hotrod 0300, 0145, higher hp,

[edgar]

Has any one souped up out there a 0300, 0145, engine to get 175--180HP out of it?
as in hot pistons, cam, exhaust system, intake, and carb, ported heads etc, : ,,like the guys with the cubs do to the 85hp's ? Insteand of a lycoming 180hp conversion..
is ther any mods that anyone has done to ther Cont engine? is the any mods that are appoved,
or not approved..? More HP and lots less money that a Lyc. 180 converson and less weight...any one have any thoughts on this ?
Thanks,
Edgar

[zero.one.victor]

The best ( & probably only) place to pursue this line of thinking is with the Swift crowd. They're an "inovative" bunch. They have a yahoo club site ---www.groups.yahoo.com/group/globetemcoswift/
There's only like 2 things I've heard of-- putting C-85 pistons in the C-145/O-300 (higher compression) and changing the propeller. Seems like a Sensenich is the one to run on a C-125 or 145 Swift. If you're looking for TO/climb improvement,put on a climb prop. Some of the Alaska guys swear by the 80" MacCauley seaplane prop,but they're spendy & hard to come by used. You can repitch your existing prop to about 48 & see some gains,right Bela?
If you come up with anything else,I'd like to hear about it. I still haven't perfected my nitrous oxide mod..............

Eric

[N170BP]

Yeah, a stock C-145 with a 48 pitch McCauley feels pretty
good when you shove the throttle forward. Not C-180 good,
but it feels good for a C-170. I just can't stand it when my
Super Cub buddies pass me while cruising!!!

Bela P. Havasreti
'54 C-170B N170BP

[wa4jr]

I've been wondering the same thing, Edgar. The O-300 has been around too many years for someone not to have come up with some neat mods. Problem is that I think most potential hotrodders with good ideas are kept quite by the FAA. Look at all the neat power mods for auto engines! If the FAA were more friendly to new ideas concerning the O-300 as well as other older aviation engines, I think we would be seeing many more useful improvements in terms of effieciency and power output. There was a rumor that a shop in Winchester VA was able to take the O-300 to 160HP, but I have not checked it out. Keep us posted if you find out anything. I sometimes think about taking a runout O-300 to a builder of auto race engines just to see what they could do with it. Would be very interested...but of course I could'nt tell the authorities about it once I put it back on my plane!

[funseventy]

Remember that depending on what kind of race shop you go to, there experience incorporates a tear down after every flight, and some after one run down the runway. I like my reliable 145 hp.

A buddy of mine in Kansas had an O-200 powered Clipwing cub that had 350 Chevy Pistons in it. It was like 10 to 1 Compression or something like that. You can do things like that with experimentals, but I'd still like to try on an O-300.

Kelly

[wa4jr]

Yes, and I'd also lose my autofuel STC! OUCH! The increased performance is not worth the $2.50/gal price of 100LL. Then there is the consideration of engine longevity. There are different levels of "hotrodding" though. I don't want anything close to "full race", but what the folks in the auto scene call "streetable perfomance mods". I have the experience of doing these mild mods to British engines, and in fact my 75 MGB has just passed 250,000 miles with a mildly modified engine. The same could be done to the O-300, but then I do find it easier to just stick with the 145 HP (maybe) and chose a longer runway! It is fun to brainstorm about the possibilities though!

[lowNslow]

Check out this site:

http://www.lycon.com/

and click on NFS pistons. Lycon rebuilt my engine, but they can't put these in and keep it legal. These pistons are for the O-200, which are the same as the O-300 cylinders, but are used by Formula 1 racers. (Lycon builds a lot of custom engines). They will however port flow, polish and balance your cylinders (legal), which I had done on mine. It dyno tested at 157 bhp, not much better - but hey.

[Joe Dickey]

Happy new year to everyone!!

I'm not an expert here, but following a quick run thru the Summit catolog, it would seem that a good high performance intake ($150) and exhaust system ($225) and a high energy ignition ($400) should get you a 30% increase at least and that's an I0-360 power or maybe an 0-470 with a little more tweeking without pulling the engine apart or changing compression. Fuel injection solves a bunch of problems and adds $600 to the bill.....just think..... easy cold weather starts, no priming, good power and response and better fuel burn of pump gas for less than $1500 in parts. Awh.....DAMN IT.....these are modern parts that FAA has not blessed and there is no insurance tax to protect the manufacuter from the lawyers!!

We have the technology!!! Non-certified GA aircraft (read homebuilt) are about to become the majority because of the bureaucratic red tape and liability issues. Once the Sport Pilot/Aircraft NPRM becomes a reality, watch and see who will be stepping up to produce these planes...think it will be Cessna and Piper???

[zero.one.victor]

Ditto what Low'n'slow said about the O-200's as used in F-1 racing. They turn them bad boys up around 3000-3200 rpm from what I hear.
Also,ditto Kelly--they don't say much about TBO. That's fine going around the pylons at Reno but not so good when you're over the middle of the wild Cascade (or Sierra,or Rocky,or Smokey) Mountains.
Read the articles about speed mods in The 170 Book,other than bigger engines seems like it's mainly aerodynamic clean-up. For better TO/climb it's mainly prop.

Eric

[GAHorn]

Check out this site:

http://www.lycon.com/

and click on NFS pistons. Lycon rebuilt my engine, but they can't put these in and keep it legal. These pistons are for the O-200, which are the same as the O-300 cylinders, but are used by Formula 1 racers. (Lycon builds a lot of custom engines). They will however port flow, polish and balance your cylinders (legal), which I had done on mine. It dyno tested at 157 bhp, not much better - but hey.

At what RPM was that 157 hp obtained?
The problem with all these imaginary mods is they violate the type certificate of the engine (and an engine so modified violates the type certificate of the airplane.) It's just not a simple matter to swap internal parts and go flying. Even if it were legal it likely isn't safe or Continental would have already performed the mod and tried to sell it. (They actually did spend a fortune and try to "hop up" the O-300 when they made the GO-300, and after several 100's of thousands of dollars wasted producing a few hundred unreliable, expensive engines, gave up on it and so did Cessna and the rest of the flying public.)
Slipping unapproved parts into these engines is not the answer. It won't be reliable, it won't be a great big power-boost, and in the long run by any standard at all, it won't be cheap.

[lowNslow]

At what RPM was that 157 hp obtained?
The problem with all these imaginary mods is they violate the type certificate of the engine (and an engine so modified violates the type certificate of the airplane.) It's just not a simple matter to swap internal parts and go flying. Even if it were legal it likely isn't safe or Continental would have already performed the mod and tried to sell it. (They actually did spend a fortune and try to "hop up" the O-300 when they made the GO-300, and after several 100's of thousands of dollars wasted producing a few hundred unreliable, expensive engines, gave up on it and so did Cessna and the rest of the flying public.)
Slipping unapproved parts into these engines is not the answer. It won't be reliable, it won't be a great big power-boost, and in the long run by any standard at all, it won't be cheap.[/quote]

The 157 bhp was attained at 2700 rpm. Obviously you are not going to get this rpm on an airplane with a regular prop (vs. a club test prop), but it still beats the rated 145 bhp attained with unimproved C-145. Port polishing and flow balancing are legal and do not violate the type certificate. Lycon does this on a lot of there rebuilds (at added cost) and the FAA is fully aware and approves. Now the high compression pistons are another matter, I don't think I would feel as comfortable with that setup.

[wa4jr]

Uhoh, gotta disagree here. With this line of reasoning, only the original engine manufacturer can safely develop and market performance aftermarket parts? This being the case, I shouldn't turn the key on my MGB again. British Leyland long ago abandoned the aftermarket performance arena when it was no longer profitable for them. The job of performance parts then fell to smaller shops, with very good results.

Joe, where do I get a Summit cataloge? How about the cost of an O-300 overhaul at Lycon? All I am interested in is a few more HP while still retaining the reliability and general smoothness of the original engine, although I wouldn't mind the "lope" that the Baron engines have with their performance camshafts! I think Joe is right concerning the future of basic certificated aircraft...the FAA is just not going to be happy until this industry is regulated to death.

Iv'e seen the excellent success that small shops have had with automotive performance parts and I refuse to believe that the same basic principles can't be adopted with good result to the aftermarket aviation engine performance market...if there is one! The ONLY difference between the two industries is that the FAA strangles the development of aviation engine performance parts while the brilliant minds in the automotive sector...free from FAA harassment and liability issues, have succeeded in bringing forth basket loads of performance mods to suit just about any taste from mild to wild.

Now, it is 0200 out at my airport. The only living things watching me are the hoot owles and maybe a black bear or two. Monster Hangar (aviation equivalent of "Monster Garage" on Discovery channel) is about to open up. Let's see about those induction and exhaust mods along with the reprofiled camshaft and oversized waisted intake and exhaust valves. Uhoh....what do I do with the type certificate

[GAHorn]

Uhoh, gotta disagree here. With this line of reasoning, only the original engine manufacturer can safely develop and market performance aftermarket parts? This being the case, I shouldn't turn the key on my MGB again. British Leyland long ago abandoned the aftermarket performance arena when it was no longer profitable for them. The job of performance parts then fell to smaller shops, with very good results.

That's not what I said at all. There are lots of "aftermarket" producers of good aircraft parts other than "the original engine manufacturer". What was being discussed was slipping unapproved parts into engines. If you think it's OK to stick a part in your engine without affecting safety or reliability then perhaps you might find Lycoming's recent crankshaft problems an interesting topic to study. To save money they used a large automotive producer of crankshafts to make their IO-540 cranks recently and now they've got a nightmare on their hands, not to mention 1,000 angry owners of grounded airplanes and several fatalities and subsequent lawsuits. Yep. Jes' find a part that fits and just stick 'er in. No problem, an' thangs'll go lots faster, tew. Ptooie!
And I could care less what you do to your MGB. But let your mods cause death over at your neighbor's house and see what happens and how much you'll save. And when you bought your MGB, would you have paid as much for it if you knew the previous owner had stuck re-worked Chevy pistons with non-standard pins in it?
The problem the FAA has is in being charged with the responsibility to keep an industry standardized for the safety of the general public. They're damned if they do and damned if they don't. And if they spent all their time and manpower researching to give approval to every shadetree idea that hatches in someone's backyard, would that be a good use of taxpayer monies? Of course not. Those with the ideas and the potential to profit by them should bear the cost and burden of proving them. If they don't plan to sell them, then they can get an experimental airworthiness certificate and operate within those rules.
Of course, it could be argued that if you don't care about legality, and if you own the darn thing....then have at it.
But if you later take someone for a ride in it that believes the standard airworthiness certificate you've got displayed is still valid, then you're a potential felon and rightfully so. Ask the passengers of the airliner that went down from unapproved maintenance on the tail if they feel their deaths were OK because the company wanted to do it "their better way" instead of the approved way.
If you truly believe your idea and method has merit, then the correct, legal, and moral way to do this is apply for approval or an experimental certificate and do it properly. Right?
You want horsepower cheap? Get a flatter-pitched prop or a bigger engine. They're both available lots cheaper and imminently more honorable than taking an illegal chance with someone else's life. My too sins.

[ak2711c]

I know two people that have gotten a Lycon overhaul and nether are real happy. One has had to have them tear the engine back down three times because they made the internal tolerances too tight. That is part of where the extra ponys are coming from. He had his CHT and EGT temps going through the roof. My other friend had the same luck. His engine would actually die as he rolled out on landing due to the heat and tight tolerances. His is being torn down again now. Apparently these are not isolated cases ether, as I understand this happens quite often with there overhauls. I there defence they are going to warranty them. Also one of them was a Lycoming 0-360 that they claimed dynoed at 207hp but when it was compaired to another identical aircraft with a stock 0-360, the stock one out performed it easily. Has anyone else heard of any similar stories?
Shawn

[wa4jr]

George you are absolutely correct! All good points you made. I do think that if FAA approval were easier to get, then we would have some very nince mods out there for our airplanes...but then some bad ones would slip under the door as well. Better stay safe and conservative that wild and liberal, Huh? Wouldn't you know yesterday at the Post Office I saw a Summit cataloge....all automotive stuff...I should have know better, but quite interesting. I took it home for future reading. I'm just going to have to limit the bulk of my shop tinkering to automotive engines I suppose. I can be happy tooling along in my 170 with the antique engine and when/if I find I need or want more power, I'll just look in the lower end of the C-180 market. ....or by then maybe that new controlable pitch prop will be available for the O-300 at a decent price Thanks for the info on Lycon guys....I'll look eslewhere in 900 hours!