A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

WOT in cruise?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Old July 25th 03, 02:14 PM
Roger Long
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default WOT in cruise?

I was always taught that WOT was a "renter's setting" and that you should
back off to 2300-2400 if you want to get good life out of your engine. I
keep running across the Advanced Pilot Seminar guys asking, "Why EVER be
partial throttle in cruise?

Of course, they are probably also talking about advanced engines, with GAMI,
analyzers, matched injectors, etc. What about those of us flying behind the
glorified lawn mower engines of simpler aircraft. I've asked the question
over at the CPA forum but I'd like some opinions from this group.

Should I take our 172 N above altitudes where the POH says max power is 75%,
put the throttle all the way in, lean till it gets a bit rough, and then
enrich until it's smooth? As long as CHT and oil temps remain in an
acceptable range, can I then cruise along confident that I'm getting there
fastest and getting the best life from the engine?

I've often suspected this was the case. Turning faster seems intuitively to
be the same as the engine working harder but the trade off is that it doesn'
t work as long. Speed of metal surface over metal surface (with oil film)
within normal RPM ranges doesn't seem as significant a wear factor as the
total number of firing cycles and revolutions. It seems like those should be
about the same whether you fly at 115 knots or 90.

Figuring the RPM's out from the POH:

At 4000 feet, WOT, 2500 RPM there will be 129,591 revolutions per 100 miles.
At 2400 RPM, 130,896. At 2300, 131,100. Going WOT instead of 2300 REDUCES
firing cycles 1.15%!

If the faster speed saves a bladder break, you'll get a huge savings in
engine wear avoiding a thermal cycle and restart.

On the other hand, marine engine factory reps, who I have more frequent
contact with, tell me that the only significant indicator of engine life (as
long as temperatures remain in normal range) is the total amount of fuel
that goes through it. Seems like that should be true for aviation engines as
well.

Slowing down from WOT to 2300 in my 172 N should reduce fuel consumption
14.5%. That's pretty significant as well as probably saving a fuel stop
somewhere on a long trip.

--
Roger Long


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Propellor Primer Ebby Home Built 3 November 19th 04 10:36 AM
Australia's aquisition of cruise missiles zalzon Military Aviation 21 August 31st 04 09:26 PM
Cruise clearance Hankal Instrument Flight Rules 26 May 22nd 04 04:08 AM
CVN-65 Cruise 1982-1983 Raymond D. Hodil Jr. Naval Aviation 1 January 14th 04 12:01 PM
Cessna 404 Cruise settings Katia General Aviation 0 December 19th 03 05:04 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.