Lycoming, Continental and Rotax
 

Guys and Girls,

I've heard a bit here and there on this site about the trusty ol 'nentals and how thirsty they are and others hints about how different engines behave.

Just wondering if any of you pilots with experience can tell a few tales about your favourite engine or worst you've flown with.

And just to jump in ahead of any one else I'll start with "the best engine I've flown with was one that runs" etc

Just an honest question from one who's curious about the handling qualities of these (and others) engines.

With the coming of the FADEC age in GA will a future pilot have half the involvement in engine management of today's GA pilots?

They all turn clockwise when viewed from the pilots seat. Continentals usually feel "smoother' than Lycomings. Rotax? So far so good in the Sportstar.

Lycomings smoother on the pocket than continentals

rotax, 15 ltrs/hr and smoooooooth

Your either a Holden man or a Ford man !
Your either a Continental man or a Lycoming man !

Now me? I drive a Holden and fly big bore Continentals (except when Jaba breaks something and I am forced to slum it in my brothers Mooney!).

The IO520 in the Bonanza just purrs along all day - as does the IO550 in the C210 I have been driving around of late.

Nothing horizintally opposed sounds as good as a Continental - either idling or full howl on TO!

Dr :8

well they dont build em jaba proof now do they :}

Smooth and quiet......one engine comes to mind and it aint one of those listed!:ok:

J:ok:

AEIO540 sounded pretty good yesterday...upright AND inverted, and I love the "snap crackle and pop" when pulled back to idle on spin entry or flare to land (hopefully not at the same time!!!)...but the elec fuel pump...well that's a whole other story!!!

was that you over Ak harbour yesterday?

Lycomings, the turbines are ooooh soooo smooooth:ok:
Conty's? well yes their radials are smooth as far as piston engines go:)
Rotax?.....pass

CW

CW:=:=:=

You were meant to say......they are all fine, so long as you have two of them on the one airframe!:E

J:ok:

Look out Capt Wally is on the debate train again!!!!

I am a Lycoming man myself!!
Continental maybe ok for an old farm tractor!!
What does that leave ...... oh Rotax.... forget it they are just as good as your ROVER lawn mover.:E

I have had a bit to do with these ROTAX motors over the years and they are just full of little surprises:=

.............bugga, 'jaba' on to me & so is 'airman 1'(always wanted to be a 'train driver'):E
ya not gunna turn into the anti-fun police are ya guys!:bored:

hey 'airman1' what's wrong with a good Rover lawn mower? Such things started out as powering ultralights & they ain't got no better!:E
If it has to be Horizonty opposed recips then Lyc's have it. I've been involved with both Lyc & Conty's eng o/hauls a 100 yrs ago (seems like it!) & gimmie Lyc's anyday!

CW

A LAME friend of mine who ran his own business told me that the TSIO Lycoming was the better and easier to work on than the Continental of the same induction!

But as for my favourite engine......well, nothing but the Rolls Royce Merlin,(Mk66) thank you very much!:ok::ok:

Although the Napier Sabre 'H' pattern 24 cylinder as fitted to the Hawker Tempest MkV does hold a certain fascination!!!!!:hmm:

Rotax don't run like a sewing machine, they just sound like a sewing machine.

Last I heard the crankshafts are now a 1200 hour throw-away item?:uhoh:

Still, they're better than Jabiru engines - sadly :suspect:

TIO-540s seem to be a bit more reliable than the 3 x IO 520's I have been around lately, but I haven't operated the Lycomings since about 2001... long before their manufacturing issues.

Our little O-235 seems to keep going no matter what our students do to it! :ooh:

Rotax 4 strokes have come a long way from the early days of busted crankshafts etc. IMHO, in the 80-100 hp class they are THE benchmark for fuel burn and cost to buy. Also, the importer support seems OK from what I have heard.
In the right hands a Rotax will run 2500 hours plus ("on condition" past 1500). At that rate it's not worth worrying about overhaul. Run the thing till it is almost dead, throw it away and start factory new.
Would I buy a second hand Rotax of indeterminate age and pedigree? Nope, but a new one out of the box would be my preference over a used Lycoming or Continental even if the latter were cheaper.

I would have to say the ole IO-520/550 holds a place in my heart. Nothing like lumping round the bush strips on idle bup bup bup bup and then she sings a sweet song at full noise. Her vocals can become a tad haunting when the smooth pur becomes a howl of protest and they are not the most reliable engine with the pots wanting to eject from the block on occasion, but she will always get you home if you treat her right. She was never made to haul uncle Cessnas biggest mistake, the strteched scenic limo, she felt a litttle out of her league slung all lonely up there, but in a bo or a strutless kimberley taxi she was in her element, especially when slung of each wing pushing beeches finest piston achievement, the mighty baron, even if its an ergonomic nightmare!

The TIO-540. IO-540 and O-540 dont have the snarl of the conti, but have never let me down in the many hours i have flown on them. Not even a mag failure touch wood.

the 520/550 all the way!

Now how bout we talk jets :)

Rotax 912/912s & 914's simply don't ever stop if you keep the fuel and water up to them. There have been failures in the past but they are usually few and far between.

A 912 requires a head tighten at 400 hours, other than that pretty much nothing is required till 1,500 hours other than oil and filters. On condition from then to easily over 2,000 particularly if done quickly in a school environment. Over time is a different case as the radiator hoses will perish over time.

There have been some 912 failures but they were usually were pilot / maintainer at fault. There was a recent failure of a 912 resulting in 2 deaths, but this was prop related apparently.

I purchased a 912 at 1,000 ahours nd did another 500 and did nothing more than change the oil, filter and coolant.

It seems unusual to cruise at 5,000 rpm but that's just what they do.

The Jabiru is a far smoother engine than the Jabiru and most others on the market. They have a little way to go with valve life and mixture indiscrepencies but other than that they are a good unit and the 6 is more powerful than all Rotaxes so they have their niche in the top end RAA / LSA range.

Check the facts
 

When I was last a RAAus CFI (9 months ago) the advice I had from the Ops Manager was that tha RAAus could be flexible on many things.

One thing they could not be flexible on was TBO on the Rotax in the school environment.

NO "on condition" allowed. :ugh:

I know one guy bought a 1500 hour Rotax from a flying school and has run it another 500 hours - not in a commercial operation I hasten to add. Oil consumption is almost nil and he has the oil analysed at every 50 hour oil change. All perfect so far.
As mentioned, the key to good engine life is regular use, but that applies to all engines - 2 stroke lawnmowers are a good example. They go forever because we are always cuttting the grass it seems. Marine engines often give trouble because they only get occasional use.
Back to Rotax engines. A weekly ground run is not the answer. They need a good flogging which is best replicated by at least a few circuits or even better a good climb for an hour's cruise. At 15 lt/hr it's as cheap as flying can be. Cheap being a relative term in this case.

Horatio Leafblower the ops manual was modified last year to allow operation of RA-Aus aircraft "ON-CONDITION" similarly to that of GA opeations. Whilst the ops manager at the time may have been operating by the book, it wasn't in the spirit of RA-Aus getting people airborne economically so the board quickly changed the regs.