![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have de-restricted a Discus BT and a Discus 2cT as described below. The
climb rate definitely improves but not as much as reported - from averaging timed climbs and post flight analysis of flight recorder data I reckon you get about half a knot increase to average of 2.9 knots. Its still a worthwhile improvement but you have to be aware the regulatory and possible insurance considerations. John Galloway At 23:30 06 March 2015, Charlie Papa wrote: On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 2:14:12 AM UTC-5, wrote: Wondering if anyone has boosted the horsepower of a Solo 2350 turbo (or s= ustainer engine) to get better high and hot performance? If anyone has don= e this would like both positive and negative comments as to the work done, = the results and what they did to boost engine performance. Yes indeed, I have done it. It is not to INCREASE the horsepower so much a= s it is to RESTORE the horsepower that the 2350 was originally built to. I= t was de-tuned by tack welding a pair of constricting rings into the exhaus= t, and then reducing the jet size by one. =20 Mine is installed in a Discus 2cT, and as such, it is a sustainer. That me= ans no throttle, no choke, no generator, - just the simplest get-you-home a= nd lightest possible. If I understand correctly, the LBA required that it = be able to sustain level flight, presumably in controlled airspace. With t= he full 28 HP it was built to, in level flight it would overspeed, which cu= ts off the ignition. =20 But using it in controlled space requires the use of headphones; a non-star= ter for me. I just stay out of controlled space. However, with the horsep= ower estored from the diminished 22 to 28, does it climb better. You bette= r believe it. The restrictor rings are tack welded in and very vulnerable to a Dremmel to= ol. Then you must remove the two jets, move the larger one in the rear (lar= ger to overcome how much hotter it will run with already heated air from th= e front cylinder passing over it) and move it to the front, and then put th= e next larger size in the rear. =20 Don't mix up the covers for the pulse diaphragm that 'injects' the air/fuel= ; the front one should not have the hole that would make it vulnerable to t= he prop wash. The result: MUCH improved climb, - perhaps 300 - 350/fpm vs. ~200. Hard to= be exact as the vibration shakes the hell out of the varios. =20 And in ~1100 hours, there is less than 10 hours on the engine, because it i= s just a sustainer, and because I start it right off tow each day (because = it's complicated and it starts faster if it has already run. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
solo 2350 engines | Rocket | Soaring | 3 | January 24th 07 03:58 PM |
Help with Solo 2350 | Limus | Soaring | 2 | May 3rd 06 02:15 AM |
Duo Turbo Climb / Altitude performance | Gary Emerson | Soaring | 16 | November 28th 05 08:19 AM |
Turbo performance vs non-turbo | John Doe | Owning | 22 | October 8th 05 02:34 AM |
Solo 2350 Engine Overhaul Manual - Translation Requested | Bob Gibbons | Soaring | 2 | January 10th 04 08:45 AM |