Harmut I agree with you on the computer thing. To drive and monitor my engine, I prefer the simple, mechanical systems, like magnetos, steam gages, gravity fuel feed, etc. to their electrical / computerized counterparts. And, no, I am not a mechanical caveman. I happen to be an Electrical Engineer and PE, with a MEE in Electronics and Computers. Electronic toys have their place. I do carry two handheld GPS units, a handheld COM backup, a traffic detector, and a SPOT. But, the engine? That's something else... Just an opinion!!! Eliacim
----- Original Message ----- From: Hartmut Beil To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 3:00 PM Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] New Engine..... The lightest O-235 weighs 243-247 lbs. dry. A C-85 weighs 180 lb dry, the C-90 comes along with 188lb dry and the O-200 is listed with 190 lb dry weight. Even if you subtract the 40 pounds weight loss of the LSA version, it is still heavier than a O-200. Remember, for a full electronic ignition and a fuel injection, you will need a power backup source which usually requires a double alternator & battery installation. For flying purposes one needs some redundancy. Now you'll gain these 40 lbs again. I am working with computers on a daily basis. I would not hang my life on a computer controlled system. The problem with those is that they crash without warning, while a mechanical system like a carburetor usually shows signs before a total failure. One can usually limb home. Unless the control cable breaks, but this can happen to an electronic system too - a throttle-body injector unit also needs a cable. Now think again about how to alter the mounting points of your Ercoupe and the nose bowl and cowling. The latter needs to be redesigned, since the starter ring on the Lycoming won't fit in our Ercoupes. Hartmut ----- Original Message ----- From: Ralph Finch To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 8:27 PM Subject: RE: [ercoupe-tech] New Engine..... 40 lbs lighter.than an O-235. How does that compare to an O-200 or C-85 (whatever engine you have now)? My guess is, a huge hassle for modest gains. Ralph Finch ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Willis Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 10:17 AM To: Chris; [email protected] Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] New Engine..... Well, 40 lbs lighter is going to screw up the weight and balance.... On 3/8/08 18:10, "Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How does the Lyc 0-235 bolt up to the Ercoupe engine mount? Would this be a good avenue for us to try and get approvals to re-engine our planes? LYCOMING'S NEW LSA ENGINE <http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1178-full.html#198502> For light airframes, Lycoming's 100-horsepower O-235 series has proven a durable choice and now the company is updating it for the emerging LSA market with the new IO-233. The O-235 serves as the basis for this new engine, but it has electronic ignition, a throttle-body injector unit and redesigned induction plumbing, according to Mike Kraft, Lycoming's chief engineer. The powerplant was also placed on a diet and is 40 pounds lighter than the original O-235. For durability, it also sports the roller tappets Lycoming has been installing in most of its new engines. The rollers reduce cam wear and spalling. Chris restoring 99674, year to go? owned 99701 in 1972 '--o-O-o--' [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ercoupe.co.uk Alon A2 Aircoupe A-188 G-HARY --
