Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 10:55:13 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail.indian-creek.net ([209.176.40.9] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1b4) with ESMTP id 2149991 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 10:47:31 -0400 Received: from pavilion (sl6.du.indian-creek.net [209.176.40.22] toucan@78055.com) by mail.indian-creek.net with SMTP (IOA-IPAD 3.70m/96) id 3377300 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 09:47:30 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <000a01c30d95$8dd76e60$1628b0d1@pavilion> From: "Jim Cameron" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: Turbo diesels and marketing mysteries X-Original-Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 09:49:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01C30D6B.763125A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C30D6B.763125A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Having sold my second ES, and dabbled briefly with the idea of = defecting to the RV camp, it now looks as if my next project will be a = Legacy. From all the research I've done, plus some pretty convincing = input from Tim Ong, it looks like the airplane to build. As I told Tim, = after looking over an RV-7A kit that a fellow in Austin had for sale, = it's like stepping out of your Mercedes and looking over a Honda Civic. Thinking about engines, and the development of the new FG model, it = occurred to me that the SMA turbo diesel might be a candidate for the = Legacy. It supposedly puts out 230hp for takeoff, and can maintain = 200hp up to 12,000', which would about equal the hp of the IO-550 at = that altitude. At 192 kg (423 lbs) it's not much different than the = IO-550. SMA claim a 30% advantage in fuel burn, too. Putting the pencil to it, however, it doesn't look viable. I did = some rough calculations for a 3000-hour engine life, which is what SMA = claim TBO will be for their engine. For the IO-550, figure a $53K = acquisition cost (engine, prop, governor), which is $17.67/hr, overhaul = costs (engine & prop, rough guess) of about $12/hr, and a fuel cost of = about $30.80/hr (14gph ave. @ 2.20/gal), which makes a total of $60.47 = combined cost. For the SMA engine, acquisition cost is $80K (!! - I'm = assuming this includes prop & governor, but I don't know for sure), = which works out to $26.67/hr, then add fuel cost at 9.8 gph (I'm buying = their 30% less figure) at about $2.20/gal, or $21.56/hr, plus overhaul, = a complete unknown, but let's assume $30K at 300 hours, or $10/hr, for a = total of $58.23 per hour combined cost. Bottom line is that there is really no significant cost advantage, = and for anything much less than a 3000-hr period, your total outlay will = be quite a bit more with the SMA engine. At 1000 hrs, the total = out-of-pocket for the IO-550 will be about $95.8K, including a $12K = depreciation reserve for O/H; with the SMA engine your out-of-pocket = total will be about $112K. Most of us don't plan on having our planes = for 3000 hours, anyway. The only wild card I see is that if (when?) the = sudden edict from EPA comes, banning lead in avgas, the turbo diesel = might look pretty good. Noise level is supposed to be lower, since the = diesel turns its prop at 2200rpm. On the negative side, it's still = unproven as far as actually having installed, flying engines make TBO. I wonder what the thinking was at Maule and Cirrus, both of whom = apparently are bringing out SMA-powered models? Maybe SMA is going to = give them a better price, but I found some references to an $80K cost = for the diesel option in a Maule. Whoof. Thoughts? Jim Cameron Medina, TX (Legacy deposit mailed) ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C30D6B.763125A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Having sold my = second ES,=20 and dabbled briefly with the idea of defecting to the RV camp, it now = looks as=20 if my next project will be a Legacy.  From all the research I've = done, plus=20 some pretty convincing input from Tim Ong, it looks like the airplane to = build.  As I told Tim, after looking over an RV-7A kit that a = fellow in=20 Austin had for sale, it's like stepping out of your Mercedes and looking = over a=20 Honda Civic.
 
    Thinking about = engines, and=20 the development of the new FG model, it occurred to me that the SMA = turbo diesel=20 might be a candidate for the Legacy.  It supposedly puts out 230hp = for=20 takeoff, and can maintain 200hp up to 12,000', which would about equal = the hp of=20 the IO-550 at that altitude.  At 192 kg (423 lbs) it's not much = different=20 than the IO-550.  SMA claim a 30% advantage in fuel burn, = too.
 
    Putting the = pencil to it,=20 however, it doesn't look viable.  I did some rough calculations for = a=20 3000-hour engine life, which is what SMA claim TBO will be for their=20 engine.  For the IO-550, figure a $53K acquisition cost (engine, = prop,=20 governor), which is $17.67/hr, overhaul costs (engine & prop, rough = guess)=20 of about $12/hr, and a fuel cost of about $30.80/hr (14gph ave. @ = 2.20/gal),=20 which makes a total of $60.47 combined cost.  For the SMA = engine,=20 acquisition cost is $80K (!! - I'm assuming this includes prop & = governor,=20 but I don't know for sure), which works out to $26.67/hr, then add fuel = cost at=20 9.8 gph (I'm buying their 30% less figure) at about $2.20/gal, or = $21.56/hr,=20 plus overhaul, a complete unknown, but let's assume $30K at 300 hours, = or=20 $10/hr, for a total of $58.23 per hour combined cost.
 
    Bottom line is = that there=20 is really no significant cost advantage, and for anything much less than = a=20 3000-hr period, your total outlay will be quite a bit more with the SMA=20 engine.  At 1000 hrs, the total out-of-pocket for the IO-550 will = be about=20 $95.8K, including a $12K depreciation reserve for O/H; with the SMA = engine your=20 out-of-pocket total will be about $112K.  Most of us don't plan on = having=20 our planes for 3000 hours, anyway.  The only wild card I see is = that if=20 (when?) the sudden edict from EPA comes, banning lead in avgas, the = turbo diesel=20 might look pretty good.  Noise level is supposed to be lower, since = the=20 diesel turns its prop at 2200rpm.  On the negative side, it's=20 still unproven as far as actually having installed, flying engines = make=20 TBO.
 
    I wonder what the = thinking=20 was at Maule and Cirrus, both of whom apparently are bringing out = SMA-powered=20 models?  Maybe SMA is going to give them a better price, but I = found some=20 references to an $80K cost for the diesel option in a Maule. =20 Whoof.
 
    = Thoughts?
 
Jim Cameron
Medina, TX
(Legacy deposit mailed)
 
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C30D6B.763125A0--