Backcountry Pilot • Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

Lycoming, Continental, Hartzell, McCauley, or any broad spectrum drive system component used on multiple type.
45 postsPage 1 of 31, 2, 3

Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

Howdy,

As some of you may know, my grandpa had gotten sick and did not have the chance to prepare his 1961 185 for long term storage. Fast-forward a twenty years and I am getting really close to getting the airplane in a shop to turn the airplane into a real nice bird again.

Anyways, the airplane has sat for a little while being somewhat disassembled. I am almost certain that the airplane will need to get an engine rebuild, as some of the fuel lines and surrounding parts in the firewall have gotten decently corroded. After a few forum posts and phone calls, I had been recommended to upgrade from the original IO-470 to an IO-550 with an MT three blade by a couple of people that are smarter than me when it comes to airplanes.

From my research =P~ I have concluded that a getting a rebuild is going to cost about thirty large, while just buying the IO-550 would cost about forty not including supporting "mods" like the new prop or engine mount. This is a tough situation for me because I really want to upgrade the panel (like really badly) with some expensive Garmin stuff that will probably add to the resale value if the time comes, something along the lines of a G500 and a GTN650 (gotta one up Fireball ya know!)

So what I ask of my fellow airplane people, if you were in my situation with a little bit of cash to spend what would you do to your beloved Skywagon? G500 + GTN650 + EDM900 + IO-470 + MT or EDM900 + IO-550 + MT? Funny idea, buy another airplane to put the avionics in and keep the 470 add the MT and do a very light weight VFR panel not like I am at 1680 empty right now anyways :lol:


Thanks guys!
pilotryan offline
User avatar
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:58 pm
Location: Great Lakes
Aircraft: C185 / C310R
Falcon 900B

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

IO550+MT!!! just sign for it. its only money!
dudestickle offline
User avatar
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 6:14 pm
Location: Fallon
FindMeSpot URL: https://login.findmespot.com/spot-main- ... /list.html
Aircraft: 182heavy

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

First, assuming the engine isn't too near to recommended TBO, get someone to pull a couple cylinders, and inspect them. They'll be able to look at the cam shaft while its apart. If that works out, pull all the tappets to be sure that they and the cam will be reliable. You may get a few years use from the existing engine, giving you time to get to know the airplane, and prioritize your wish list. If the avionics that you have now work, fly them for a while.


If or when you need to do an engine change, I just changed an IO-520 TP an IO-550 and MT three blade. I'm going to assume that you'll be on wheels, not floats. Buy the 550 factory reman. Put the MT two blade prop on it. Stick with the factory engine mount. The performance gain that I've seen has been amazing. My cylinders had been cleaned up by Lycon. I'm having a hard time believing the difference it made, I can't rationalize that porting could make this big a difference. I may be pulling as much as 330-350 hp based on dynamometer tests that have been performed on similar engines. That said, even the factory 300 + power will knock your socks off!
Pinecone offline
User avatar
Posts: 996
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 6:37 pm
Location: Airdrie
Aircraft: Cessna A185F

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

If it were me, I'd put the powerplant FAR ahead of the panel.....UNLESS you are planning to use the airplane for serious IFR soon.

You have several options when it comes to engines. You could overhaul the IO 470, which would limit horsepower some, but still a good solid engine, with the right prop.

You could upgrade to an IO-520, which offers a bit more power, for takeoff or short term use.

Or, you could go with the full meal deal and install an IO 550...... The IO 550 is the engine that these Cessnas always wanted, frankly. Buckets of power compared to the 470/520, smooth as silk and running LOP you can run at 13 gph all week. The 550 also turns slower at max power, so quieter than a screaming 520.

So, if twer me, I'd probably go with the 550, and with any money left over, I'd install a JPI engine analyzer and maybe an Aspen PFD.

You may eventually decide to operate the plane in IMC, but you'll be using that power EVERY flight.

MTV
mtv offline
Knowledge Base Author
User avatar
Posts: 10514
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 1:47 am
Location: Bozeman

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

IO-550 + MT
Squash offline
Supporter
Posts: 605
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 12:46 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

I would suggest finding out if the existing IO-470 had some life left in it. If so, get the airplane back together as is, and just fly it for a while before going hog-wild on it. You'll have a better idea what changes you want to make, plus you'll be better able to appreciate any improvements later.
Last edited by hotrod180 on Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
hotrod180 offline
Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 10534
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 11:47 pm
Location: Port Townsend, WA
Cessna Skywagon -- accept no substitute!

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

dudestickle wrote:IO550+MT!!! just sign for it. its only money!

It is isn't it!

Pinecone wrote:First, assuming the engine isn't too near to recommended TBO, get someone to pull a couple cylinders, and inspect them. They'll be able to look at the cam shaft while its apart. If that works out, pull all the tappets to be sure that they and the cam will be reliable. You may get a few years use from the existing engine, giving you time to get to know the airplane, and prioritize your wish list. If the avionics that you have now work, fly them for a while.

Last time I checked the log's the engine was at 800 or so hours with 2700 total. I would like to save the engine, because from what I can tell it is the one that came when it left Kansas. I will get the cylinder's checked when I have it hauled up to the shop that will work on it.

mtv wrote:If it were me, I'd put the powerplant FAR ahead of the panel.....UNLESS you are planning to use the airplane for serious IFR soon.

You have several options when it comes to engines. You could overhaul the IO 470, which would limit horsepower some, but still a good solid engine, with the right prop.

You could upgrade to an IO-520, which offers a bit more power, for takeoff or short term use.

Or, you could go with the full meal deal and install an IO 550...... The IO 550 is the engine that these Cessnas always wanted, frankly. Buckets of power compared to the 470/520, smooth as silk and running LOP you can run at 13 gph all week. The 550 also turns slower at max power, so quieter than a screaming 520.

So, if twer me, I'd probably go with the 550, and with any money left over, I'd install a JPI engine analyzer and maybe an Aspen PFD.

You may eventually decide to operate the plane in IMC, but you'll be using that power EVERY flight.

MTV

IO-550 or bust! I really do not know why my grandpa does not want to ever hear a word about 550, but everyone I talk to on any wagon related page absolutely loves it. If I were to upgrade I'd go straight up to the 550 with the EDM900.

Squash wrote:IO-550 + MT

Squash knows whats up!

hotrod180 wrote:A bit off point, but....I know you're a young guy, and it doesn't seem like you've mentioned your flying experience. Might I ask about that? Reason being, a new guy at my airport is a rusty pilot- hasn't flown in about 20 years. Don't think he had a lot of experience before he stopped either. He bought an RV7A a while ago, and had a local RV pilot/CFI flying with him. He hadn't even got to where he could solo the thing when he decided to tear the panel apart & convert it to all glass. Not very handy, so he hired the work out. It's still torn apart now, a year later. Personally I woulda recommended that he at least get solo'd and do some flying in the thing, to make sure he really fit his needs (vs a 172, 182, Bonanza, or whatever)- as well as to have a better idea what mods would really be useful.

Sorry to be a buzz killer, but in your case, I would suggest finding out if the existing IO-470 had some life left in it. If so, get the airplane back together as is, and just fly it for a while before going hog-wild on it. You'll have a better idea what changes you want to make, plus you'll be better able to appreciate any improvements later.

No need to apologize! I have about a "year or so" of flying in, as in I started last year and have tried to fly at-least once a week but had taken four months off due to some family stuff getting in the way.

I appreciate everyone's opinions on the matter. Figuring out this stuff can be and has been really stressful!
pilotryan offline
User avatar
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:58 pm
Location: Great Lakes
Aircraft: C185 / C310R
Falcon 900B

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

Another vote here for the 550.

I fly a Cirrus (let the jokes begin) and every time I take off in it the power makes me want to put a 550 in my 180. Early on in my 180 search I had a chance to buy a 61 185 with a 550 (at a great price) and choked and missed the opportunity. I still regret it.

Another thing to consider with fancy avionics is the annual bill to keep everything updated. You can buy a lot of gas for what it costs.
BTV offline
User avatar
Posts: 124
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:11 pm
Location: Amarillo
FindMeSpot URL: https://share.delorme.com/BrandtVermillion

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

My 185 has the 260hp and when it hits TBO I'm putting a 520D in it with a 88in McCauley 3 blade. The 550 is WAY more expensive and burns more gas, unless your flying at max gross all the time it isn't worth it. As far as the MT goes there fine if yor on floats and modest off airport stuff, but one willow branch will shred that prop to pieces, I've seen it. The MTs are faster but don't pull as hard as a Black Mac. MTV is right you defiantly want to invest in the engine first avionics second. I don't know where your located but the best IFR avionics in the world can't help you if you can't shed ice which is why IFR without de-Ice system in AK is a very bad idea.
C185D offline
User avatar
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2016 7:13 am
Location: Wasilla

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

Hands down go with the 550. Go with the hartzell blended or black Mac props.
Quickdraw1 offline
User avatar
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 3:40 am
Location: Omaha

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

Some thoughts:

With "a year or so of flying", how many hours is that? Are you working on an IR yet? Do you have a high performance endorsement? Do you have a tailwheel endorsement? What are your long term flying plans?

As I recall, you're fresh out of HS and just beginning your college experience. I don't mean this as any sort of derogatory statement, but for most of us barely into adult life and also barely into aviation, we didn't know butkis what we really wanted to do. Sometimes what we thought we wanted to do while still in HS wasn't anything like what we ended up doing. Similarly, what we thought we wanted/needed in aviation turned out to be nothing like reality, either.

When I was just out of HS, the only reason I decided to try pre-law was because my friend Jerry suggested it, rather than going "undeclared" for a major. I sure didn't plan to go on to law school--in fact, I really had no idea what I wanted to do with my life, other than marry my HS sweetheart and be a success at something. Never in my wildest dreams did I think I'd retire after 46 3/4 years of practicing law in both the USAF and civilian life.

When I arrived in Laramie after I'd left the USAF, I had all of about 85 hours total time. Since I'd flown what to me was a "high powered" 172 on occasion in Anchorage, I thought that that was what I wanted, to haul my family consisting of wife, 2 kids, and dog. And of course, it should be fully IFR equipped, because eventually I'd get my IR. My first flight in a 172 in Laramie disabused me of that idea, though, because there's a lot of difference between density altitudes of the near sea level airports I knew compared to Laramie's almost 7300' elevation. What we ended up with was a late model (1970--this was a long time ago) 182, IFR equipped. It had 360 and 90 channel navcoms, no glideslope, an ADF, and a transponder. We added a DME. Yet for several years, my partners and I flew it all over the country, as far west as Los Angeles, southwest to Phoenix, east to eastern Ohio, northwest to Idaho's mountain country, much of it IFR. But that airplane today wouldn't even be legal to fly on instruments, as technology has changed so much.

Unless you have a money tree growing in your backyard, if it were my decision to make, I'd say first find out the status of the existing engine. Although it's been sitting awhile, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's in need of very much. Find a good A&P/IA and follow his/her advice. The stock engine in a 185 is still quite a screamer at your local elevations. In fact, it's pretty darned good at much higher elevation airports. If it doesn't need replacing or overhauling, don't do it. And likewise, the stock prop, unless it's in need of overhauling, works just fine.

Then before spending beaucoup bucks on the panel, wait until you've got your IR to decide what it is that you really want. Granted that what Cessna stuck in there back when the airplane was built isn't the best for today, and what your grampa may have added or changed before leaving the project, you don't need to turn it into glass to make it entirely usable--and technology is still evolving. But you will have to have ADS-B Out in your area, by January 1, 2020, which isn't all that far away. To take advantage of the many, many GPS approaches which have come into being since the airplane was built, once you have your IR, you'll need an IFR approach certified GPS, such as a Garmin 650. But again, you need to learn to fly that stuff before you can use it, and what's available today may not be what you want tomorrow.

Cary
Cary offline
User avatar
Posts: 3801
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:49 pm
Location: Fort Collins, CO
"I have slipped the surly bonds of earth..., put out my hand and touched the face of God." J.G. Magee

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

This is a no brainer:

Sell the airplane.

Buy a 120 or J3 and actually learn how to FLY.

Invest the rest of the money and watch it grow into enough to buy a kerosene burner by the time you're 50, by which time a G500 will be about as valuable as floppy disks and mimeograph machines.
Hammer offline
KB and Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 2094
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 9:15 am
Location: 742 Evergreen Terrace

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

Give us enough time and thread drift and we'll prepare some girl advice for you too.
Zzz offline
Janitorial Staff
User avatar
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: northern
Aircraft: Swiveling desk chair
Half a century spent proving “it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

Zzz wrote:Give us enough time and thread drift and we'll prepare some girl advice for you too.


Well, as the resident expert on creating failed relationships, I think I'll bow out of that one. :shock:

Cary
Cary offline
User avatar
Posts: 3801
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:49 pm
Location: Fort Collins, CO
"I have slipped the surly bonds of earth..., put out my hand and touched the face of God." J.G. Magee

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

BTV wrote:Another vote here for the 550.

I fly a Cirrus (let the jokes begin) and every time I take off in it the power makes me want to put a 550 in my 180. Early on in my 180 search I had a chance to buy a 61 185 with a 550 (at a great price) and choked and missed the opportunity. I still regret it.

Another thing to consider with fancy avionics is the annual bill to keep everything updated. You can buy a lot of gas for what it costs.

A Cirrus a what? :lol: I hear that they are great airplanes! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOqQtB2Pux4 I just had to link that..

C185D wrote:My 185 has the 260hp and when it hits TBO I'm putting a 520D in it with a 88in McCauley 3 blade. The 550 is WAY more expensive and burns more gas, unless your flying at max gross all the time it isn't worth it. As far as the MT goes there fine if yor on floats and modest off airport stuff, but one willow branch will shred that prop to pieces, I've seen it. The MTs are faster but don't pull as hard as a Black Mac. MTV is right you defiantly want to invest in the engine first avionics second. I don't know where your located but the best IFR avionics in the world can't help you if you can't shed ice which is why IFR without de-Ice system in AK is a very bad idea.

I have one friend who swears by his 180 with an IO520 conversion with an 80 inch three blade. Once your airplane hits TBO I would really love to hear what gains you get from the 470 to the 520.
I agree with you there on the fuel burn for the 550! I would like to try and keep hourly costs down by as much as possible, but these are big bore continentals. I am located in Minnesota permanently for now until I part time live in Texas during the winters, haven't had much problems with ice last winter in the flight schools Skyhawk.

Quickdraw1 wrote:Hands down go with the 550. Go with the hartzell blended or black Mac props.

I do not have much experience with either prop, do you have a preferred prop?

Cary wrote:Some thoughts:

With "a year or so of flying", how many hours is that? Are you working on an IR yet? Do you have a high performance endorsement? Do you have a tailwheel endorsement? What are your long term flying plans?

As I recall, you're fresh out of HS and just beginning your college experience. I don't mean this as any sort of derogatory statement, but for most of us barely into adult life and also barely into aviation, we didn't know butkis what we really wanted to do. Sometimes what we thought we wanted to do while still in HS wasn't anything like what we ended up doing. Similarly, what we thought we wanted/needed in aviation turned out to be nothing like reality, either.

When I was just out of HS, the only reason I decided to try pre-law was because my friend Jerry suggested it, rather than going "undeclared" for a major. I sure didn't plan to go on to law school--in fact, I really had no idea what I wanted to do with my life, other than marry my HS sweetheart and be a success at something. Never in my wildest dreams did I think I'd retire after 46 3/4 years of practicing law in both the USAF and civilian life.

When I arrived in Laramie after I'd left the USAF, I had all of about 85 hours total time. Since I'd flown what to me was a "high powered" 172 on occasion in Anchorage, I thought that that was what I wanted, to haul my family consisting of wife, 2 kids, and dog. And of course, it should be fully IFR equipped, because eventually I'd get my IR. My first flight in a 172 in Laramie disabused me of that idea, though, because there's a lot of difference between density altitudes of the near sea level airports I knew compared to Laramie's almost 7300' elevation. What we ended up with was a late model (1970--this was a long time ago) 182, IFR equipped. It had 360 and 90 channel navcoms, no glideslope, an ADF, and a transponder. We added a DME. Yet for several years, my partners and I flew it all over the country, as far west as Los Angeles, southwest to Phoenix, east to eastern Ohio, northwest to Idaho's mountain country, much of it IFR. But that airplane today wouldn't even be legal to fly on instruments, as technology has changed so much.

Unless you have a money tree growing in your backyard, if it were my decision to make, I'd say first find out the status of the existing engine. Although it's been sitting awhile, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's in need of very much. Find a good A&P/IA and follow his/her advice. The stock engine in a 185 is still quite a screamer at your local elevations. In fact, it's pretty darned good at much higher elevation airports. If it doesn't need replacing or overhauling, don't do it. And likewise, the stock prop, unless it's in need of overhauling, works just fine.

Then before spending beaucoup bucks on the panel, wait until you've got your IR to decide what it is that you really want. Granted that what Cessna stuck in there back when the airplane was built isn't the best for today, and what your grampa may have added or changed before leaving the project, you don't need to turn it into glass to make it entirely usable--and technology is still evolving. But you will have to have ADS-B Out in your area, by January 1, 2020, which isn't all that far away. To take advantage of the many, many GPS approaches which have come into being since the airplane was built, once you have your IR, you'll need an IFR approach certified GPS, such as a Garmin 650. But again, you need to learn to fly that stuff before you can use it, and what's available today may not be what you want tomorrow.

Cary

I want to say thanks for writing this up, I am always looking for feedback like this. Right now I went through a 141 school and have about 45 hours. It is not a whole lot of experience, but it is a start to hopefully a long life full of flying. I do not have my IR, tailwheel or high performance endorsement as of now. The good thing is that my instructor that I flew with instructs on all of the above, I do not know if he does them all at the same time though.

I am a month out of HS and a month into College. You bring up a great point. My views on life and aviation have changed so much in the past year. At first I wanted to be an Airline pilot that flew all over the world as most kids wanted to, then as I grew up I wanted to fly domestic 737 stuff. Fast forward a couple of years and all I want to do right now is get tailwheel, IR and high performance and go from there. I would love to instruct in the near future, as my flightschool has a program for their instructors to get sic time in their King Airs.

Sounds like you guys got a really nice 182! I know my grandfather took my mom around the country in that airplane when she was a little kid on flights that sound a lot like the ones that you and your friends did with your 182.

In regards to the 470, I wont know the condition of the engine until it gets a cylinder or two pulled. The thing that scares me is that corrosion had occurred on some parts that were non structural but were in the engine compartment. We still think that the high humidity in that area played a role and that we might have a surprise when we pull the engine apart. I wish I had a money tree, but because my mom was born the year the airplane was made and has flown in it since then makes her want to split the costs of repair and upgrades with me.

Talking about the panel and spending big bucks, she is the one who is insiting on me getting the airplane equipped with some good avionics. Granted all that I want is a GTN and some gauges and layout that looked good. We are still working out the details for the 2020 deadline, I like the idea of a remote mount transponder and the GTN650 controlling that and the radios. It will save some space in the panel for various other upgrades.

Thanks again man!

Hammer wrote:This is a no brainer:

Sell the airplane.

Buy a 120 or J3 and actually learn how to FLY.

Invest the rest of the money and watch it grow into enough to buy a kerosene burner by the time you're 50, by which time a G500 will be about as valuable as floppy disks and mimeograph machines.

I have thought about it believe me but it is just something I am unwilling to do. The story is that my mother and the airplane were born in the same month. She grew up with that plane practically as a big sister.

Want to know a sad story? My late father had an L-4 Grasshopper with an original brody hook https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brodie_landing_system that is/was our plane that is in the photo, and that is Rick working on something at the Oshkosh show. Anyway his side of the family decided to sell it for dirt cheap before me and my mothers side of the family could even realize what had just happened. I would really like to own a J3, but selling the 185 in its current condition would not pay for one. My grandapa really wants me to buy one when I get a chance, so I am happy to hear the same thing he always tells me from another pilot.

Cary wrote:
Zzz wrote:Give us enough time and thread drift and we'll prepare some girl advice for you too.


Well, as the resident expert on creating failed relationships, I think I'll bow out of that one. :shock:

Cary

I need all of the advice I can get. Apparently being a pilot and driving a Chevelle did not get me very far in terms of picking up the ladies :(
pilotryan offline
User avatar
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:58 pm
Location: Great Lakes
Aircraft: C185 / C310R
Falcon 900B

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

An IO 550 won't burn any more fuel than an IO 470 IF you run them at equivalent power. Fuel burn is directly proportional to power output.

As I noted earlier in this thread, I've run a LOT of hours on IO 550s at 13 gallons per hour, by running lean of peak, which that engine likes a lot.

Yes, if you run the IO 550 at wide open throttle and high rpm all the time, you'll burn a lot of gas, but you don't need to do that. The advantage of that engine is that it gives you massive power for takeoff, but allows you to dial the fuel flows back very nicely in cruise.

Of course, that requires discipline on the part of the pilot, and ham fisted pilots who refuse to study up a bit on the engine will do some damage to that engine....but the same pilots will do as much or more damage to an IO 520 or IO 470......

Any of these engines will do the job. Mostly, it's a matter of how much money you are willing to spend getting there.

Good luck.

MTV
mtv offline
Knowledge Base Author
User avatar
Posts: 10514
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 1:47 am
Location: Bozeman

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

mtv wrote:An IO 550 won't burn any more fuel than an IO 470 IF you run them at equivalent power. Fuel burn is directly proportional to power output.

As I noted earlier in this thread, I've run a LOT of hours on IO 550s at 13 gallons per hour, by running lean of peak, which that engine likes a lot.

Yes, if you run the IO 550 at wide open throttle and high rpm all the time, you'll burn a lot of gas, but you don't need to do that. The advantage of that engine is that it gives you massive power for takeoff, but allows you to dial the fuel flows back very nicely in cruise.

Of course, that requires discipline on the part of the pilot, and ham fisted pilots who refuse to study up a bit on the engine will do some damage to that engine....but the same pilots will do as much or more damage to an IO 520 or IO 470......

Any of these engines will do the job. Mostly, it's a matter of how much money you are willing to spend getting there.

Good luck.

MTV


So let me get this straight if I run my io-470 LOP at 21-2300 and get 9gph then a io-550 can go down to 9gph as well? You would have to run it around 17-2100 and even then I don't know if that would get it to 9gph. The 550 is a great engine but last time I checked just the STC was 2500$ not including all the extras that add up quick. The Kenmore io-520D STC is 400$ and requires new fuel flow Gauge, and tachometer. The only benefit to the 550 is performance at max gross, on floats or high DA, if money's not an issue then by all means do the 550, but IMHO it's not worth the money.
C185D offline
User avatar
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2016 7:13 am
Location: Wasilla

Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

I assume what MTV was trying to get across is that fuel burn will be the same for the same amount of work done, not literally at the same power settings. Fly both at 140mph in the same aircraft and fuel burn will be similar if not slightly better mpg for the 550. The bonus is the 550 has the capacity to go faster, climb faster and get off the ground loaded quicker IF you want or need to use it (and the extra fuel burn).

P.S I think Pponk io 550 STC is $1700 and has the same requirement for gauge recalibration as a io 520 conversion would have.
NZMaule offline
User avatar
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: New Zealand
Aircraft: Cessna A185F

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

Want to make noise and run off your neighbors? Run a 88" 3-blade McCauley propeller at 2850 RPM.

Want to scare yourself? Do a simulated engine out with a 88" 3-blade McCauley and see how far you glide.

An IO-550 making 300+ HP at 2700 RPM is quieter and pulls hard with an 80-82" prop of any variety. Then run LOP all the way home.

Oh, almost forgot. Blonde's are more fun.
Squash offline
Supporter
Posts: 605
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 12:46 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: Rebuild IO470F or new IO550D

deleted
Last edited by hotrod180 on Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
hotrod180 offline
Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 10534
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 11:47 pm
Location: Port Townsend, WA
Cessna Skywagon -- accept no substitute!

DISPLAY OPTIONS

Next
45 postsPage 1 of 31, 2, 3

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

Latest Features

Latest Knowledge Base