In another email, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >Some thoughts about big engines... >So, I think I am right that the 0-200 STC limits the engine output so that >these speeds cannot be attained - by limiting the prop that can be legally >used.....
I think the prop is pitched to limit the rpm, not the airspeed. I guess you could limit the pitch to something that would give good climb but crappy top speed, but I don't think an extra 35 hp would cause much of an increase in cruise speed. My M-10 has a C-90, and it only flies at 90 knots. Of course, that's at 75% power. Exceeding Vne is generally caused from going downhill too fast (sometimes even with the engine at idle). You couuld say that a big engine would put you closer to Vne in normal flight, giving you less time to react if you get in an unusual attitude, but I don't think it would be much different than a Bonanza in that regard. OK, maybe that was a bad example. How about a 210? More horsepower doesn't add a whole lot of top speed, but it makes the thing climb a lot better. There's a saying that says something like "Aerodynamics gives you speed, and horsepower gives you more climb" or something like that. Personally, I would LOVE to have a better climb rate. This thing is a dog. Sometimes it barely does 300 feet/min. There's a web page that has some info and a calculator about this: http://www.sierra.net/skyranch/frame1.htm It says that increasing the horsepower from 100 to 120 would only increase the airspeed about 6-7 knots, and that's at full power in straight flight. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Dold ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://home.pacbell.net/sdold/ Say NO to useless over-quoting ----------------------------------------------------------------
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
