Choice in Aircraft Engines

[Grum.Man]

Easy to say when there’s no way to prove otherwise without the ability to test the hypothesis in the marketplace. I guarantee that if I had a choice in engine manufacturer with one airframe vs a no choice with a competitor, it would weigh heavily on my decision of which airframe to purchase.

Well I guess someone could look up whether Cirrus sales numbers for the SR-20 went up with the switch to lycoming or down...

 

[Liberty Flyer]

The only airframe that I recall allowed for a choice of engines was the Bellanca Super Viking. They offered both the Continental and the Lycoming engines but there was a price difference of about $2,000 in 1973 dollars.

 

[Eagle_]

There are few aircraft that allow engine choice unless you are in the Experimental/homebuilt market. Some do though:
Da-20 (rotax 912 or Conti IO-240)
Da-40 (Austro 300 or Lycoming 360)
Da-42 (used to offer austro and lycoming but I think it’s Austro only now)
Piper pilot (only for flight schools tho)
Piper Archer (Conti diesel or Lycoming 360)
I’m probably forgetting some.

 

[Pinecone]

The only airframe that I recall allowed for a choice of engines was the Bellanca Super Viking. They offered both the Continental and the Lycoming engines but there was a price difference of about $2,000 in 1973 dollars.

Mooney. Different models but same basic airframe. From 150 HP to 280 HP. With STCs some with over 300 HP.

M20 150 HP Lycoming (O-320)
M20A/B/C/G 180 HP Lycoming (O-360)
M20E/F/J 200 HP Lycoming (IO-360)
M20K 210/220 HP Continental (TSIO-360)
M20L 217 HP Porsche
M20M Bravo with 270 HP Lycoming (TIO-540)
M20R Ovation 280 HP Continental (IO-550)
M20S Eagle 244 HP Continental (IO-550)
M20TN Acclaim 280 HP Continental (TSIO-550)
M20U Ovation Ultra 280 HP Continental (IO-550)
M20V Acclaim Ultra 280 HP Continental (TSIO-550)

 

[MooneyDriver78]

Mooney. Different models but same basic airframe. From 150 HP to 280 HP. With STCs some with over 300 HP.

M20 150 HP Lycoming (O-320)
M20A/B/C/G 180 HP Lycoming (O-360)
M20E/F/J 200 HP Lycoming (IO-360)
M20K 210/220 HP Continental (TSIO-360)
M20L 217 HP Porsche
M20M Bravo with 270 HP Lycoming (TIO-540)
M20R Ovation 280 HP Continental (IO-550)
M20S Eagle 244 HP Continental (IO-550)
M20TN Acclaim 280 HP Continental (TSIO-550)
M20U Ovation Ultra 280 HP Continental (IO-550)
M20V Acclaim Ultra 280 HP Continental (TSIO-550)

Plus the Rocket (TSIO520) and Missile (IO550).

 

[Pinecone]

Yeap, I was not going into all the STCs.

There are some RPM/Boosts for some of the -550 powered aircraft.

 

[Crashnburn]

According to what I've heard, the 6-cylinder Continentals had about the same horsepower as the 4-cylinder Lycomings they replaced and ran a lot smoother.
However, 6 cylinders cost 50% more to overhaul than 4 so, as far as I'm concerned, it was the overall cost that caused Cessna to replace the Conti's with Lycomings.

There are some other advantages, which I don't remember, that changed my preference for Conti's to Lycomings. Something to do with how the valve trains are set up.

 

[Pinecone]

OTOH, you can pull the lifters and check the cam on a Continental a lot easier than a Lycoming.

 

[mondtster]

I’d guess that the airframe that had close to the most engine choices on it was the Socata Rallye. Power ranged from 100 hp to 235 hp and there were Continental, Lycoming, and Franklin offerings.

 

[Pinecone]

I’d guess that the airframe that had close to the most engine choices on it was the Socata Rallye. Power ranged from 100 hp to 235 hp and there were Continental, Lycoming, and Franklin offerings.

Mooney has been 150 to 310 HP. Lycoming, Continental, and Porsche.

So same number of engine manufacturers and a slightly wider HP range.

Also Maule. The M4, M5, M6, and M7 are basically the same airframe. Available over the years with Lycoming, Franklin, and Continental engines. 145 HP to 260HP. And even a Allison turbo prop version with 420 HP.

 

[mondtster]

Mooney has been 150 to 310 HP. Lycoming, Continental, and Porsche.

So same number of engine manufacturers and a slightly wider HP range.

Also Maule. The M4, M5, M6, and M7 are basically the same airframe. Available over the years with Lycoming, Franklin, and Continental engines. 145 HP to 260HP. And even a Allison turbo prop version with 420 HP.

Although it may not be apparent in my post, my point was with the volume of different engines approved to be on the airframe. I’d guess the Maule will be close to the same amount but I haven’t looked.

 

[Racerx]

I have a similar question but it relates to avionics. Since these things are essentially hand built, why couldnt you buy them with whatever brand of avionics you want?

 

[Eagle_]

Mooney has been 150 to 310 HP. Lycoming, Continental, and Porsche.

So same number of engine manufacturers and a slightly wider HP range.

Also Maule. The M4, M5, M6, and M7 are basically the same airframe. Available over the years with Lycoming, Franklin, and Continental engines. 145 HP to 260HP. And even a Allison turbo prop version with 420 HP.

Question about the turboprops: why would you ever want a turboprop over a geared lycoming or continental 6 cylinder engine that can produce the same horsepower (TIGO-541-E1A for example has 425 Hp). It seems like it would cost you a crazy amount more to get a turboprop? I know it’s not related to this aircraft specifically and a geared Lyco or conti will cost a lot more than a non geared one but still…

 

[Lndwarrior]

Different firewall forward, different cowling, different spinner, different prop, different flight characteristics, different weight and balance, different performance numbers (and testing required), different endurance/range, and on and on and on. Changing the engine pretty much changes everything about the aircraft. The cost to manufacturers would be enormous with no real benefit to anyone.

While it may be partially true that there are no stupid questions, this one comes pretty close to the line....

 

[aterry1067]

Question about the turboprops: why would you ever want a turboprop over a geared lycoming or continental 6 cylinder engine that can produce the same horsepower (TIGO-541-E1A for example has 425 Hp). It seems like it would cost you a crazy amount more to get a turboprop? I know it’s not related to this aircraft specifically and a geared Lyco or conti will cost a lot more than a non geared one but still…

There are several reasons one would choose a turbo-prop over a piston (and vice-versa), but two main reasons would be performance at altitude and reliability.

Edit: but for a Maule? Bragging rights would probably be the biggest reason.

 

[Dan Thomas]

According to what I've heard, the 6-cylinder Continentals had about the same horsepower as the 4-cylinder Lycomings they replaced and ran a lot smoother.
However, 6 cylinders cost 50% more to overhaul than 4 so, as far as I'm concerned, it was the overall cost that caused Cessna to replace the Conti's with Lycomings.

There are some other advantages, which I don't remember, that changed my preference for Conti's to Lycomings. Something to do with how the valve trains are set up.

The smaller Continentals (such as the O-300) typically needed valve work at around mid-TBO time. Lyc's normally don't. They have sodium-filled exhaust valves that stay cooler, resisting burning. 23 years ago they changed the valve guide material to essentially stop the guide wear. They have the Dynafocal engine mount system that reduces their vibration nearly to the level of the six-bangers.

 

[TomF]

I would suspect one of the big factors with engines and avionics is that the manufacturer probably gets a better deal going with an exclusive agreement and then also only has to engineer for one. You see it with outboards too on boats from the bigger manufacturers.

 

[SoonerAviator]

Question about the turboprops: why would you ever want a turboprop over a geared lycoming or continental 6 cylinder engine that can produce the same horsepower (TIGO-541-E1A for example has 425 Hp). It seems like it would cost you a crazy amount more to get a turboprop? I know it’s not related to this aircraft specifically and a geared Lyco or conti will cost a lot more than a non geared one but still…

Well, the RR500 (~450 SHP) weighs 250lbs, where the Lyco/Conti gas burners will weigh over 575lbs. The increased performance at altitude and single lever operation (in addition to generally greater dispatch reliability) is worth something. The weight savings offsets most of the increased fuel burn (assuming you have the tank capacity to take advantage of it).

 

[Bell206]

Since these things are essentially hand built, why couldnt you buy them with whatever brand of avionics you want?

Hand built is more figuratively speaking than each aircraft is an individual custom product. From a production/certification standpoint it wouldn't be so lucrative to offer unlimited options. While I don't know if Cessna still offers it, at one time you could purchase production aircraft that had not yet gone through the completion process or what they called "green." You then ferried it to your shop of choice and had the radios, interior, and paint applied. Turbine helicopter OEMs still sell this way.

 

[Pinecone]

Although it may not be apparent in my post, my point was with the volume of different engines approved to be on the airframe. I’d guess the Maule will be close to the same amount but I haven’t looked.

Hmm,

145 HP Franklin
210 HP Continental
220 HP Franklin
160 HP Lycoming O-320
180 HP Lycoming O-360
200 HP Lycoming IO-360
210 HP Lycoming TIO-360
235 HP Lycoming O-540 (maybe 2 different Dash numbers)
235 HP Lycoming IO-540 (at least 3 different Dash numbers)
260 HP Lycoming IO-540
420 HP Allison Turboprop

 

[Pinecone]

Question about the turboprops: why would you ever want a turboprop over a geared lycoming or continental 6 cylinder engine that can produce the same horsepower (TIGO-541-E1A for example has 425 Hp). It seems like it would cost you a crazy amount more to get a turboprop? I know it’s not related to this aircraft specifically and a geared Lyco or conti will cost a lot more than a non geared one but still…

That engine has a TBO of 1200 hours.

Allison (Rolls Royce) 250 Series 2 has a hot section TBO of 3500 hours.

So for each overhaul of the turbine, you will have made 3 overalls to the piston engine.

And the big geared piston engines are not known for making it to TBO.

Plus, turbines are more reliable. You don't hear of many turbine failures compared to piston engines.

 

[Bell206]

Allison (Rolls Royce) 250 Series 2 has a hot section TBO of 3500 hours.

The overhaul comparison is really not valid as there are life-limited parts involved with turbines which do not align with the stated O/H times such as the 3500h in your example. Recip engine overhaul parts are all on-condition. Anybody who puts a turbine in a <6000lb private aircraft wants the turbine regardless of the cost.

 

[Eric Lehto]

But Textron now owns Lycoming, and voila, none of their piston airplanes now use Continental motors.

Well, the Bonanza and Baron still both have continentals. Very low annual sales, which just goes to show that it really is about the $$ to certify.