PDA

View Full Version : Lycoming O320 160 hp PA-22



Throttle Pusher
03-19-2010, 04:38 PM
Ok a friend of mine has just told me about a friend of his that is selling his
O-320 160 hp engines out of his apache, constant speed props included.
I dont know yet which eng it is yet will find out in a couple of days.
All I know is that thier O-320 160 HP.
I know the B engines have the mount that I need but if its not, is there
a STC for the dynafocal 320 for the PA-22.(1952 PA-22 135 is what I have.)
Which 320 engines(with constant speed) wont work with the PA-22 which ones will.
Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.
Ken

Gilbert Pierce
03-19-2010, 07:01 PM
The Lycoming 160 in my Clipper came out of an Apache. It is an O-320-B2B. Had to change the prop bushings from 7's to 6's. (7/16 to 3/8) Not a big deal. Bear in mind the 160's have a crank AD on the hollow bore in the nose.
I blocked off the prop Governor with the available Lycoming block off plate. It has a conical mount.

Throttle Pusher
03-19-2010, 08:02 PM
Would there be a problem with useing the constant speed with the B2B on the PA-22?
Where is the prop gov. mounted on the B2B? Lycoming doesent say.
The B3B is mounted on the rear of the engine,wonder if it will fit between the eng and fire wall.
What do you criuse at and fuel burn with your 160 Hp.
Ken

Gilbert Pierce
03-19-2010, 09:22 PM
The prop gov. is mounted on the accessory case just above the muffler. I don't think it would clear.


Fuel burn is very dependent on rpm. My B2B has low compression Millennium cylinders so it is modified to 150 HP.
At 75% power it burns 9.2 gallons per hour and that varies a little with altitude. i.e 75% is 2450 RPM at sea level. For each 1000 feet above sea level you add 25 rpm. At 4000', 75% power would be 2550 rpm. It will burn a Little more then 9.2 at higher altitudes. I have an EI fuel flow computer so I seldom fly now at 75% power. Dropping the rpm by just 50 and leaning aggressively I burn 8.5 gph + or -. I have an EI engine monitor (UBG-16) so I don't worry about aggressive leaning. My 0-320 does just fine lean of peak. No vibration.
If I have a tailwind I throttle back to 2300 or 2350 and lean. I will be burning 7.5 gph to 8.0 gph. At 4000' turning 2550 and burning 9.2 gph I am indicating 118 mph. Throttle back to 2400 and I will indicate about 112mph and burn 8.2 gph. That means at the end of a 2 hour flight I will arrive about 6 minutes later and save 2 gallons of gas. At $4.00 per gallon that 6 minutes saved me 8 bucks. Beside that I get to spend 6 more minutes flying.

fabricman
03-21-2010, 06:13 PM
Gilbert -

I am really surprised to compare my 125 HP 0290 Original Pacer performance to your 0320 Clipper. I'm running about the same speeds and fuel burn is never more than 8 gallons per hour. I run 2400 and according to the GPS, generally clock about 112 to 115 MPH. The 0290 turns about 2550 in the air. I lean by tach, and then richen a bit from max lean. I guess my little Pacer performs better than I thought!

I spent an entire day hunting for metric o rings for the brake cylinders, and could find nothing that was not smaller than the stock o rings. Do you know what number you used in rebuilding your brake cylinders?

M. Haught

pmanton
03-21-2010, 06:38 PM
I get about the same fuel burn as Gilbert in my O-320 PA 22. I am always right on the front edge of the weight & balance envelope and have considered adding some fixed ballast way back in the tail to get my CG a bit further aft. I once had my wife ride in the back seat and I was 5-6 MPH faster and the plane handled much better. I'd be able to throttle back a bit more for the same cruise I'd think. :-)

Paul
N1431A
2AZ1