Is it worth it?

[querk1a1]

My question to get this started is this: Is the Honda engine going to be able to Compete with the Delta Hawk? I mean if you want a traditonal engine like a Lycoming or Contiental but not with old technology, then I guess the Honda is what one would want, but still the problem is Pressure alltitude and gas consumption and the high cost of the new engine plus TBO cost. Your thoughts?

[Dan Tomlinson]

It depends how they really price it, and how easy to acquire once a few are flying, but the early reports are that it will be a great engine.

 

We Wait!

[Jon Matcho]

Check out this rumor/report at the bottom of this page: http://www.avweb.com/news/avmail/187877-1.html

 

I personally have plenty of time to ponder this one, and am finding it a practical waste of time researching Rotary, Subaru, Lycoming, etc. at this point in my build.

[Jon Matcho]

But what the heck... I'll let everyone else get lost on the 'net like I have:

• Eggenfellner (Subaru conversion)
• Mistral (non-Mazda rotary)
• Crossflow (?)
• Powersport (rotary)
• Real World Aviation (Tracy Crook's Mazda rotary conversions)

I'll check back in on this in a couple years...

[Dan Tomlinson]

I personally have plenty of time to ponder this one, and am finding it a practical waste of time researching Rotary, Subaru, Lycoming, etc. at this point in my build.

Sure - but for 40k you should be able to buy a couple XP-360's. At that price, they're not in the same market!

 

There was another engine - a Diesel that was being touted also, and talking to them they mentioned $75k - the next question was what plane were they including with that!

[Jon Matcho]

Adding to the list...

• Superior (Lycoming clone)
• DeltaHawk (diesel engines)

I suppose we could use a comprehensive list of possibilities in the Engines section here.

[FlightService]

Honda is a very serious company when it comes to new markets and putting Honda on something. Do not take anything they do lightly. I am currently a college student working on a system for Honda and I have technical experiance with their motorcycle line. Although I have not read anywhere of someone insulting them, Honda is not above throwing alot of money into a project to prove a point (If there are dirt track fans here, you should remember the Honda/Harley wars of the mid 80's because Harley ran it's mouth. Harley got it's "a$%" handed to them and then Honda dropped the program. A little over $4 million invested if I remember, never saw profit, all to just prove a point.)

 

Bottom line: The Honda initial cost up front will be 50% to 80% higher than competition but over the life of the product it will come to about 30% less in total cost of ownership.

 

Everybody have fun!!! You guys have the coolest looking little planes!

[Nathan Gifford]

It would make a certain amount of sense, since Honda is already building engines. If you can put the reliability into the engine and keep the costs down it would give you a heckuva profit margin at $40K.

 

The second question for Honda is how to handle the American legal system. First crash, their fault or not, the lawyers are gonna line up for Mr. Deep Pockets.

[FlightService]

I haven't heard of Honda losing too many lawsuits even when they are in the wrong. I need to get the number of their attorney for my next speeding ticket!!!!

 

haha

[Waiter]

I lived in Japan for 5 years, and commuted back and forth for another 5. Thats their attitude, Invest whatever it takes to get the manufactureing process down.

 

I read a really good book "From those wonderful folks who brought you Pearl Harbor". It Discussed Japanese production and financial attitudes, i.e. there is no such thing as a 5 year plan, They have 30 and 40 year plans.

 

The only problem I had living there was $170 / hour to rent a Cessna 172 (dry of course)

 

Konechuwa

 

Waiter

[Len Evansic]

Hey FlightService,

 

Have you heard anything on the grapevine that would indicate when this engine would become available, or a better guess at a purchase price at that time? I'm not looking forward to having to decide on an engine, but a Honda aircraft engine (at the right time and at the right price) would make that decision a lot easier.

 

-- Len

[Aitch1969]

is the mistral really an "NON MAZDA" rotary or really just well developed package around this now familiar engine? and at over $30,000 its definately TOO expensive

[FlightService]

I have not heard of any new data. Honda does a good job of keeping divisions seperate, especially one involving students. I am doing research for American Honda auto division. So unfortunately no inside scoup.

 

Thomas

[Len Evansic]

I am doing research for American Honda auto division. So unfortunately no inside scoup.

I assume that you are in Marysville, rather than Anna OH, then. If I were a betting man, I would bet that Honda would build the aero engine at the Anna facility alongside the Goldwing, Honda, and Acura engines. Of course, they could build it at the partner's facility (wherever Continental builds engines now).

 

When I was just getting out of school, I interviewed at the Anna plant. Four rounds for me to see that I didn't fit the compartmentalized culture, before they also came to the same conclusion. Still, their employee benefits were great. In hindsight, I've often wondered if I should have made a better effort to fit in and show enthusiasm at my last interview. They still make great engines, but I feel that I have gained much better work experience than I would have working there.

 

-- Len

[kumaros]

Adding to the list...

• Superior (Lycoming clone)
• DeltaHawk (diesel engines)

I suppose we could use a comprehensive list of possibilities in the Engines section here.

You forget two very important engines:

http://www.thielert.com/en/aviation/engines.htm

Thielert Centurion, a modified Mercedes A-Class engine, already certified in Europe and flying in numerous aircraft, most notably Diamond. The twin engine Diamond was at this year's Oshkosh and flew back to Europe over the Atlantic from Newfoundland to the Azores, burning something like 200 liters (~ 60 gallons) of jet-A fuel. That's the reliability and economy I'd like to have.

 

http://www.wilksch.com/

Wilksch Airmotive. An very viable proposition, especially after their teaming up with Yanmar Diesel (a well known manufacturer of marine diesels).

 

They both cost about US$ 20K and they are certified and/or flying in actual aircraft, no pie-in-the-sky.

 

Kumaros

[cncdoc]

I think there are more viable options in the 90 to 160 HP engine range than there are in the 180 to 250 HP range.

 

It seems the barrier is about 200 HP range when the engine weight starts to increase significantly, which disqualifies many engine options for some aircraft, especially canard type.

 

The big cylinder designs win the "no psru" nod, but get the vibration, high octane fuel necessity frown.

 

Smaller "auto" engines develope the HP at higher rpm and need a psru to use a prop, but are easier to repair and less expensive.

 

Decisions, decisions, decisions

[FlightService]

Levinsic

 

Clemson SC, doing initial development on "other" systems. Good guess though, the guys out of Marysville are the backers. I would agree with your guess about the build location for a small piston engine. If what the gentleman originaly reported is true. you would probably be looking at a goldwing/ accord hybrid motor of oppossed pistion design, VVTI, and using accord pistions, crank of unknown source. The number of cylinders I think would be 4 being that if it was a Honda a flat 6 engine with open exhaust would easily hit 300+ hp.

 

But from what I have seen out of Honda the engine could be any configuration. They don't seem to show a preference. They have pistion engines in every concievable form except radial.

 

anybody else have any ideas?

[kumaros]

I think there are more viable options in the 90 to 160 HP engine range than there are in the 180 to 250 HP range.

snipped...

 

There are three roads open:

- Join two ~ 100 HP common-rail turbo-diesels, as the Leon brothers have done. 100 HP turbo-diesels are currently a dime a dozen in Europe, as over 50% of new cars are bought with diesel engines.

- Use one of the new 3 liter V6 turbo-diesels of Volkswagen or Mercedes Benz. While their maximum power is 225HP at 4000 RPM, slightly derated they put out 205HP at 2800 RPM, with > 500 Nm of torque from 1500 to 2800 RPM, making them extremely suitable for directly driving a huge propeller. The VW is a special kind of cast iron, the Mercedes Benz is aluminum with iron liners. They both weigh in at about 400 lbs. I only wonder if one could invert them like the Wilksch Airmotive WAM series of engines, thereby raising the crankshaft and providing the opportiunity of swinging an even bigger prop.

- To avoid center of gravity issues, one could use two ~ 100HP turbo-diesels in a push-pull configuration, almost like a Defiant, but without the additional structure and fuel capacity needed to support huge, thirsty, vibrating, antiquated aircraft engines, like IO-320's the Defiant was designed for.

 

Kumaros

[Len Evansic]

...you would probably be looking at a goldwing/ accord hybrid motor of oppossed pistion design, VVTI, and using accord pistions, crank of unknown source. The number of cylinders I think would be 4 being that if it was a Honda a flat 6 engine with open exhaust would easily hit 300+ hp....anybody else have any ideas?

I'm not so sure about that. The one thing I do know is that a direct drive aircraft engine will fly in the face of Honda engine design philosophy by its very nature. When I interviewed, I heard of the heroic battles that went on within the corporation to get a V6 produced for the North American market. The thinking that was pervasive throughout Honda at the time was that four cylinders was all that you need, and that the JDM engines had enough power output and so there was no need to go six cylinders.

 

But the North American market argument was that Americans drive differently than the Japanese. Americans buying the Accord, don't run the engine to the redline before shifting. We use predominantly automatic transmissions, and therefore have shifts well below the power band of the standard Honda four cylinder engine. For this reason, Honda higher-ups grudgingly agreed to produce a V6 for the NA market. It was produced only in Anna, but the design was done and tightly controlled by Honda Japan.

 

As an aside, any problems in testing were documented here, but then submitted and re-documented in Japan. As an engineer, this struck me as bass-ackward, because an engineer working with production and testing would see a problem, investigate it, and fully document it, but could not submit a design fix. The broken pieces were then sent to Japan, to people who had no involvement, who would ignore everything discovered here to re-work things. Then, the changes would be sent back over here to be implemented (for the first time, on the line). This several-month round trip would often be repeated for a single problem, as the Japanese engineers were not exposed to the actual manufacturing or American investigations, and quite often would not fix the real issue of the breakage or defect. Honda would guarantee the one-way flow of information by ensuring that in a building that employed ~400 engineers, there were only two (2!) CAD terminals.

 

Back on topic, where I was going with this is that the Accord engine components were designed for a high-rpm low-torque engine. I doubt that they would be used in a low-rpm high-torque engine. Historically, Honda produces power with speed, not torque. That isn't to say that they don't have the knowledge to go the other way. Also, the distance-intensive design and manufacturing model they use is probably the reason that this engine is not on the market yet.

 

Things may have changed over the last ten years, but I doubt it.

 

-- Len

[FlightService]

excellent points, I figure Honda would use pistons and other such things out of production engines to lower cost. The VVTI in retrospec might not be needed but will probably be added to show "advanced technology" I look at the Gold Wing engine as a base because of it's almost flat torque curve and excellent power delivery (word of caution DO NOT twist the throttle to stop in first gear unless you are ready to have a half ton in the air on one tire!!! Can you say seat cover in the rectum anyone?) Also the new Ridgeline engine is showing promise in the torque category and is based on the current Accord platform.

 

Being I have little experience with engines outside of the automotive/motorcycle spectrum I don't fully understand the constraints of what they are dealing with, but from what I can see is it possible for honda to install an integrated gear reduction unit?

 

The next few years are going to be fun!!!

[wannabeduck]

Hello all,

Honda aircraft engine, if there will be one in the future it probably will be too expensive for many poor folks (like me) to use in an experimental aircraft, for the last three years while building ( an oversized Long Eze) i was hoping that Honda would put one around 150-180 hp out in the market , finally, can't wait any longer so i bought a run out Lycoming 0-320 to rebuilt and install on my near finish project, as I have been servicing Honda product for over a quarter of the century, my thought is if there is an aircraft engine from Honda in the future, it will not be a piston engine and it will not be intended for the experimental market.The answer is obvious, too much of a liability exposure for a corporation as large as Honda, and they've learn a big lesson from the ATV ( the three wheelers) business of the late 70's .

Thanks for allow me to put in my 2 cents , you guys are the coolest