Jump to content

C4 project is alive!


CT4ME

Recommended Posts

Posted
25 minutes ago, FlyingMonkey said:

915 will be lighter weight, butl less power than the original IO-360.  So it depends on whether you want more power or better fuel efficiency which one you would want to go with.

The 915 is going to deliver best speed at improved economy.  The turbo is a game changer, with it in the mix more power <> better top speed

Posted
3 hours ago, Ed Cesnalis said:

The 915 is going to deliver best speed at improved economy.  The turbo is a game changer, with it in the mix more power <> better top speed

More power will mean better speed all things equal.  But at higher altitudes the turbo engine might make better power than the IO-360.  So then is comes down to what altitudes you are operating at.

Posted
4 hours ago, FlyingMonkey said:

More power will mean better speed all things equal.  But at higher altitudes the turbo engine might make better power than the IO-360.  So then is comes down to what altitudes you are operating at.

Thats kinda the point, things aren't equal and the 915 doesn't have the fall off in power as altitude increases.  Even with the IO-360 best speed will be at 7,500' and it will likely win at that altitude if its weight doesn't negate its advantage but above 10,000' and especially above 16,000' the 915 config will find its best speed and advantage and I bet its pushing 200mph.

Posted

At 7500ft the 180hp engine making reduced power will still be making more than the 135hp engine making full power.  So the cruise speed will be higher at that altitude for the IO-360.  Most folks east of the Rockies have no desire to fly at 16000ft when they can get similar speed at 7500ft.  So I stand by my statement that it will depend on where you fly which engine suits you best.

Plus the $15k+ price premium for 40 less horsepower just to get the turbo is a little tough to swallow.

Posted
12 minutes ago, FlyingMonkey said:

 

Plus the $15k+ price premium for 40 less horsepower just to get the turbo is a little tough to swallow.

Compared to the IO-360, the 915 also burns much less fuel, can run on autogas, and is lighter.

Posted
7 hours ago, FlyingMonkey said:

At 7500ft the 180hp engine making reduced power will still be making more than the 135hp engine making full power.  So the cruise speed will be higher at that altitude for the IO-360.  Most folks east of the Rockies have no desire to fly at 16000ft when they can get similar speed at 7500ft.  So I stand by my statement that it will depend on where you fly which engine suits you best.

Plus the $15k+ price premium for 40 less horsepower just to get the turbo is a little tough to swallow.

You don't have to cruise at 16, to get the benefit.  Above 10,000' this powerplant will begin to realize the advantage. People will cruise at altitude for the speed and all the more so in a 4 passenger plane.  You keep making statements as thought we are only talking power and not power to weight.

Posted
11 hours ago, JLang said:

Compared to the IO-360, the 915 also burns much less fuel, can run on autogas, and is lighter.

The AF in the Continental IO-360-AF stands for alternate fuel. It is also designed to run on auto fuel.

Posted

One thing to remember is that the design promised to be able to carry a payload equal to its empty weight which was around 1600 pounds. I think 135 HP at sea level would be a little underpowered with that goal in mind.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...