V8 Auto Engine DEMO with PSRU's Geared Drive for Aircraft

[@Vansaircraftbuilders]

AVIATION TRAINING WITH ROD MACHADO - Become a PILOT - Improve Your Skills! vansaircraftbuilders.com/flight-training.aspx

[@allendavis5302]

Everyone, I got a big list of 34 comments and questions this morning. Apparently the auto notification was off line for a while. Normally I reply to each individual’s set of questions. But I leave for AirVenture at 5 am tomorrow morning and time does not permit that. Luckily for me there were several repeats on the list. First, I want to thank all the positive comments about our designs and installations. Second, we will be in booth #624 in the North Aircraft Display Area, a corner booth at the south end. That area is just south of the war bird area. Our RV-10 featured in the videos will be there parked at an angle facing the outer corner. Answers: Yes, there are some great Toyota engines that would make good aircraft engines. We have smaller PSRU’s for them as well. No, because the factory ECU will not support a mechanical throttle body. The factory electric throttle bodies have reliability issues in an aircraft application and the FAA does not allow fly-by-wire throttles. So all of our ECU’s have been MEFI-4’s, FiTech, or MSD Atomic systems. Holley also make a great ECU, and they all support mechanical throttle bodies. All or these ECU’s have tables that go to 5,200 meters MSL (17,060 feet) and will interpolate timing and A/F ratios above that based on sensor inputs. We won’t do turbo’s or superchargers for more power. We will do turbo’s for turbo normalizing. Many of the available turbo systems can maintain sea level performance to 16,000+ feet. The clutch will disengage if the engine shuts down for what ever reason. This will allow the propeller to free wheel in flight. A fixed pitch or normal constant speed propeller free wheeling will cause more drag than if it were in a fixed/stopped position. To correct that, and reduce the drag below what a fixed/stopped propeller would cause, we recommend using a constant speed propeller that reduces pitch with increased oil pressure rather than the standard increasing pitch with increased oil pressure propeller. This type of propeller will go to a high pitch setting after loosing oil pressure and possibly auto-feather, rather than go to a low pitch setting, which greatly reduces the drag from the propeller. The clutch has three major advantages that solves several issues. The engine starts like it is in park/neutral in a car allowing the start to live a long life. The clutch engages at 800 to 900 rpm’s, which sounds high, but is only 480 to 540 rpm’s at the propeller. The air flow at that rpm is the minimum needed for air flow through the radiators to keep the engine cool idling on the ramp. Getting most aircraft to start taxiing requires the propeller to turn at at least 1200 to 1600 rpm’s, which is 2000 to 2667 rpm’s on the engine. It’s all relative to the propeller requirements, not what a car needs. The damping hub of the clutch helps greatly to manage the secondary and third order harmonics. If either of those ever match up with the primary harmonics a lot of things will start to fail all over the aircraft. Since 1996 we have not had to put any RPM limitations on any engine in any airframe. Ask any certified engine manufacturer if they can say that. The clutch disengaging after parking the aircraft prevents Propeller Kickback, which is the inertial mass of the spinning propeller forcing the engine through compression cycles. A reduction gearbox gives any propeller the mechanical advantage needed to do that. This is very similar to a gas engine dieseling in a car. It is very hard on the propeller, gearbox, engine, airframe, and instruments. It is not a pleasant experience for anyone inside the airplane either. The inertial mass of a given propeller will determine how much the propeller will spin after the clutch disengages after shutting down the engine. Light weight composite propellers will spin 2 to 3 times, while a heavier metal propeller will spin up to 12 times. Winds less than 25 to 30 mph will not start the propeller to spin because the aft end of the propeller shaft drives the oil pump and the propeller governor as well as trying to rotate the gears through a bath of gear lube. The weight of an LS3 engine installation will vary for different aircraft types, but that is also true for certified engines. The LS3 installation for an RV-10 is 580 to 582 lbs. The 260 HP Lycoming sold for the RV-10 installation is 587 to 589 lbs. That does NOT include a propeller or propeller governor. It does include all fluids required to fly both engines. The higher 375 HP for take-off is pure gravy. Why an LS3 engine? Yes, they cost less, about 45% less to install at retail costs for both. Their maintenance also costs a lot less. Very good spark plugs cost only $14 each rather than $40+ each, they last 5 times longer, and there are only 8 instead of 12. Savings on oil changes are about the same. The engine operated like we set them up will last 3000+ hours, not 2000 hours, and we don’t have to replace any jugs to get there. The fuel burn rates are 25-30% less at the same horsepower settings. And a replacement long block costs only $4800 to get back to a zero time engine. Our PSRU’s are also good for 3000 hours, and economical to overhaul. If you do the math for just 2000 hours for a certified engine it comes out to over $120,000 of savings. So they cost a lot less, weigh a little bit less, last 50% longer, and produce 37% more horsepower. In any other market I would be able to charge more, not 45% less. The cooling system design took some development early on, but by 1999 we had that nailed down. Since then all of our LS-V8 engine installations never over heat on the ground, in long climbs, or in cruise. Because the thermostat controls the cooling they can’t be shock cooled during decent either. The only time I have seen an in-line 6 engine installation was in WW1 replica’s. Yes, they were Ford 300’s. In an installation were the engine is never run over 4500 rpm’s, and only for take-off and climb, there is no need to upgrade the rotating assembly parts to forged components. But if you want to do that cheaply buy and LS376-480 or LS376-525 with all forged rotating parts, and put an LS3 cam in it. All versions of the stock LS-V8’s are used in stationary power installations around the world where they are run at 4000 to 4500 rpm’s contentiously at 50% power or higher for a year or more using several types of fuel. They get oil changes while they are running so they never shut down. That’s a very tough engine design! The SD400 weighs 109 lbs with the flywheel/clutch assy and 3 quarts of oil, without a propeller or propeller governor. We get a lot of hot-rod guys asking about all sorts of power adders and improvers. We call them NASCAR Bubba’s. It is very easy to take a stock car and beef up the frame and suspension to handle up to 3 times more horsepower. I know because I’ve done it, and watched all the TV shoes that tell you how to do it. But that is VERY hard to do for any airplane. You can easily end up with an engine that can twist the airframe up in a little ball on take-off. Worse than putting a V8 in a motorcycle. Even a stock LS3 in an RV-10 can force you into an uncontrollable torque turn off the runway if you slam in full power all at once. This is by far is the longest, most comprehensive reply I have ever posted for this sight. If you have more questions I will try not to let so many slip by and return to answering them individually again. If you visit our booth next week we can go into great detail on everything.

[@EVGUY13245]

This is awesome. I wonder how it would handle a set of turbos.

[@em2attic]

Stoooooopppppp lmao!!! Sr71 whooooo lmao!!!

[@EVGUY13245]

@Justin Hawes that I know lol. I meant how much more fun and faster the plane would fly lmao

[@nonormies2837]

Reliably good up to 500 hp without

[@Mr123pbd]

@Justin Hawes bruh its an ls you dont need to gap the rings what are you smoking and obvi this guy is smoking something cause an lq9 is a 6 litre not 5.3

[@gtgodbear6320]

One on 6-12lb. would probably be plenty.

[@raynus1160]

Very cool. That should liven-up the old 182.

[@bennapper1302]

An amazing conversion!! Does this retain the factory GM LS3 ECU? What altitude is it capable of?

[@EatPezzzz]

1:26 is it an LQ9 or a 5.3L? An LQ9 is a 6.0L.

[@oldcrow3646]

Lq9 5.3L truck engine

[@gavincline209]

@@oldcrow3646 the Lq9 is a 6.0L they came out of the 2500’s or the “MAX” trucks, Cadillac used them also. It’s the newer 07’ and up version of the LQ4. The lm7’s are 5.3L.

[@onementality9781]

@@gavincline209 I would say the 6.0 and if not then it should of been: because more torque and over all power:)

[@hondaman117]

he probably meant LC9, 5.3 with Aluminum block. The block is clearly aluminum in a couple shots.

[@erichaley6776]

I always thought an LQ4 was the 6.0L truck engine but I maybe wrong

[@bradgeary3467]

wondering. if you have major engine failure would the clutch not disengage and allow prop to free wheel? and this would not drastically reduced glide performance in a pretty major way? i love the LS. great for almost anything

[@pilotavery]

You don't actually want the prop to freewheel. A completely stopped prop actually lets you glide farther than a moving prop that's not producing power.

[@rickn8or]

How does it meet the FAA requirement for a dual ignition system? And what is the induction system? And lastly, is it a fixed or variable pitch prop?

[@231pilot]

Experimental aircraft don't need to meet any requirements. This system uses a single ECU/Cam/Crank system, so no real redundancy. I'd use the engine and add an aftermarket dual ECU/Spark/Injection system with a backup battery, IMO.

[@EVGUY13245]

@@231pilot I think that's how everyone does it tbh. That's how I'd do it too

[@AirborneRenegade]

Experimental rating

[@Top_34]

Imagine getting gapped by a V8 plane

[@WatchForThePlot]

Like how close the steering wheel is to the props

[@cadilacdesert]

Does it stay cool enough climb out and taxi?

[@apivovarov2]

what happened to the prop if the engine stops in the air? will it be in neutral and rotate freely by the air?

[@scottmitchell7302]

Nice work good engineering credits to u

[@goodtalker]

Does anyone know if a straight six automotive engine has ever been used in aviation? Seems like I once saw a plane with a Ford 300 straight six in a small ag plane.

[@ExoticNarcotics]

Yes. Simple small plane, but meeting requirements is the always issue :/ Wouldn't get kuch trouble other than fines if caught but caught illegally flying unfer radar will def be a price possibly jail time shiiiiit MOST likely. Felony lol.. But you can at Airports, and such. Yes there has been. Also twin turbo LS7 (7.0L) in a plane. Boats is my fav cause flying is way to complicated

[@jaredjhale]

Viking makes their engines from Honda Fit and another small car engine (Subaru?). I believe theirs is a 4 piston though, not 6. However, their engine is absolutely going to be less weight than the truck engine shown here.

[@chaselittle2601]

Corvair motors

[@lovetoflylovetofly3843]

Franklin used to make a straight 6 air-cooled engine that was is a couple planes.

[@chippyjohn1]

Suzuki M13a non VVT engine is better than any engine currently used in aircraft with the exception of the RED V12. For a 6 I was considering using a BMW M54 or the later B57/B58. M54 would still be the best inline 6 without the Vanos. Will start manufacturing my own inline 6 engines hopefully within 2 years. Aerospace needs an overhaul. The engines currently being used are obsolete 1930's designs, and the automotive engines being used have balance shafts etc. I am amazed that no one has produced a good engine for LSA.

[@Stubby0266]

What happens in an event of an engine failure, the prop wind mills?

[@vernonknight5827]

Is the gear box an overdrive and if so what ratio?

[@Agwings1960]

Whats the horsepower to weight ratio on that whole setup.

[@apivovarov2]

legendary reliable toyota engines should be good for that? right?

[@thomasmalone215]

Just curious what’s the benefit of doing the ls swap? Obviously a lot cheaper to rebuild but, but does it get better fuel economy? And what other benefits does it have?

[@holl0918]

Better fuel economy, variable spark timing, higher max takeoff power, single lever power control, ability to use unleaded fuel, cheaper engine parts (?).

[@BannedOnMain]

Power to weight ratio is the main one. Max power for most big continentals is 350hp. An LS with a gearbox can make whatever ho you can imagine and parts are much cheaper. This will never make it into a certified aircraft though.

[@limabravo6065]

One question I have every time I see an automotive engine in an aircraft is do you guys swap out the crankshafts for forged units? I mean as far as V8’s go the LS family has an extremely strong bottom end, but constant high RPM has to be pretty tough. Not criticizing just curious

[@EVGUY13245]

@Mark Pachol 480hp is a forged bottom end. Although I'd use a billet block

[@Logan-ce2uh]

How much does that redrive way???

[@longboardalways]

The LQ9 is a 6.0.

[@thomasmahoney9748]

Why add the complexity and weight of a clutch and decouple? WHY?

[@bndahi8251]

is sounds very similar to the Da-42 engine, the AE 300. maybe because it too is a modified car engine

[@robertgiggie6366]

The clutch seems to be unnecessary complexity since as soon as the engine started it was apparently at high idle above the stated 800 rpm engagement.

[@ioijiopjkiopjkp]

It's so they can use the stock starter motor.

[@Deviation4360]

If you see many belt type re-drive v8 set ups running they do quite often struggle at startup with the full prop load, my guess is that the smaller square bore/stroke v8's don't come to life as efficiently as the big 4 and 6 jugs of your certified aero engines (for the same capacity/power to weight). This engine has most likely had a warm up prior to it being demo'd and thus could be brought up from idle quicker, seemingly mitigating the clutches effect. I would add that perhaps these jerky start ups may tend to lead to re-drive belts cracking. Think of why the lumpy Harley Davidson V-twin has never been directly geared to its gear box in its design history, it would probably break the gear train on a regular basis. The belts from crank output to the clutch end of the gearbox are cheaper as a replacement on the motorcycle, however the aircraft cant't pull over so easily to replace the belts that are more or less under full strain in operation. The clutch in this re-drive avoids the awkward stresses of start up that could lead to the belt failure. If the gearbox contains actual gearing the same problem exists, necessitating the clutch. These are all my best guess as I haven't actually researched this engines design philosophy.

[@bradgeary3467]

pretty sure it has to do with difficulty starting this engine with a load (prop) on it

[@markclark4154]

It probably has to do with the torsional vibration on startup and shutdown. Ever noticed how a direct drive piston engine plane shakes on shut down?

[@Mowers11]

Can an engine like the LQ9 run at 75% power for several hours during cruise? I mean on the road engines like this run at 10-15% power for a while then 45% going up hill for a few minutes then 20% on the road just no where near the Constant power required by aviation cross country cruise.

[@ToyotaNutjob]

Yes. Lol

[@jstravelers4094]

The fuse on each individual coil pack should be implemented on all of these engines no matter what they are used to power. I don't need to be stranded in the middle of a desert.

[@SteveAubrey1762]

S-W-E-E-T!

[@marcelothales]

Top best

[@44hawk28]

Richmond autos for quite a while and they have lynched on aircraft in the service and overhauled aircraft instruments when I first got out of the service and installed them in aircraft. My question is this. Do you have a stock cam in that engine and if so why in the world would you leave the stock cam in it and not put in a cam that provides a little bit more torque which is a required element in pushing something through the air or through the water. Everybody keeps talking about horsepower requirements in aircraft. Horsepower does not push the propeller. Torque does. If you can get torque numbers at a lower RPM you can get better fuel mileage or burn fewer gallons per hour. Furthermore, I pulled a couple of those engines apart and the ring gap on him is like .030. That is ridiculously large and would result in way too much oil usage for an aircraft. I would think of bringing it down to at least .018 might work out far better. And possibly with a little bit higher tension rings then come on an automotive engine.

[@orange_gretsch_man7763]

Lm7 is a 5.3 lq9 is a 6.0

[@bradgeary3467]

yep

[@waitandsee8175]

👍👍👍👍😄

[@Fuzzysmoke]

LQ9 is 6.0

[@MountedMontersTV]

Lq9 is a 6.0 but everyone makes mistakes

[@SKORPION0]

Lets strap on a supercharger🥲