eh009us wrote:Are you talking Bearhawk or BH Patrol ? either engine is fine, but when you get into a 200hp stock engine, the weight goes up since it's a different block. Personally I'm going with something like Aerosport power's IO375 in 195(can burn mogas) or 205 hp (100ll only). It's a stroked o360. I wouldn't build it w/o a CS prop.

I didn't see those engines on the list of engines. Just wondering if they will work with a kit. (No time to due scratch built) Not familiar with mogas. Is it readily available. Can you still go 100ll?

It's a custom engine from aerosport power, go to their website and check it out. Barrett may make one as well. Again, it's an O or IO360 based engine with a stroked bore. It'll fit wherever a 360 lycoming will fit. Go forth and do ye reasearch, my good man. You have a looong way to go, but you'll get there.

eh009us wrote:It's a custom engine from aerosport power, go to their website and check it out. Barrett may make one as well. Again, it's an O or IO360 based engine with a stroked bore. It'll fit wherever a 360 lycoming will fit. Go forth and do ye reasearch, my good man. You have a looong way to go, but you'll get there.

Literally LOLing

madpilot wrote:

eh009us wrote:It's a custom engine from aerosport power, go to their website and check it out. Barrett may make one as well. Again, it's an O or IO360 based engine with a stroked bore. It'll fit wherever a 360 lycoming will fit. Go forth and do ye reasearch, my good man. You have a looong way to go, but you'll get there.

Literally LOLing

very sweet thanks so much. I do have a few years before I'm ready to buy and another before I put in the engine. This is what this site is for right.

mr scout wrote:

mtv wrote:

mr scout wrote:Don't believe all the words from non-turbo owners. I have a TO-360 and love it, it really has no more maintenance cost than any other engine. Up high on a hot day a 390 wont even come close. I have never figured out why so many people are afraid of turbo's 78% of the industrial world has ran them for years.
The damage from overboost isn't blowing the heads off its detonation, I run 42" and put 24gph to keep it cool. Once at altitude you can pull it back to 10 GPH I never do. I bought the plane to travel not sight see so I am usually burning 14-15gph.

The TO-360s are not just a turbo charged 360 they have very few parts in common.

Are you talking about a TSIO 360, as in a Continental engine, or a TIO 360 Lycoming?

I'm not afraid of turbo charged engines, but, depending on the engine, many of them have a shorter TBO than their normally aspirated brethren. Shorter TBO = $$. More weight, more complexity. Not necessarily HUGE factors, but they are factors worth considering.

There are places and airplanes where the turbo makes a lot of sense. And, others where they don't.

MTV

Mike there you getting your hackles up, statements are not always directed at you.

I didn't see TSIO-360 anywhere in my comments

No, but there is no such engine as a "TO-360". So, is it a Continental or a Lycoming? Just curious-really.
And, my hackles aren't up, just clarifying my earlier comments.
MTV

Mike (mtv) is right, there's a TON of different engine configurations out there before you even get to the custom stuff (io-390, io375, etc, the Barrett custom shop). It pays to be specific and some gentle correction in the right direction isn't too out of order for someone trying to learn. The beginners learning curve in my case was straight up ! And I'm still on that climb .

No Actually Mike is wrong

There indeed lives TO-360 lycoming engines, great little engine exhaust comes out the top of the heads. Turbo charged and carbureted

Lycoming
TO-360-C1A6D 210 hp (157 kW) at 2575 rpm, Minimum fuel grade 100 or 100LL avgas, compression ratio 7.30:1. Turbosupercharger: Rajay 301E10-2. Same as the TO-360-A1A6D but with the power output increased, lower compression ratio and carburetor located after the turbocharger instead of before the turbocharger.[2] TO-360-E1A6D 180 hp (134 kW) at 2575 rpm, Minimum fuel grade 100 or 100LL avgas, compression ratio 8.00:1. Turbosupercharger: AiResearch TA04. Same as the 0-360-E1A6D but with an AiResearch TA402 turbocharger, 8.0:1 compression ratio pistons, piston cooling oil jets and a high pressure fuel pump.[2] TO-360-F1A6D 210 hp (157 kW) at 2575 rpm, Minimum fuel grade 100 or 100LL avgas, compression ratio 7.30:1. Turbosupercharger: Rajay 301E10-2. Same as the TO-360-C1A6D but with rear type mounting (long type 1.12 inch conical mount

Madpilot,

I am building a Bearhawk and am going with an O-540 parallel valve engine and I live in Utah so we get really high density altitudes like you get there in Colorado... 10k plus on a regular basis in the summer. My last airplane was turbo-charged and was quite a performer but I decided with the Bearhawk I wanted simple and lightweight, hence the carbed O-540.

Injected means additional fuel piping with pressurized runs back to the tanks and turbos add another level of complexity that I don't feel is of great benefit in this type of airplane. A fly high, cross-country speedster sure, but you are going to be tooling around at low level not up at 15k.

The bearhawk is an amazing performer with the O-540 and will get you into places you don't have any business going into IMHO. There are a couple Bearhawks around here, all with O-540s and every one of the pilots say that they can throttle back and burn the same 10 gph you would with an O-360 and fly at the same speed as the O-360 Bearhawk...but when you want and need the extra power/speed, it is there. In Colorado, Utah or any other western, non-coastal region I wouldn't consider anything but a 540 in the BH. Just my opinion.

What Darin said, Regarding the BEARHAWK. Madpilot, you will find everyone has an opinion on this topic, and opinions are worth what you pay for them. You will find this every time you ask a question, whether it be primer, welding methods, whatever. Don't take any of the Snippy BS personally. One guy is always more "right" thanthe next. .

You might want to join the BH builders groups on Yahoo, there are 2 good ones. One is for the Patrol, but I would join both (and have). A wealth of information on both from guys that have built or are just ahead of you in the process. I'm still in the learning curve but these sites do help to flatten the curve somewhat, just side step the side-show arguments where you can.

I found that I've had to do my own research. I'm a fan of using the most horsepower that my airframe is designed for. That being said, the difference between a 180 hp lycoming and a 200 hp lycoming can be 10 grand, because one is a wide deck engine, even though they are both called a "360". Power, it's there if you need it like Darin said. I'll be using some sort of "O"360 derivation, no turbo, keeping it simple except for a cs prop. For me. On my plane. A Patrol.

Darinh wrote:Madpilot,

I am building a Bearhawk and am going with an O-540 parallel valve engine and I live in Utah so we get really high density altitudes like you get there in Colorado... 10k plus on a regular basis in the summer. My last airplane was turbo-charged and was quite a performer but I decided with the Bearhawk I wanted simple and lightweight, hence the carbed O-540.

Injected means additional fuel piping with pressurized runs back to the tanks and turbos add another level of complexity that I don't feel is of great benefit in they type of airplane. A fly high, cross-country speedster sure, but you are going to be tooling around at low level not up at 15k.

The bearhawk is an amazing performer with the O-540 and will get you into places you don't have any business going into IMHO. There are a couple Bearhawks around here, all with O-540s and every one of the pilots say that they can throttle back and burn the same 10 gph you would with an O-360 and fly at the same speed as the O-360 Bearhawk...but when you want and need the extra power/speed, it is there. In Colorado, Utah or any other western, non-coastal region I wouldn't consider anything but a 540 in the BH. Just my opinion.

Thanks so much for the advice. I've been wondering if I should step up, and will defiantly consider it.

eh009us wrote:What Darin said, Regarding the BEARHAWK. Madpilot, you will find everyone has an opinion on this topic, and opinions are worth what you pay for them. You will find this every time you ask a question, whether it be primer, welding methods, whatever. Don't take any of the Snippy BS personally. One guy is always more "right" thanthe next. .

You might want to join the BH builders groups on Yahoo, there are 2 good ones. One is for the Patrol, but I would join both (and have). A wealth of information on both from guys that have built or are just ahead of you in the process. I'm still in the learning curve but these sites do help to flatten the curve somewhat, just side step the side-show arguments where you can.

I found that I've had to do my own research. I'm a fan of using the most horsepower that my airframe is designed for. That being said, the difference between a 180 hp lycoming and a 200 hp lycoming can be 10 grand, because one is a wide deck engine, even though they are both called a "360". Power, it's there if you need it like Darin said. I'll be using some sort of "O"360 derivation, no turbo, keeping it simple except for a cs prop. For me. On my plane. A Patrol.

Thanks eh009us. I understand what you are saying completely. I do like to know peoples opinions, it helps displace any preconceived notions or thought I have no businesses having as I don't know much about this stuff yet.

I would give a big thumbs up on the O-540 Idea. Besides being bullet proof you can pull them back as previously stated. In any backcountry plane the KISS method seems to always work out the best.