A Simple Auto Engine Conversion

I was thumbing through a catalog from Speedway Motors. They advertise
a magneto-type distributor. Assuming you didn't come across a
thrashed race engine with magnetos, couldn't someone put together an
engine worthy of aircraft use, by simply 1) ordering an aftermarket
engine with fuel injection, such as the chevy "RamJet" crate engine,
2) adding a dry sump lubrication system to it (not too strange
addition to high perf cars nowadays), and 3)-adding the magneto from
Speedway. Use direct drive to keep the RPM low and reliability high.
I doubt that today's hi perf crate engines lack the torque to turn a
prop at 1:1.

If this is unsafe, specifically why?

I know someone could fly within 100 miles of a t-storm and have the
static electricity play with the ignition system, but stop a magneto?
If you were struck with lightning, your auto-engine might stop, but
then your resin might burn and melt, leaving you with some loose
fiberglass to negotiate a crash. Point I'm making is, experimental
planes near t-storms have bigger probs to worry about, don't they?

BTW, that magneto appears to be offered just for big and small block
chevy's. Aside from that, the models they carry are "nostalgia
engines"...1950 hemis, flat head fords and the like. Another caveat:
they cost $1100...but even with that and a $1200 dry sump system, we
are still way under the cost of an O-540.

wrote:

Another caveat:
they cost $1100...but even with that and a $1200 dry sump system, we
are still way under the cost of an O-540.
and you are over the weight of an O-540...

But it will fly


--
Volem rien foutre al païs!
Philippe Vessaire Ò¿Ó¬
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Aug 25, 4:25*am, Philippe wrote:
wrote:
Another caveat:
they cost $1100...but even with that and a $1200 dry sump system, we
are still way under the cost of an O-540.

* *and you are over the weight of an O-540...

But *it will fly

--
Volem rien foutre al païs!
* * Philippe Vessaire *Ò¿Ó¬
** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**

not if it's an aluminum aftermarket racing block. i don't think GM's
ramjet crate engine is offered with aluminum blocks though...but in
all honesty, there are a dozen shops that could make an alloy ramjet
chevy engine in their sleep.

i suspect an alloy chevy small block weighs less than an O-540, and an
alloy chevy big block weighs a little more...so you get to choose. i
assume you need a radiator, but not a psru.

given the output of the big block in the neighborhood of 500hp, maybe
it would be fair to compare it's weight/fuel consumption to a TSIO-540
or normally aspirated O-720 or PT6 turboprop.

my reason for starting this thread is simple...i've read a lot of "mad
scientist/decades of refinement" auto conversion stories...only to see
this magneto option in a consumer catalog as a 2 wire bolt in! i
realize magnetos are in $18,000-48,000 corporate-sponsored race
engines, but then you'd just as well buy a 220hp Franklin for the same
money.

wrote:

BTW, that magneto appears to be offered just for big and small block
chevy's. Aside from that, the models they carry are "nostalgia
engines"...1950 hemis, flat head fords and the like. Another caveat:
they cost $1100...but even with that and a $1200 dry sump system, we
are still way under the cost of an O-540.

Did they have one for the Corvair?

nope...you'd have a tough time getting fuel injection / dry sump in a
corvair motor too. if you don't mind carbs, and like the 1960s
engines, you could also consider a buick aluminum

...in fact, you could look for a shop that specializes in making range
rover V8 w/EFI work outside of their OEM environment. range rover was
essentially a small aluminum buick v8....but i think it was
discontinued around 2000. still, the range rover engine is probably a
lot easier to find than the buick version. but you'd probably end up
with 33% more weight than the corvair


On Aug 25, 8:35*am, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote:
wrote:
BTW, that magneto appears to be offered just for big and small block
chevy's. *Aside from that, the models they carry are "nostalgia
engines"...1950 hemis, flat head fords and the like. *Another caveat:
they cost $1100...but even with that and a $1200 dry sump system, we
are still way under the cost of an O-540.

Did they have one for the Corvair?

On Aug 25, 3:48*pm, "
wrote:
I was thumbing through a catalog from Speedway Motors. *They advertise
a magneto-type distributor. *Assuming you didn't come across a
thrashed race engine with magnetos, couldn't someone put together an
engine worthy of aircraft use, by simply 1) ordering an aftermarket
engine with fuel injection, such as the chevy "RamJet" crate engine,
2) adding a dry sump lubrication system to it (not too strange
addition to high perf cars nowadays), and 3)-adding the magneto from
Speedway. *Use direct drive to keep the RPM low and reliability high.
I doubt that today's hi perf crate engines lack the torque to turn a
prop at 1:1.

If this is unsafe, specifically why?

I know someone could fly within 100 miles of a t-storm and have the
static electricity play with the ignition system, but stop a magneto?
If you were struck with lightning, your auto-engine might stop, but
then your resin might burn and melt, leaving you with some loose
fiberglass to negotiate a crash. *Point I'm making is, experimental
planes near t-storms have bigger probs to worry about, don't they?

BTW, that magneto appears to be offered just for big and small block
chevy's. *Aside from that, the models they carry are "nostalgia
engines"...1950 hemis, flat head fords and the like. *Another caveat:
they cost $1100...but even with that and a $1200 dry sump system, we
are still way under the cost of an O-540.

How about this one:
http://www.vertical-aviation.com/press.aspx?pr_id=53

On Aug 25, 9:06*pm, JohnO wrote:
On Aug 25, 3:48*pm, "





wrote:
I was thumbing through a catalog from Speedway Motors. *They advertise
a magneto-type distributor. *Assuming you didn't come across a
thrashed race engine with magnetos, couldn't someone put together an
engine worthy of aircraft use, by simply 1) ordering an aftermarket
engine with fuel injection, such as the chevy "RamJet" crate engine,
2) adding a dry sump lubrication system to it (not too strange
addition to high perf cars nowadays), and 3)-adding the magneto from
Speedway. *Use direct drive to keep the RPM low and reliability high.
I doubt that today's hi perf crate engines lack the torque to turn a
prop at 1:1.

If this is unsafe, specifically why?

I know someone could fly within 100 miles of a t-storm and have the
static electricity play with the ignition system, but stop a magneto?
If you were struck with lightning, your auto-engine might stop, but
then your resin might burn and melt, leaving you with some loose
fiberglass to negotiate a crash. *Point I'm making is, experimental
planes near t-storms have bigger probs to worry about, don't they?

BTW, that magneto appears to be offered just for big and small block
chevy's. *Aside from that, the models they carry are "nostalgia
engines"...1950 hemis, flat head fords and the like. *Another caveat:
they cost $1100...but even with that and a $1200 dry sump system, we
are still way under the cost of an O-540.

How about this one:http://www.vertical-aviation.com/press.aspx?pr_id=53- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

that's a nice engine. everyone says "ooh -- auto...dangerous" but no
one can explain exactly why. let's shrug on exactly why that gm
engine will get us killed, and just pay $38,000 for a 180hp
engine. ...or let's pay 6000 for a 2 stroke 80hp engine and hope
people dont laugh.

i can appreciate the engineering/advantages of aircraft turbine
engines, but the piston engines are overrated. given the choice of a
2 stroke rotax airplane, or a VW 4 stroke conversion, most mechanics
agree the VW engine is safer!!!

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:07:46 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

everyone says "ooh -- auto...dangerous" but no
one can explain exactly why.

1. Ignition systems with insufficient redundancy.
2. PSRU failures.
3. Difficulty in implementing efficient liquid cooling systems.

Ron Wanttaja

On Aug 27, 1:14*am, Ron Wanttaja wrote:
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:07:46 -0700 (PDT), "

wrote:
everyone says "ooh -- auto...dangerous" but no
one can explain exactly why.

1. Ignition systems with insufficient redundancy.
2. PSRU failures.
3. Difficulty in implementing efficient liquid cooling systems.

Ron Wanttaja

The ignition system redundancy is surmountable but doing so will
increase weight as does the PSRU. However PSRU and liquid cooled
engines predate the current trend of using high preformance automobile
engines. This however does not infer that problems and short service
life of the PSRU and engine have not always been an issue with
avaition engines.

Joe

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:07:46 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

everyone says "ooh -- auto...dangerous" but no
one can explain exactly why.

1. Ignition systems with insufficient redundancy.
2. PSRU failures.
3. Difficulty in implementing efficient liquid cooling systems.

But doesn't the Rotax 912 have reduction gearing and liquid cooling? It is
getting put into an awful lot of aircraft models - particularly LSAs.