Jr,

Maybe you're right .

The C-90 is a different engine than the O-200, though. Sometimes the difference in nomenclature on an engine can be pretty subtle, like location of certain accessories, camshaft, pistons, carburetor, etc. I'm not sure any of that applies to the engines you mentioned, but it does in the C-90 and O-200.

The early Huskys had an O-360 C1G engine, while the later ones have an O-360 A1P engine. The difference is the engine mounting, with the C model having conical mounts and the A1P having Dynafocal mounts. They are not interchangeable, without changing the engine mounts themselves.

The C-90 is a better seaplane engine, at least. And, yes, I've run em both on one airframe. C-90, hands down, and that was verified by a good friend and experienced pilot as well. Some say it's the camshaft, which is different, but who knows?

MTV

mtv wrote:The C-90 is a better seaplane engine, at least. And, yes, I've run em both on one airframe. C-90, hands down, and that was verified by a good friend and experienced pilot as well. Some say it's the camshaft, which is different, but who knows?

MTV

Now that little tid bit is worth knowing for someone looking for a little airplane, I assume your saying it "pulls" better at lower RPM? Not trying to thread jack, you guy's keep going on the subj, but MTV, is that it?
My take on the analism of flying is partly because of how one goes about being liscensed. You spend entirely too much time with sometimes self appointed asses that call themselves instructors. Now I'm talking about the minority of the breed, but you know the type, Ray Ban's, leather flight jacket and David Clark's. This type revels in minusia (sp?) Now they are the minority and there is the mechanic equalivent as well, he can be spotted by his clean hands, but aviation, more than most professions, seems to draw the BSers.

a64,

Yes, for reasons that I cannot explain, the 90 got up on step noticeably quicker. The O-200 I used wasn't lame, either. The guy who sold me the plane was a mechanic, and told me I could keep whichever engine I wanted, and he'd keep the other. They both had recent field overhauls, and both were good engines. I jokingly said "how would I know which is better?" and he said he'd swap em so I could decide . I helped.

I chose the 90, and the guy who sold me the plane grinned and said, "That would have been my choice as well". He'd already done the testing, it turned out. I also had another friend fly the plane with both engines. His independant conclusion was the same.

I have heard this from a few others who've done the same deal with these engines and everyone says the same. Some say it's the cam and valve lift. I have no idea myownself.

MTV