X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:33:55 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from web54307.mail.re2.yahoo.com ([206.190.49.117] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3c3) with SMTP id 4026285 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:53:02 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.190.49.117; envelope-from=mattinlosangeles@yahoo.com Received: (qmail 90389 invoked by uid 60001); 17 Dec 2009 19:52:26 -0000 DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=olsqaOfi5MsKwVy9UYrX6619er0Ne3gBvd72k8putgKr5tEQ66lLxi6raNxi7Vnkl1Ir2rxUcXzGU4O98c3lMechZgLlSK4u5GoDXFZHCgJadK2nFN0vv9whsWgpdvN6lPxEx4A0lGYRvlCOa7quiDySlrONoFpNrWUf+jBqVEI=; X-Original-Message-ID: <329089.89579.qm@web54307.mail.re2.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: 71LmmAAVM1k_XSp9M0ziZDXFegfly9W7FS0cuYUX_U7wpX4zU7kinb0ZaaHReyx_w21BALXgmUfwfQAvEveeXbsB_LcmC0HqR.80u.Z7BG9p1ZmtQojZIQrKGU6lck_.JXt44dAVMZa4l2VGpDACheumvYBgy5lj.BHYU2uEJEUQJyvr1dnvYiKsmskGfQg4lK.bc4kJERdS3EAZrziPjCCDuC1yhvpdSJOxl0rnEWhhuAGi5suZYdbH_GrDS8EZ84keKFqYUtchPUkJe_VVxX1arPt3yw6g0BnioKmVcDRDwvzwrIrIBpbvVGbGxaMUiPWkNBIyseFrGv562Bm3WYGp Received: from [12.155.58.181] by web54307.mail.re2.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:52:26 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/240.3 YahooMailWebService/0.8.100.260964 References: X-Original-Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:52:26 -0800 (PST) From: Matt losangeles Subject: Re: [LML] Re: io-550 vs. tsio-550 differences? X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-143344608-1261079546=:89579" --0-143344608-1261079546=:89579 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Gary,=0A=0AI am planning on a manual wastegate because I am a cheapskate= . I used to have one on my Mooney and it worked great. I would really like = to have intercoolers because I saw some really high induction air temps on = my Mooney. It wasn't until you got up to 20k or higher=A0though. Not having= them might make sense, it would save the cooling drag as you say.=A0I don'= t plan on flying above 21k feet (above this,=A0cannulas loose there effecti= veness on me and my girlfriend). I suppose I could try it without intercool= ers to begin with and add them after the fact. It would limit how quickly I= could climb to those high altitudes though. Of course by limit I am guessi= ng I would have to reduce my MP/boost/climb rate to 1500fpm from 2000fpm af= ter 12000 feet or so. Probably not that big a deal, I guess. Hmm. decisions= , decisions.=0A=0AMatt=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFro= m: Gary Casey =0ATo: lml@lancaironline.net=0ASent: Th= u, December 17, 2009 7:11:43 AM=0ASubject: [LML] Re: io-550 vs. tsio-550 di= fferences?=0A=0A=0AHere's another thought: =A0A lot of it might depend on y= our intended usage. =A0If you want to go really high (over 20K) and have ma= ximum performance you might want to consider getting the extra power of the= TSIO-550. =A0But if you, like me, might limit altitudes to less than 20K a= nd are more cost and fuel economy sensitive, then a lower tech solution mig= ht be in order. =A0I flew for many years behind a Lycoming O-540 that was t= urbonormalized (C-TR-182) and it worked quite well. =A0It didn't have an in= tercooler or automatic waste gate - the waste gate was connected to the thr= ottle linkage so there were no extra levers. =A0It was fed by a pressurized= carburetor, so that doesn't apply with a Continental. =A0So the question i= s, what's wrong with using a standard IO-550 with a turbo and manual waste = gate? =A0The Lycomings don't bother with a sniffle valve, so there isn't an= y difference between turbo, fuel injected, or naturally aspirated engines i= n that regard. =A0At 18,000 feet the use of an aftercooler has real, but marginal benefit, as t= he extra aerodynamic drag and pressure loss negate most of the charge-cooli= ng benefit. =A0Just a thought, suggesting a KISS methodology.=0AGary=0A=0A= =0AYes, but can you fit it into a Legacy cowling????=0A=0A----- Original Me= ssage ----- From: "George Braly" =0ATo: =0ASent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 10:02 AM=0ASubject: [LML] Re: i= o-550 vs. tsio-550 differences?=0A=0A=0AAh... you could buy a=A0 TN IO-550 = engine and have exactly what you want.=0A=0AIt already has all of that stuf= f you are worried about.=0A=0AIntercoolers, fuel pump, throttle, GAMIjector= (R) fuel injectors, pressurized magnetos, and all the little details.=0A=0A= There are over 900 of them flying, and parts support is superb (ask me how = I know).=0A=0AThey have better intercooler efficiencies than the TCM TSIO-5= 50.=0A=0AThey run on significantly less fuel=A0 than TCM TSIO-550s at the s= ame BHp.=0A=0AThey run cooler than a TCM TSIO-550 at the same BHp.=0A=0AThe= y can be made to run at VERY high horsepower (Sport Class winning BHp level= s at Reno if you find someone who really understands the engines and knows = how to get them set up right for that demanding activity.)=0A=0AAnd they ar= e able to use an electronic waste gate controller designed for that engine.= =0A=0AThere is a pending STC application with the FAA to authorize their us= e on certified aircraft with G100UL fuel.=0A=0AI know where one complete en= gine and turbo system is sitting, ready to be installed.=0A=0A. . . Just a = thought.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A=0A=0A --0-143344608-1261079546=:89579 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Gary,
=0A
 
=0A
I am plannin= g on a manual wastegate because I am a cheapskate. I used to have one on my= Mooney and it worked great. I would really like to have intercoolers becau= se I saw some really high induction air temps on my Mooney. It wasn't until= you got up to 20k or higher though. Not having them might make sense,= it would save the cooling drag as you say. I don't plan on flying abo= ve 21k feet (above this, cannulas loose there effectiveness on me and = my girlfriend). I suppose I could try it without intercoolers to begin with= and add them after the fact. It would limit how quickly I could climb to t= hose high altitudes though. Of course by limit I am guessing I would have t= o reduce my MP/boost/climb rate to 1500fpm from 2000fpm after 12000 feet or= so. Probably not that big a deal, I guess. Hmm. decisions, decisions.=0A
 
=0A
Matt
=0A

=0A
= =0A
=0AFrom: Gary Casey <casey.gary@yahoo.com>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
= Sent: Thu, December 17, 2009 7= :11:43 AM
Subject: [LML]= Re: io-550 vs. tsio-550 differences?

=0A
=0AHere's another thought:  A lot of it might depend on your intended u= sage.  If you want to go really high (over 20K) and have maximum perfo= rmance you might want to consider getting the extra power of the TSIO-550. =  But if you, like me, might limit altitudes to less than 20K and are m= ore cost and fuel economy sensitive, then a lower tech solution might be in= order.  I flew for many years behind a Lycoming O-540 that was turbon= ormalized (C-TR-182) and it worked quite well.  It didn't have an inte= rcooler or automatic waste gate - the waste gate was connected to the throt= tle linkage so there were no extra levers.  It was fed by a pressurize= d carburetor, so that doesn't apply with a Continental.  So the questi= on is, what's wrong with using a standard IO-550 with a turbo and manual wa= ste gate?  The Lycomings don't bother with a sniffle valve, so there i= sn't any difference between turbo, fuel injected, or naturally aspirated engines in that regard.  At 18,000 feet the use of an after= cooler has real, but marginal benefit, as the extra aerodynamic drag and pr= essure loss negate most of the charge-cooling benefit.  Just a thought= , suggesting a KISS methodology.
=0A
Gary
=0A
=0A

=0A=0A
Yes, but can you= fit it into a Legacy cowling????

----- Original Message ----- From:= "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
To: <lml= @lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 10:02 AMSubject: [LML] Re: io-550 vs. tsio-550 differences?


Ah... you = could buy a  TN IO-550 engine and have exactly what you want.

I= t already has all of that stuff you are worried about.

Intercoolers,= fuel pump, throttle, GAMIjector(R) fuel injectors, pressurized magnetos, a= nd all the little details.

There are over 900 of them flying, and pa= rts support is superb (ask me how I know).

They have better intercooler efficiencies than the TCM TSIO-= 550.

They run on significantly less fuel  than TCM TSIO-550s at= the same BHp.

They run cooler than a TCM TSIO-550 at the same BHp.<= BR>
They can be made to run at VERY high horsepower (Sport Class winning= BHp levels at Reno if you find someone who really understands the engines = and knows how to get them set up right for that demanding activity.)
And they are able to use an electronic waste gate controller designed for = that engine.

There is a pending STC application with the FAA to auth= orize their use on certified aircraft with G100UL fuel.

I know where= one complete engine and turbo system is sitting, ready to be installed.
. . . Just a thought.
=0A

=0A=
<= FONT size=3D2 face=3DTahoma>=0A
=0A
=0A


=0A=0A = --0-143344608-1261079546=:89579--