I've been keeping track of the LH-10 ELLIPSE and noticed besides the Rotax 912 they are also using Vija engines. In fact they have more offerings using the Vija engines (a French company, but so is the LH-10 ELLIPSE) than the Rotax. Total weight including PSRU is 193 lbs for 160 hp fuel injected turbo engine.

It took some searching to find their web page, but worth it. The base engine is a 1200 cc Suzuki 4 cylinder in line engine that has been around and improved for 30 years. I had this engine when it was new 30 years ago on a GS 1100E motorcycle and even back then it was a very smooth, powerful, and reliable engine. $27,000 is sure cheaper than the Rotax 914.

http://vija-engines.com/images/2010/Produits-2010.html

Now THOSE should be able to run car gas, with or without ethanol.
And there's TONS of performance parts out there for these engines. Very reliable, too.

Wonder if they use a chain drive or gear drive to the output layshaft.

Gear drive. What I like about the engine is the use of engine oil for temperature management. Everyone knows that wear happens when engine parts expand and contract at a different rate of their mating parts. No thermal shock. Another wear reduction is these engines were designed with 10,000 rpm in mind and are run at Rotax speeds, 5000~6000 rpm. If you could spin a Rotax to 10,000 without it gernading, it would be a 50 hr engine.

On the ships I've served on, the computer would take an hour to slowly ramp my engine order of "Full ahead sea speed" to take us from 14 kt to 19 kt to ensure even heating of engine parts under increasing power levels.

Interesting. I wonder what they do with the motorcycle gearbox and clutch.

For the comfort of the ears, the in-line cylinders produce a soft harmonious sound.

Don't you just love the French? "Pour le confort des oreilles" must be something idiomatic that just doesn't translate well. Anyway, hopefully heat rejection won't be an issue eh?

That engine is not the one from a GS1100E (although that was a great engine too and the basis for many drag bike engines), but is the engine from the GSX1100R and later was used in the 1200 Bandit. The GS engine was air cooled (as opposed to air/oil cooled) had a pressed crank, not forged, and racers usually welded the cranks up before hot rodding.

I haven't seen very much real success out of auto and moto engines in aircraft. Maybe this will be an exception.

littlewheelinback wrote:That engine is not the one from a GS1100E (although that was a great engine too and the basis for many drag bike engines), but is the engine from the GSX1100R and later was used in the 1200 Bandit. The GS engine was air cooled (as opposed to air/oil cooled) had a pressed crank, not forged, and racers usually welded the cranks up before hot rodding.

I haven't seen very much real success out of auto and moto engines in aircraft. Maybe this will be an exception.

Thanks for the education. I know my GS 1100 E wasn't oil cooled but didn't know if it later morphed into this engine, but as you pointed out, a whole new design. Temperature equalization is a good thing for hard working engines.

Since the original GSX-R 1100 made 158 peak HP at near redline (over 10,000 rpm) and the Bandit engine made less peak power (tuned for midrange power), I don't see how one of these engines geared to turn 6000 rpm would make anything close to 160hp. Probably in the 90-100 hp range. Durability at that rpm limit should be excellent though, these engines are very tough.

Random Bandit1200 dyno chart pulled from the web...

That dyno chart is probably measured at the rear wheel, so add 10% for crankshaft hp. It does give a pretty accurate picture of the hp. For this engine at 6000 rpm you'd be pretty lucky to get 100 hp even with some mods.

littlewheelinback wrote:I haven't seen very much real success out of auto and moto engines in aircraft. Maybe this will be an exception.

rotax?

As much as everyone loves to hate on Rotax, the 912 series engine is not and has never been a conversion. It was designed from the blank sheet as an aircraft engine. An argument could be made for the origin of some of their two-stroke motors, but I doubt that is what you were referring to.

I guess when you are that far in the lead, a target on your back comes naturally...

If you don't need 160 hp, here is an engine that has my interest. $16390 for 100 hp @ 215 lbs. I know that is 40+ lbs more than a 100 hp Rotax, but it is diesel. Besides lower fuel burn (120 kt 2.5 gph), red dye diesel is $3.25. Makes flying a bit more affordable, and since turbocharged even cheaper at altitude.

http://eco-motors.com/images/Downloads/ ... l-Info.pdf

Very promising, but being an early adopter sounds... interesting.


"This is are non certified aircraft engines!
They have not received the safety and durability testing specified by
aircraft standards. They are only for use in uncertificated experimental
aircraft or vehicles when there is no risk for the safety due to an engine
failure. Never fly the aircraft equipped with this engines in
circumstances or in areas, in weather conditions or in altitudes where
you have no chance for successful landing after an engine failure. The
user is taking all risk resulting from the use of this engines and he is
aware of the possibility of sudden functional disturbances.
Specification and offer might be subject to change any time"

Speaking of diesel, how about the Mercedes designed 800 cc turbo diesel used in the Smart Car everywhere but the States? Seems when 100 LL when and if you can get it in Europe runs from $16~$20 per gallon is a driving factor for diesels over there.

http://www.flyeco.net/FK9-Smart-Diesel.pdf

I just like the torque curve of diesels.

littlewheelinback wrote:Since the original GSX-R 1100 made 158 peak HP at near redline (over 10,000 rpm) and the Bandit engine made less peak power (tuned for midrange power), I don't see how one of these engines geared to turn 6000 rpm would make anything close to 160hp. Probably in the 90-100 hp range. Durability at that rpm limit should be excellent though, these engines are very tough.

The 160 hp is at 7000 rpm, and unlike the stock usage in the Bandit, it is turbocharged. I'm just thinking if you want to better the take off performance of a 180 hp Carbon Cub at around 1/2 the price, then this turbo engine at 50+ lbs less than the 340 in a Just Super STOL might be the ticket.

All the new research in this category is promising. In reality though, not many of us have the "pioneer spirit" to endure dealing with one of these contraptions with parts distribution, dealer support, and service being nonexistent.

I'm not hating on Rotax - I love them. However, the predecssor to the 912 was the 503 used heavily for ultralights (and the entire company really) was in snowmobiles and motorcycles. From the Rotax web site history:

1978 Ultralight engines 501, 505 developed
(based on snowmobile engine 503)
1984 Start of development of ROTAX® 912

I think it's a very good example of motorcycle and personal water/snow craft technology adapted to aviation.
http://www.rotax-aircraft-engines.com/portaldata/5/data/ac%20brochure.pdf

Av8r3400 wrote:As much as everyone loves to hate on Rotax, the 912 series engine is not and has never been a conversion. It was designed from the blank sheet as an aircraft engine. An argument could be made for the origin of some of their two-stroke motors, but I doubt that is what you were referring to.

I guess when you are that far in the lead, a target on your back comes naturally...

Yes and getting parts for the early 912 was a nightmare. Friend of mine had a Kitfox with one of the very first ones. There were definite supply chain issues. We haven't found that to be the case today.

That said, it is a weird little engine, speaking from being use to little Continentals. I like it though. Very well built.