Well aware of shock cooling of tugs and the advatages of liquid cooled engines although liquid cooled is significantly heavier(?).
This engine was designed to be a plug 'n' play replacement (more or less) for the Lycoming. So from many perspectives - power, weight, slightly quieter, great fuel burn and TBO, this engine has advantages and could be fitted to a Pawnee with relative ease (compared to fitting a cooling system - or I am seriously mistaken). Anyway, I thought it would be worth bringing to the attention of the tug community who would want to improve their fuel economy without mucking around too much with shoe horning a cooling system in. Speaking of cooling systems - any news on how the Subaru H6 tug in QLD is progressing? > Gotta be liquid cooled, Anthony, or we are still in the > dark ages. Its not just the thermal shock imposed on tug > engines specifically that favours jacketed engines, the > internal tolerances can be sharpened considerably due to > the limited temperature changes, improving power, > emissions, wear and overall reliablilty. Noise output also > goes down, cleaning is simpler although there is an > argument for reliabililty due to coolant system failure > (more bits, basically) I am not currently up to speed, > however a few years back (8-10) both Cummins and GM / > Detroit heavy motors stated their #1 engine failure cause > was coolant system fault. Current engine managments > systems can get you home / safe with a full coolant > system loss, albeit at a significantly reduced power > output. I do like the 3000 hour bit though.... > > Wayne Carter > _______________________________________________ > Aus-soaring mailing list > [email protected] > To check or change subscription details, visit: > http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
