Cessna 182 Diesel Conversion

Katamarino

Katamarino

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
2,098
Location
YPJT
Display Name
Display name:
Katamarino
The SMA engine is back, this time under STC from Soloy.

"Special" pricing of only $175k for a 230hp, or $210k for 260hp. Both considerably more expensive than my airplane was in the first place.

Does anyone else think that this is absolutely ridiculous? I'd absolutely love to switch to a Diesel at TBO, but 'd only seriously consider it at 50% of this price.

I flew 140 hours behind an SMA engine on a 182 a few years back under the original SMA STC, and it had some key weaknesses to say the least.
 
After my small diesel 'incident' a few years ago (Thielert/Centurion 1.7) I rather keep flying on AVgas...

What diesels deliver 260hp in the 182?
 

Attachments

  • 210312+NOODLANDING.jpg
    210312+NOODLANDING.jpg
    44.8 KB · Views: 143
  • 4.jpg
    4.jpg
    205.2 KB · Views: 139
I'm a mechanical engineer. Have owned a Diesel pick-up truck for a decade and wouldn't give it up.
But as long as some form of avgas is available you'll never catch me owning a Diesel engine airplane. From what I have observed at the shop that maintains the Diamond twins (both Thielert and Austro) at our airport those engines are a maintenance nightmare. There is no chance the fuel savings will ever come close to offsetting the high entry fee plus the even higher maintenance costs.
 
GRG55 said:
I'm a mechanical engineer. Have owned a Diesel pick-up truck for a decade and wouldn't give it up.
But as long as some form of avgas is available you'll never catch me owning a Diesel engine airplane. From what I have observed at the shop that maintains the Diamond twins (both Thielert and Austro) at our airport those engines are a maintenance nightmare. There is no chance the fuel savings will ever come close to offsetting the high entry fee plus the even higher maintenance costs.
Click to expand...
That about sums it up for me......;)

I to am an Aero engineer, A&P I/A, and worked on a few aviation powerplant development programs......that were not very successful with aviation diesel powerplants.
 
Last edited:
They only make sense outside of the US, where Avgas is often unavailable or over $20 a gallon.
 
While the ad implies that there is an increase in payload, I don't see any numbers. Still, their price appears to be "all inclusive", with a nice engine monitor, and 100+ hours of labor; check that against the price of a well known engine replacement for a P210. And they don't mention whether you need a core stock engine, so you may have that to sell. An exceptional airframe with a bad engine may be a good candidate for this (compared to a new 182).
Yeah, I'm a compression ignition fan (though currently I have only a tractor thus powered.)
 
Even selling my PPonk engine and JPI-830 I think this cost would come out a bit on the high side. It's a shame as it'd be ideal for my trips to places like South America, Africa, Asia and so on. Maybe the price will decrease as they progress...but looking over the website Soloy seems to be a "If you have to ask the price, you can't afford it" kind of a shop so maybe not.
 
This company is taking a short, tortuous path to bankruptcy.

If you can’t sell a new diesel engine for profit at price of a factory overhauled avgas engine...you will be bankrupt inside 10years.
 
Last edited:
Tx_Flyboy said:
This company is taking a short, tortuous path to bankruptcy.

If you can’t sell a new diesel engine for profit at price of a factory overhauled avgas engine...you will be bankrupt inside 10years.
Click to expand...
Safran has been selling a diesel conversion for two decades and they are not out of business yet. At this point I think they are going to go the distance.

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk
 
Tx_Flyboy said:
This company is taking a short, tortuous path to bankruptcy.

If you can’t sell a new diesel engine for profit at price of a factory overhauled avgas engine...you will be bankrupt inside 10years.
Click to expand...

Maybe if they only sell in TX -- not so true in much of the rest of the world.

Besides, the engine is much more complex than a gas engine. Why would it sell for the same $$?
 
I know nothing about diesel aircraft engines. But I do know about auto ones. In general they are much more reliable and can produce a lot of power. They require less often mx but that mx is generally more expensive. The up front cost is higher but over the longer life of the engine averages out the less per mile in my opinion.
What’s the mx like in aircraft ones? Is the Overhaul time different or extended??
 
tspear said:
Safran has been selling a diesel conversion for two decades and they are not out of business yet. At this point I think they are going to go the distance.

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Saran's engine is not a conversion, and Safran is a very large company; they are 1/2 of CFM International, among other things. Still, it's too darned expensive.
 
If you ever owned a diesel truck (without DEF fluid) you would understand the benefits. There is a reason we use Diesel engines in our marine applications too. Much more reliable. If there was a practical option for my 210 I would definitely consider at TBO.
 
Interesting responses.
Apparently, people here don’t understand how price segmention works in avaiation.

$175k + $150k base airplane to save what? 4-6gal/hr of fuel? Really? This makes very little sense in the LARGEST GA market in the world.

They won’t stay in business because of one off sales to Africa, a handful in Europe and similar in small corners of the world where the money isn’t.

These people are asking for entry level single & twin turbo prop commitment to be stuck in a piston single with no hope of recouping a reasonable amount of money back and no quantifiable reliability/maintenance history.

Whatever.
 
Tx_Flyboy said:
Interesting responses.
Apparently, people here don’t understand how price segmention works in avaiation.

$175k + $150k base airplane to save what? 4-6gal/hr of fuel? Really? This makes very little sense in the LARGEST GA market in the world.

They won’t stay in business because of one off sales to Africa, a handful in Europe and similar in small corners of the world where the money isn’t.

These people are asking for entry level single & twin turbo prop commitment to be stuck in a piston single with no hope of recouping a reasonable amount of money back and no quantifiable reliability/maintenance history.

Whatever.
Click to expand...
It's the same logic the turbo normalizer crowd spews......and I have a turbo. :D
 
benyflyguy said:
In general they are much more reliable and can produce a lot of power. They require less often mx but that mx is generally more expensive. The up front cost is higher but over the longer life of the engine averages out the less per mile in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I'm... Quite familiar with an operation flying C404's and C406's. (Aka F406) Basically the only big difference between them is a GTSIO vs PT-6. Otherwise they're overall similar planes and we use them likewise. Your description of diesel vs gas is our same experience of avgas vs Jet-A turbine. Far more expensive up front for the turbine, far more expensive mx, but the frequency of the mx and the overall reliability of the PT-6 almost washes out the costs.

Too bad nobody can scale down a small enough turbine to be worth it for small aircraft. I guess the Soloy 206's are the closest we'll ever get.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
Saran's engine is not a conversion, and Safran is a very large company; they are 1/2 of CFM International, among other things. Still, it's too darned expensive.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, I could have been more specific. Safran has had certified clean sheet direct drive diesel engine for two decades. It has been sold/used only as an STC on a limited number of aircraft.

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk
 
Tx_Flyboy said:
Interesting responses.
Apparently, people here don’t understand how price segmention works in avaiation.

$175k + $150k base airplane to save what? 4-6gal/hr of fuel? Really? This makes very little sense in the LARGEST GA market in the world.

They won’t stay in business because of one off sales to Africa, a handful in Europe and similar in small corners of the world where the money isn’t.

These people are asking for entry level single & twin turbo prop commitment to be stuck in a piston single with no hope of recouping a reasonable amount of money back and no quantifiable reliability/maintenance history.

Whatever.
Click to expand...
When I started flying in 2009, the difference between avgas and Jet-A was around buck fifty. Now it often pushes closer to two fifty.

There are also a lot of planes which fly from the USA to Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean. All places where avgas is six or more dollars per gallon then Jet-A.

Then for those who fly only domestically, you will often see the engine conversion to diesel has a greater range.

Lastly, if you have a bad camshaft or case; you are look in at the price of a new engine. That conversion is not much more and makes life a lot more comfortable when you fly.

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk
 
benyflyguy said:
I know nothing about diesel aircraft engines. But I do know about auto ones. In general they are much more reliable and can produce a lot of power. They require less often mx but that mx is generally more expensive. The up front cost is higher but over the longer life of the engine averages out the less per mile in my opinion.
What’s the mx like in aircraft ones? Is the Overhaul time different or extended??
Click to expand...

"...much more reliable..."

Who are you trying to kid?
If what you say was actually the case Otto cycle engines wouldn't utterly dominate the light vehicle market the way they do here.
 
Last edited:
No need to kid anyone. My dad retired his Detroit diesels in his commercial fishing boat with over 15,000 hours on them. One had to be rebuilt at 5000 hrs due to a coolant overheat issue. They were still tuning when he pulled and sold them to the new owner. See how many gas engines make it to 5,000 hrs in the salt water marine world. There is a reason there in 99% of the commercial fishing boats in my area. Unlike car engines, marine applications require a fairly high constant load like airplanes.

Here is a example of a duramax making it to over a million miles and the only thing major the truck needed was a transmission.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/articl...sf/2012/05/flint-made_chevy_silverado_pas.amp
 
I just wanted to add... take care of a diesel and it will last. Abuse a diesel it will last, but likely not as long. Warm ups are key just like any engine and allow the oil to cool the turbo. Not something I am religious about my duramax. Glad I was able to get rid of the def in my 2014 due to a faulty def tank. They are more complex and therefore more expensive. The naturally aspirated ford diesels of the early 90s were horrible, shaking and loud loud, lacking power. They are almost as quiet and smooth running as a gas nowadays and they don’t smell as bad. There are instances of the modern day diesel holding up to 2000hp from the blocks designed for less then 500HP. My duramax puts out 405 stock but after just a exhaust, chip and secondary fuel pump it easily handles 600hp. Pulls harder and is more fuel efficient than any gas engines of my want more HP past.
 
Skibum44 said:
If you ever owned a diesel truck (without DEF fluid) you would understand the benefits. There is a reason we use Diesel engines in our marine applications too. Much more reliable. If there was a practical option for my 210 I would definitely consider at TBO.
Click to expand...

You are seriously comparing a liquid cooled diesel marine and a liquid cooled diesel truck engine to an air cooled diesel aircraft engine?
 
Clip4 said:
You are seriously comparing a liquid cooled diesel marine and a liquid cooled diesel truck engine to an air cooled diesel aircraft engine?
Click to expand...

The 1st generation SMA engine is liquid cooled, I'm pretty sure this is too.

Edit; looked into it and it's a combination air and liquid. 1st generation had a couple of great big radiators. Cooling still sucked.
 
Skibum44 said:
I just wanted to add... take care of a diesel and it will last. Abuse a diesel it will last, but likely not as long. Warm ups are key just like any engine and allow the oil to cool the turbo. Not something I am religious about my duramax. Glad I was able to get rid of the def in my 2014 due to a faulty def tank. They are more complex and therefore more expensive. The naturally aspirated ford diesels of the early 90s were horrible, shaking and loud loud, lacking power. They are almost as quiet and smooth running as a gas nowadays and they don’t smell as bad. There are instances of the modern day diesel holding up to 2000hp from the blocks designed for less then 500HP. My duramax puts out 405 stock but after just a exhaust, chip and secondary fuel pump it easily handles 600hp. Pulls harder and is more fuel efficient than any gas engines of my want more HP past.
Click to expand...

There's nothing inherently durable about a diesel engine. Compared to a spark engine, the combustion events are explosive, and result in much higher peak temperatures and pressures. Off road diesel engines still use high sulfur fuel that forms corrosive acid. The reason that marine and truck diesels last longer than their gasoline equivalents is that they are built from the oil pan up just to do that, and they are priced, and weigh accordingly. If you look at the light duty engines in automobiles, they last 4000 - 5000 hours. Granted, they are operating at a low percentage of their rated power most of the time, but they also have to survive many, many cold starts and hot shutdowns.

There's no reason to believe that an aviation diesel, which has to be light in weight, would live as long as a marine or truck diesel.
 
I hear that engineers tell the marketing department: "You can have three attributes to your design. Fast, cheap, strong. Pick two."
 
FormerHangie said:
There's no reason to believe that an aviation diesel, which has to be light in weight, would live as long as a marine or truck diesel.
Click to expand...

There is no reason to believe it wouldn’t be more reliable then its gas counterpart. I never said it would last as long as my marine or truck diesels, nor would I push it as long. However, it would be the most cared for diesel I own.
 
dennisc172 said:
After my small diesel 'incident' a few years ago (Thielert/Centurion 1.7) I rather keep flying on AVgas...
Click to expand...

the Thielert/Centurion 1.7 was a fiasco
 
tspear said:
The plane, the engine, Diamond or Thielert?
Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
buy a new plane that turns into..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technify_Motors
On 14 May 2008 Thielert announced that it would no longer honour existing engine warranties for engines installed in Diamond Aircraft and also dramatically increased the price of parts. Owners who required warranty work were required to pay cash in advance for parts. This announcement caused an immediate negative reaction from Diamond DA42 owners and also from Diamond Aircraft.
------------
As part of its insolvency, Thielert indicated that it would not honor warranties or inspect and replace life-limited parts as was the case when the engines were sold to customers. This change in policy has resulted in Thielert-powered aircraft being grounded or no longer economically viable to fly.
Click to expand...

https://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-324531.html
800 distressed owners
----
Further, the new prices raise the direct costs of operating the diesels to four or five times that of a gasoline engine. In fact, minus the fuel, Thielert diesel costs outstrip those of operating a turbine engine, such as Pratt & Whitney's PT6 or even a small jet engine. Why? Thielert still requires 300-hour removal and inspection of gearboxes, plus numerous other expensive parts. Furthermore, all these components have to be shipped back and forth to Germany for service and inspection. Shipping alone comes about $600 per inspection event.
Click to expand...
https://www.avweb.com/blogs/insider/AVwebInsiderBlog_Thielert_FlawedEconomics_197998-1.html
 
Last edited:
What’s it cost to just convert it to a turbine lol

I mean if you’re going to burn Jet A, do it right

 
James331 said:
What’s it cost to just convert it to a turbine lol

I mean if you’re going to burn Jet A, do it right

Click to expand...

That will burn a little more fuel and a engine that cost more then the plane, ouch. Would love to have one and be able to afford one.
 
@vman
I know the history. I was just wondering which part you claim was a fiasco?

Tim

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk
 
tspear said:
@vman
I know the history. I was just wondering which part you claim was a fiasco?

Tim

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The whole 1.7 engine was a fiasco. It was/is (are there still planes flying with it?) a very unrealiable engine with a lot of difficulties and engine related accidents. What I learned is that the engine was a converted Mercedes Benz engine with being constantly fully loaded, way more heavy then it was designed for. This caused problems like in-flight shutdowns, fires or complete failures (like mine in the post in the beginning of this thread).

A lot of operators of the engine replaced it early for the newer version with discount from the manufacturer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top