As John said, they're scarce, but I can tell you that the C-90 is probably the
best of the continentals for the coupe. Balance of power and economy. Far
better than the O-200 and less of a pain to install.
----- Original Message -----
From: Hartmut Beil
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; ety
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Re: C-85 with O-200 crankshaft and other engine
changes.
Why focus on the O-200 ?
Admitted , these engines are widely available and will be used on Cessnas
LSA. You even can buy them new from Continental as I understand.
But the better fit for our ERcoupe airframe is the little brother of the
O-200, the C-90.
The C-90 uses the same crankshaft and pistons as the O-200, but develops its
power at a much lower rpm.
That way, you can have a longer prop, which is as I understand desirable.
And the engine is certified for uses in Ercoupes already, allowing for a wide
range of props. No additional engineering data is needed.
The C90 should use less gas than the O-200, since its not running that fast.
There are a lot of positives for that engine. Why is it so neglected?
I want one in my Coupe.
Hartmut
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Burkhead
To: ety
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 7:46 PM
Subject: RE: [ercoupe-tech] Re: C-85 with O-200 crankshaft and the FAA
Mike wrote:
> It is my opinion that this is an opportunity in a small way. All you
> have to do is make every issue or change a safety issue. It makes it
> a little more difficult for them to reject something that purports to
> make the plane safer. JMO. Mike @C35
Mike,
You might be on to something, there, Mike.
If anyone were to submit a one-time form 337 requesting installation of an
O-200 on a 415-C or 415-CD, it might be useful to include something like
this as the first paragraph:
***********************
Though Ercoupes meet the minimum climb needed for certification, the climb
on this model of Ercoupe with a C-75 or C-85 engine is marginal for safety.
Other installers of the O-200 engine report significant improvement in climb
resulting from the engine change from C-85 to O-200. However, consistent
reports indicate that the cruise speeds of this model stay roughly the same
with the O-200 engine and this propeller combination. This engine change is
requested specifically to improve safety.
***********************
I don't know if it'd help or if they'd want documentation of these
assertions.
Maybe we need to collect performance data and notarized statements from
current O-200 owners to help future upgraders.
What do you experts think?
Ed
Ed Burkhead
http://edburkhead.com East Peoria, Illinois
ed -at- edburkhead???.com (change -at- to @ and remove "???")
