What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Suzuki Engines

R

rv6ejguy

Well Known Member
The Suzuki G13BB engine is about 15 lbs. heavier than the Rotax ready to fly. Puts out around 10-15 more hp and is very bulletproof, having been raced at extreme outputs in turbocharged form and many have been used in aircraft. Tampabayaerosport and Raven make gear and belt redrives respectively and most of the bugs have been worked out a long time ago. They would be a fraction of the cost of a 912 both to acquire and rebuild.

Lots of info at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FlyGeo_uncensored
 
Once an alternate guy, always an....

The RV-12 proposes to use an "alternate" Rotax engine, but that is not alternative enough for you guys, so you want to use motorcycle engines. Some folks just have to be different. :D

I can see if Van?s wanted to uses a Continental O-200 or O-235 Lycoming, and those not being "alternative" enough, but the Rotax not being "alternate" enough? Really the Rotax has an ultra-light, motorcycle, snowmobile, jetski and ATV heritage. I think they certified an engine for aircraft use?

What about Jabiru, VW air-cooled or a Subaru (late 70?s, early 80?s push rod version, pre belt-driven overhead cam models)?

I guess if Van suggested a motorcycle engine you guys would look for something more alternative, rubber bands anyone? :D :D

George
 
The only problem I have with Rotax is that I have had racing Sea-Doo's with Rotax engines for a lot of years, and I can count on only about 100-150 hours before they grenade - usually a rod through the case, or alternatively, a lean seizure because one of the carbs suddenly got a little fuel clog and went lean...

I know, I know...their aircraft engines are totally different from their ski engines - but their ski engines are derivatives from their snowmobile engines...

Hey, I love them in my skis, really - but it's easy to swim to shore when they quit - an aerial tow is a little harder to arrange "on the fly"! ;)

Paul Dye
 
If you follow Rotax engines as I do, there are some issues with them. Cost, availability, overhaul costs and some reliability areas. They are not in the same league as a Lycoming.
 
gmcjetpilot said:
The RV-12 proposes to use an "alternate" Rotax engine, but that is not alternative enough for you guys, so you want to use motorcycle engines. Some folks just have to be different. :D

I can see if Van?s wanted to uses a Continental O-200 or O-235 Lycoming, and those not being "alternative" enough, but the Rotax not being "alternate" enough? Really the Rotax has an ultra-light, motorcycle, snowmobile, jetski and ATV heritage. I think they certified an engine for aircraft use?

What about Jabiru, VW air-cooled or a Subaru (late 70?s, early 80?s push rod version, pre belt-driven overhead cam models)?

I guess if Van suggested a motorcycle engine you guys would look for something more alternative, rubber bands anyone? :D :D

George
Click to expand...


The LSA class generally has cost as a big consideration. The Rotax is not cheap by any means, either to acquire, operate (low TBO) or to rebuild. The Jabiru has had many problems, not all of which have been resolved as previously discussed here on this forum and they have been somewhat uncooperative to pay for problems with their engines. Some of the first customers felt like Beta testers. Also slightly heavy. The EA81 Sube is very reliable but too heavy for this application. VW air cooled is short on hp and reliability in the direct drive format.

Really, there are few alternatives available with the track record, weight, reliability, parts availability, support, and redrives that the Suzuki has. Rotax if you want it and can afford it for sure, for others, maybe the Suzuki deserves a look.
 
I dropped into a forum presentation by Raven Industries at SnF this year. The one thing that really impressed me about the Geo motor is how economical and durable it has been while running at high rpm (freeway speeds in Geo is something like 5000 rpm). Raven makes several belt driven redrives for the Suzuki motor variants. I agree, it might be the best value choice for the RV-12.

At that time, I was looking for potential powerplants for a gyroplane (before I discovered the Vans tent...).
 
I love motorcycle engines

No doubt a motorcycle engine is small, light and powerful, but how do you overcome separating the transmission out. Also even more than auto engines they are set up to make HP at very High RPM. Would you used the transmission.

I know some motorcycle engines have a separated tran's box and crankcase, but most rice burners have one piece cases with tranny and all? Interesting. I remember a BD-5 tried to use a Harley D once. Motorcycle engines are not cheap either. There seems to be a economy of scale and the old "you get what you pay for". G
 
Last edited:
gmcjetpilot said:
No doubt a motorcycle engine is small, light and powerful, but how do you overcome separating the transmission out. Also even more than auto engines they are set up to make HP at very High HP. Would you used the transmission.

I know some motorcycle engines have a separated tran's box and crankcase, but most rice burners have one piece cases with tranny and all? Interesting. I remember a BD-5 tried to use a Harley D once. Motorcycle engines are not cheap either. There seems to be a economy of scale and the old "you get what you pay for". G
Click to expand...

George,

The Suzuki engine they are talking about comes out of a Swift. The car was also sold under that name and as the Chevy Sprint. Later GM sold them as the Geo Metro.

These three cylinder engines have been used in airplanes for some time. One of our EAA chapter members has a Jenny replica (7/8ths scale, I believe) flying behind one of these engines and is quite happy with it.
 
N941WR said:
George,

The Suzuki engine they are talking about comes out of a Swift. The car was also sold under that name and as the Chevy Sprint. Later GM sold them as the Geo Metro..
Click to expand...
I know the engine and recall seeing one at an airshow now that you mention it. Thanks G
 
Not to hijack this thread but...

I find it interesting that there isn't a "definitive" auto conversion. By "defnitive" I'm referring to an engine that doesn't spark a great deal of debate.

Some that come to mind are:
1) VW's but they seem to have gone by the wayside.
2) Subaru engines look very promising and a good number have been sold but the question of weight continues to come up.
3) Mazda rotary is a good engine but again, a lot of debate regarding fuel burn.
4) V8's have never been that popular. Too much HP, too much weight, too much complexity?
5) The above mentioned Suzuki engine.
6) Corvair engines gained some respect but I don't think they were ever produced in enough quantity to make an impact.
7) There used to be a Honda engine out of Canada but I haven't seen or heard anything about this in some time and don't know if it was ever viable.

What other engines did I miss?
 
auto conversions

N941WR said:
I find it interesting that there isn't a "definitive" auto conversion. By "defnitive" I'm referring to an engine that doesn't spark a great deal of debate.
Click to expand...
Pretty much anything in the aviation community sparks a debate - that's what happens when you get a few intelligent, confident, and opinionated people in a discussion. I think it's healthy, but I understand the sense of your comment.

One great thing about humans is that we are always trying to improve things. That does not mean that what we've got is bad, but we want to make it better. I think this is the case with the so-called "alternative" engines. Aviation engines are good, but people want to make them better. Better of course depends on what you value. Price, reliability, smoothness, efficiency, ease of maintenance, weight, power, and lots of other factors weigh into the equation.

This is a debate that I hope never ends, unless of course someone discovers the "ultimate" power source that we currently only see in the imaginations of sci-fi writers.
 
The big thing with traditional aircraft engines, be them Rotax or Lyc is simply the high cost. For handy people, an auto engine conversion is a way cheaper way to get into the air. If the RV12 really starts to sell well, expect a company like Raven to produce parts like mounts and integrated systems to install the Suzuki engines into them. This is what is really needed, an established company willing to devote the R&D time to test and develop the whole installation package to work well, duplicate it and make it available to the masses. This is where the total package installation really becomes viable and reliable.

When individuals have different systems installed which are not well proven, this is where reliability can turn out to be compromised.

The Corvair is a bit on the Porky side for the RV12 at around 185-190 lbs. for the bare longblock although people are putting them in KR2s. By the time a bearing housing, alternator, starter, exhaust etc. is added... Build it light is the way to go. The 1300cc Swift DOHC is a nice piece.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top