Folks,
for those who are interested:
After running the numbers and the characteristics of both engines (as discussed on here) through my head a few dozen times, and after talking to the appropriate people; I finally have decided to go for the 115HP 914 Turbo conversion kit. (ORIGINAL Rotax Turbo & computer).
I will keep my 80HP Rotax 912 engine which hasn´t suffered any incidents yet, and which seem to run fine! No excessive oil consumption, nothing.
Let´s hope that kit gives me the same performance as it does to the other 914 owners.
Originally Posted by
Catchacloud
KISS - keep it simple stupid.
True!! Very true!!
But the killer argument for me was that where we are; we do actually fly ridiculously high at times. There´s airports at 3.000 meters here, and a few other "obstacles" that go over 6000 meters:
And although the Rotax turbo is not designed to maintain the exact 115HP at these altitudes, it will make a difference compared to the conventionally breathing engine!
Originally Posted by
MichaelJP59
Unless your local friend uses the turbo a lot more than most people, I fail to see how he can use 33% more fuel. Unless he's always in the circuit, of course
Okay, after some more research it turns out that the Turbo´s of the Lycoming´s / Continental´s are primarily there to give you your 100% power at higher altitudes. Correct?
Rotax´s Turbo however makes concessions; it both gives you more power at higher altitude (albeit less than 100%) and it adds a lot of grunt at lower level--> making the handling more "sexy" in the lowlands--> which is where I´m based. The Rotax turbo "works" at any time……….which explains the 25% more consumption, or somewhere around there.
I guess for a lot of UK / US guys on here, the 100HP 912ULS is just fine.
But flying here, I think I pay the extra fuel burn penalty, but enjoy the sexy handling at the beach and more importantly: the extra power when I "hit" the Andes.
Cheers,
###Ultra Long Hauler###