----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----
Ed. The problem lies in the engine-propeller combination. The O-200 is only available with a climb prop. I assume the 125hp engine would have a similar climb prop. You need to run the engine at higher rpms to stay at speed. That will consume more gas. Also the higher horsepower is produced with a bigger engine - more cubic inches will eat more gas, no matter what. So it comes that the C75 is taking less than 5 Gallons and the C85 more than 5 Gallons on average. I can't speak for the O-200, since I haven't flown one but reported are over 7 Gallons and I assume you would have a hard time to get the 125 hp engine to fly at 7 Gallons in cruise like the website claims. Sure , the bigger engine will give you more climb. If this is what you really need, I would say go for it. But one should be aware that it is a trade off like always in aviation. Hartmut ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ed Burkhead" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Coupe-List" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 3:20 PM Subject: RE: [COUPERS-FLYIN] Franklin 125 hp engine in an Ercoupe?? > ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]---- > > > > Hartmut, et. al., > > How much actual difference is there in fuel consumption between > > a. 75 hp engine in a Coupe flying 100 mph > > b. 85 hp engine in a Coupe flying 100 mph > > c. 100 hp engine in a Coupe flying 100 mph > > d. 125 hp engine in a Coupe flying 100 mph > > ??? > > I'm thinking fuel consumption will relate closely to the energy being > expended. > > Hartmut is right that a Coupe wouldn't speed up very much by adding a > 125 hp engine. A Florida Coupe owner tried that about 15 years or so > ago - he reported it climbed like and angel but didn't go much faster. > He added a second fuel tank in each wing for 18 extra gallons. > > Yet, couldn't you use the extra power to improve climb, then slow down > to the same old cruise speeds and get good range by not using > significantly more fuel? > > About the engine weight, the Franklin website says: > "The 4A-235 weighs within a few pounds of an 0-200 when the engine are > comparably equipped, yet it is rated at 125 HP." > > Yet, Teledyne Continental's lists the O-200 weight dry basic engine as > 170.18 lb., while Franklin lists theirs as 206 lb. It seems like 36 lb. > is significant. Still, the extra power would get you off the ground > quicker and lift you faster. Doing what else you could for lightness > during the change like a lighter starter, mags, etc., might make up some > of the weight difference. > > > Ed Burkhead > http://edburkhead.com/ > ed -at- edburkheadQQQ.com (change -at- and remove the QQQ) > > > > > ========================================================================== == == > To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm > Search the archives on http://escribe.com/aviation/coupers/ > > > ========================================================================== ==== To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm Search the archives on http://escribe.com/aviation/coupers/
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
