Estimate Performance with IO-550 an 330SX

[morrisond]

Given the ability to put an engine other than an IO-470 in one of Todd's creations, and in an attempt to get discussion going on this forum I've been looking at alternatives.

It looks like if I do this the way to go would be an IO-550(with an BRS to balance out the weight and provide additional safety) built by Ultimate Aero Engines (an additional 7-9% HP) K&N Filter(Claims 2-4%), and an Leading edge Exhaust(+15-20Hp). Let's call it a solid 330-340HP.

Use X-Stol Wing Extensions and Micro VG's - Has this been tried on an 260Se?

The question is could this combo take off vertically?(Just joking). What would the lightly loaded take-off roll be at 2400 lbs? Less than 200ft? What about at max Gross, 300'? What could this plane land in? It matters to me as the smaller the field I need the less snow I have to plow in the winter(Muskoka, Ontario)

What about Cruise speed is 160 or higher within reach?

What about rate of Climb? 2,000' per minute plus? Sure would be fun and given the cost of building one of these the extra mods wouldn't add that much percentage cost.

Let the speculation run wild. Maybe we'll give Todd the idea for a new Super 260Se the 330SX.

[kwmoore]

There was some related speculation in an earlier thread. (http://www.260sepilots.org/forums/showthread.php?t=304)

Several 260se's have wingtip extensions. (http://www.260sepilots.org/forums/showthread.php?t=176)

Todd has tried out VGs (http://www.260sepilots.org/forums/showthread.php?t=295) on the 260se but found them not very effective in the 260se's low-angle-of-attack slow flight regime.

I don't think the landing distance would change at all, but the takeoff run would be shorter.

160 KTAS might be achievable on a very clean, straight airframe, but one can only push the (by modern standards) draggy 182 airframe so fast. Air Plains and Texas Skyways often advertise 160 KTAS for their 300 hp conversions, but I believe most customers are disappointed in that aspect. Todd quotes 150-153 KTAS as a 75% best power ROP cruise for the 260se, so the cube root rule would predict 157-160 for a "300se." This would also include the benefit of the drag reduction mods that he installs.

On the other hand the climb rate should be prodigious.

Keep in mind that the IO-550 is by comparison a real fuel hog. My experience in the SR22 is ~20 gph for 75% best power, rich of peak (ROP). I operate mostly wide-open-throttle-lean-of-peak (LOP), and fuel flow is typically 15-15.5 gph below 4000 feet, ~14.5 gph between 4000 and 8000, and 13.5 gph or less above 8000. Thus the IO-550 run LOP has about the same fuel flow as the IO-470 run ROP. If you're willing to sacrifice range and fuel costs for the extra takeoff and climb performance and marginally faster cruise, then the IO-550 would be worth considering.

[morrisond]

Hi Kevin,

Wouldn't the Landing distance be shorter with the Wing Extensions due to the lower stall speed?

Any thoughts on how much HP an Blueprinted Io-550 from Ultimate engines and leading edge exhaust would put out? Wouldn't this push you over 160 knots?(Doesn't really matter to me, I'm more interested in the climb and takeoff performance this combo would give).

Another option would be Ultimate Engines IO-470 (275Hp I think I saw on this site) with the Leading edge Exhaust (+18 hp Dyno on an 0-470), could give you a nice 290 out of an IO-470.

Can you put a three blade on an 260SE(Asthetics/Noise reduction, additional ground clearance)

I'm Guessing throttled back to 145 knots or so the GPH could be quite low on an IO-550 and nice and quiet.

[kwmoore]

Wouldn't the Landing distance be shorter with the Wing Extensions due to the lower stall speed?

Yes it would; I misunderstood, thinking you just meant IO-550 vs. IO-470.

I don't know enough about the outcomes of engine "blueprinting" to say how much increased power would result from an Ultimate Engine or Victor "project."

Rod Keller, who checks in on this site now and again, has a wren with an IO-550 and 3-blade, perhaps he can comment. I would imagine you could put a 3-blade on the IO-470 if you want, but I wouldn't expect any performance gain. You might have to balance the extra weight unless you used one of the new lightweight composite props.

Is the "leading edge exhaust" certified for all of these engines, particularly for IO-470 vs. O-470? I am not familiar with this mod.

[morrisond]

From what I can tell the exhaust is good for any of the 0-470, IO-470, IO-520 and IO-550.

What is Victors website? Is that Mattituck?

[kwmoore]

Victor Aviation at KPAO:

http://www.victor-aviation.com/

[Todd Peterson]

We had an IO-470 that was blueprinted, ported, polished and flow balanced. It was a good engine and very smooth. I could not tell any significant difference in take off performance however. To me the biggest down side, other than the cost, is that you are forever tied to the company for product support. If your engine needs a cylinder replacement you would need to get another cylinder from the Overhaul Shop set up the same as the other cylinders on your engine. You couldn't simply just order another cylinder and install it.

As to the 520/550 issue I have thought about this over the years. The only reason I can see for going with the larger engine is for a shorter take off run or a higher rate of climb. A stock 260SE gets off in 390 feet at a gross weight of 2,950 lbs. This was measured during our certification. The new Katmai will get off in 310 feet at full gross. I'm not sure how much shorter one would be wanting to go and at what cost. If you look at the out takes on the new Katmai DVD you will see us going into a 250 foot long Jeep trail that ran right to the edge of a big hill on a rainy day. The wind was light and variable. To safely take a ton and a half of airplane into this strip is nothing short of amazing in my opinion. One also quickly comes to the conclusion that the engine has nothing to do with the landing part of the equation. Short landings are all aerodynamics. The I0-470 when compared to the larger engines is more reliable (Cessna Pilots Association has even stated that), burns less fuel and the total weight is less. In disucssing the larger engines with CPA tech staff it sounds like some of the larger engines may also be prone to vibraiton issues.

With all that said there is one spot that I do like the thought of more power and that is hauling heavy loads out of short high density altitude strips. Here the larger engine makes sense if you can retain the flying qualities of the airplane. Unfortuanately, or maybe fortunately, not many of our customers do this. I am currently looking at making a "one up" Katmai for a customer that needs just exactly this along with some other airframe modifications. As we get deeper into the Katmai X project I will keep everyone updated.