hey all,
im looking at putting a bigger engine in my 170. I'm want to go with a cont. 210 or franklin 220 but would consider a lycoming. Do any of you have any experience with the cont. 210 or frank. 220? which is lighter and does the weight screw up your cg? any info would be appreciated.
thanks Dan
continental engine conversion
Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher
Dan,
I have recently installed a Continental IO-360 in my '52 B model. Contact me at
blueldr@earthlink.net
if you want info.
I have recently installed a Continental IO-360 in my '52 B model. Contact me at
blueldr@earthlink.net
if you want info.
BL
INFO AS PER REQUESTED.
1. I chose the Cont.IO-360 over the Lyc. because it has six cylinders and runs much smoother and has 30 more HP.
2. The engine fits inside the cowling without modification thus maintaining the same configuration.(Flat plate area--Drag)
3. The engine is fuel injected thus eliminating the problem of carburetor ice in any atmospheric condition.
4. I'm a "Continental" rather than a "Lycoming" person.
It is not an insignificant dollars item. If you just want more power, it's cheaper to sell the 170 and buy a 180. If you want a really great 170, it is a real bang in the butt!
1. I chose the Cont.IO-360 over the Lyc. because it has six cylinders and runs much smoother and has 30 more HP.
2. The engine fits inside the cowling without modification thus maintaining the same configuration.(Flat plate area--Drag)
3. The engine is fuel injected thus eliminating the problem of carburetor ice in any atmospheric condition.
4. I'm a "Continental" rather than a "Lycoming" person.
It is not an insignificant dollars item. If you just want more power, it's cheaper to sell the 170 and buy a 180. If you want a really great 170, it is a real bang in the butt!
BL
-
Dave Clark
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 6:25 pm
BL
What's your honest cruise speed and fuel burn say at 75% power and 7,000 ft? How tough was it to handle the fuel return and how did you do that? I got a real good deal on the Lycoming but would have been really attracted to the IO-360 due to the things you mention but I'm not sure that the airframe really needs all that power. As I have mentioned before I had bought a Stinson 108 with a 220 Franklin in it that turned out to be junk. I had to overhaul it and it turned out real nice. Turbine-like smoothness! Anyway I didn't like the idea of 10 1/2 to 1 compression ratios being an old round engine guy and really missed the Cessna flying and cargo qualities so I sold it and bought the 170.
What's your honest cruise speed and fuel burn say at 75% power and 7,000 ft? How tough was it to handle the fuel return and how did you do that? I got a real good deal on the Lycoming but would have been really attracted to the IO-360 due to the things you mention but I'm not sure that the airframe really needs all that power. As I have mentioned before I had bought a Stinson 108 with a 220 Franklin in it that turned out to be junk. I had to overhaul it and it turned out real nice. Turbine-like smoothness! Anyway I didn't like the idea of 10 1/2 to 1 compression ratios being an old round engine guy and really missed the Cessna flying and cargo qualities so I sold it and bought the 170.
Dave
N92CP ("Clark's Plane")
1953 C-180
N92CP ("Clark's Plane")
1953 C-180
Cost of Franklin Conversion
Last fall I checked into the cost of the Franklin 220 hp Conversion. The total was about $42k by the time you are done and back in the air. Here were the numbers for all new components not including shipping:
STC ( includes various parts) - $8,000
Engine no accessories - $16,300
Magnetos, Harness, Plugs - $1,450
Starter - $460
Alternator - $560
Carburetor - $1,695
Vacuum Pump - $395
Prop Governor - $1,585
Consant Speed Prop - $6,995
Misc Parts (hoses, fittings, AN hardware, aluminum sheet, controls) - $900
Labor 40 to 60 hrs - $3,500
Total is about $42,000, however you can sell your old engine core and prop for value to reduce the net cost.
The performance numbers are impressive, the conversion cost is about the same as a 170 in excellent condtion.
You might be able to obtain $60k to $65K retail for a 170 with the conversion if it is in perfect condtion. Thus you would need to find an airframe in excellent condtion, perfect paint ($7k) with good radios ($8k)and interior ($4k) for about $20k to make the numbers work. Or a runout POS for around $2K or $3k to make it cost effective not counting your labor.
STC ( includes various parts) - $8,000
Engine no accessories - $16,300
Magnetos, Harness, Plugs - $1,450
Starter - $460
Alternator - $560
Carburetor - $1,695
Vacuum Pump - $395
Prop Governor - $1,585
Consant Speed Prop - $6,995
Misc Parts (hoses, fittings, AN hardware, aluminum sheet, controls) - $900
Labor 40 to 60 hrs - $3,500
Total is about $42,000, however you can sell your old engine core and prop for value to reduce the net cost.
The performance numbers are impressive, the conversion cost is about the same as a 170 in excellent condtion.
You might be able to obtain $60k to $65K retail for a 170 with the conversion if it is in perfect condtion. Thus you would need to find an airframe in excellent condtion, perfect paint ($7k) with good radios ($8k)and interior ($4k) for about $20k to make the numbers work. Or a runout POS for around $2K or $3k to make it cost effective not counting your labor.
I am presently running a fixed pitch 7860 prop. At 2500 RPM it pulls about 18" MAP which is only about 51%. Fuel burn is 8 GPH at about 115 to 120 MPH TAS. I have a CS prop coming.Dave Clark wrote:BL
What's your honest cruise speed and fuel burn say at 75% power and 7,000 ft? How tough was it to handle the fuel return and how did you do that? I got a real good deal on the Lycoming but would have been really attracted to the IO-360 due to the things you mention but I'm not sure that the airframe really needs all that power. As I have mentioned before I had bought a Stinson 108 with a 220 Franklin in it that turned out to be junk. I had to overhaul it and it turned out real nice. Turbine-like smoothness! Anyway I didn't like the idea of 10 1/2 to 1 compression ratios being an old round engine guy and really missed the Cessna flying and cargo qualities so I sold it and bought the 170.
The fuel return goes to a header tank installed in the left side of the boot cowl adjacent to the pilots left lower leg. The header tank vents up the left front door post and into the cross fuselage tank vent It is as per the STC from XP Mods.
BL
-
Dave Clark
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 6:25 pm
BL
It will be interesting to get figures when you get the new prop so we have the same efficiency. Of course if we cruise with the same prop and at the same horsepower we should have close to the same cruise speeds and fuel burn. What I'm interested in is what extra airspeed and fuel burn you would get if we were both at 75% and you were using that extra 22.5 hp (75% of 30). I'm thinking that increment will be less efficient due to the drag curve but I just don't know if it's much less efficient. You might get the extra airspeed at nearly as good efficiency which would be an arguement to use the 210hp engines for the guys that want to go fast. I'll bet this has been figured out before.
It will be interesting to get figures when you get the new prop so we have the same efficiency. Of course if we cruise with the same prop and at the same horsepower we should have close to the same cruise speeds and fuel burn. What I'm interested in is what extra airspeed and fuel burn you would get if we were both at 75% and you were using that extra 22.5 hp (75% of 30). I'm thinking that increment will be less efficient due to the drag curve but I just don't know if it's much less efficient. You might get the extra airspeed at nearly as good efficiency which would be an arguement to use the 210hp engines for the guys that want to go fast. I'll bet this has been figured out before.
Dave
N92CP ("Clark's Plane")
1953 C-180
N92CP ("Clark's Plane")
1953 C-180
Franklin conversion
I had a 220 PZL Franklin put into my 170B about 2 years ago. The performance is great. The cost was around $35K. It is pricey. The cowl needs minimal modification - patch the old exhaust holes and install a lip on the lwer cowl. My biggest concern is that the cg seemed to have moved forward significantly so that I have to be more cautious about loading and need some ballast most of the time. I had the plane weighed after the conversion (haven't repeated the measurement) and, unfortunately, relied on 40+ years of weight and balance calcualtions for the pre-conversion weight.
Paul
Paul
franklin conversion
preconversion - empty weight 1303.8 lbs c.g. 39.3 inches - based on 40+ years W&B calculations
postconversion - empty weight 1495 lbs c.g. 37.01 inches - weighed after conversion
Paul
postconversion - empty weight 1495 lbs c.g. 37.01 inches - weighed after conversion
Paul
-
Dave Clark
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 6:25 pm