight testing on the package before release for sale though.
Honda produces very nice engines. The Viking is a nice looking package as Jan's always are but the proof is in the pudding as they say. It would be nice if the price could have been kept under 10K but it is another choice for people anyway. Sales/ deposits seem to show this is fair interest in this concept.
I'm not keen on the intake manifold design. I can't see how this could duplicate the airflow or tuning lengths of the factory intake although the design missions are a bit different. It's easy to strangle breathing with a poor intake as we've seen before on other conversions.
Suzuki G13 engines have been mounted on their sides for years by Raven for aircraft use and suffer no ill effects it seems.
I'm happy to see Jan's new gearbox employs a proper TV damper. I'd hope to see many hundreds of hours of flight testing on the package before release for sale though.
Honda produces very nice engines. The Viking is a nice looking package as Jan's always are but the proof is in the pudding as they say. It would be nice if the price could have been kept under 10K but it is another choice for people anyway. Sales/ deposits seem to show this is fair interest in this concept.
I'm not keen on the intake manifold design. I can't see how this could duplicate the airflow or tuning lengths of the factory intake although the design missions are a bit different. It's easy to strangle breathing with a poor intake as we've seen before on other conversions.
Suzuki G13 engines have been mounted on their sides for years by Raven for aircraft use and suffer no ill effects it seems.
Mike S
Senior Curmudgeon
Flying Honda from the past
Remember W.A.R Replicas?
Buddy of mine made the Honda engine setup for the P-51.
Mid 1980s and used a Prelude engine.
Remember W.A.R Replicas?
Buddy of mine made the Honda engine setup for the P-51.
Mid 1980s and used a Prelude engine.
Last edited:
Again you are spot on. Which begs the question...how many hours if any did one of these fly on an RV-12 before being sold as applicable to an RV-12? As far as that goes, how many of these are flying besides the company test bed? Nothing against the proprieter but I'm always curious when a product is already being sold when I haven't see much verifiable history or data on it. "65 sold so far and 6 in RV-12's" doesn't tell me anything other than someone can sell something.
I have no horse in the race either way and if it all works out that'll be fantastic.
Cheers,
Stein
Yes, I believe it is counterproductive for any vendor/ manufacturer in the aviation business not to do a lot of real world testing before you start selling. This applies whether it is engines, avionics, ignition systems, propellers etc. If something bad turns up on a customer installation after you have 100 sold and in the field, it is likely to kill your reputation or indeed your whole company financially when you are asked to fix it for those 100 people. We've seen it happen many times here on VAF with many different products.
If you don't learn from the past, you are destined to repeat it.
