IO-470L or a IO-550B in a L-EZ?

[Beastus_Maximus]

I have been looking around at engines for sale, I have found more than a few Continental IO-470-L's and IO-550-B's

 

Initially I was planning on going with a IO-360, but all the ones I keep finding for sale have been involved in a prop strike for some strange reason.

 

In comparison, I know that we are talking two heavier 6 cylinder engines verses a lighter 4 banger. I also know that they will both burn more fuel.

 

The specs for the IO-470-L put it at 260 HP weighing 411 lbs.

It is 43.17 inches long, 33.56 Wide, and 19.75 inches tall.

 

The specs for the IO-550-B put it at 300 HP weighing 406 Lbs.

It is 37.97 inches long, 33.56 inches wide, and 27.32 inches tall.

 

The specs for the IO-360 put it at 200 HP, 300 lbs.

It is 29.81 inches long, 32.24 inches wide, 22.99 inches tall.

 

So a minimum gain of 60 horsepower, maximum of 100 would add at the most 111 lbs to the aircraft.

 

The shortest configuration is the IO-550-B, Ironically it is also the lighter and more powerful of the two.

 

I am planning on building using the Infinity retractable gear Which according to them will allow you to run a 72" prop.

 

My concept is a extended nose Long Ez, with the IO-550-B and a 72" 3 blade prop. This would make for a 300 HP constant that based on my estimates on articles that I have read would get on down the way at about 15.6 GPH at high cruse, and 13.9 rolled back for some economy. Those are the numbers AOPA posts for a 206 with a IO-550 conversion. So conceivably these would be the worst case numbers.

 

Also, to help with the weight and balance issues, I am 265 lbs in my skivvies, I will always inhabit the front seat, if you figure in my weight over what a standard FAA 170 pounder is which I am assuming is what the aircraft was designed around, it would put an additional 95 LBS of *ahem* ballast in the front.

 

If I figure in a max weight for 110 lbs for the GIB, I am figuring this will make the total weight added to the "design" less the added weight for the lengthening of the fuselage about 141 lbs with both seats occupied for a gain of 100 horse power!

 

I am thinking it is doable because with the Berkut the option to run a IO-540 Lycoming was offered, which actually weighs depending on the model 25-41 lbs more than the Continental.

 

Also in my research comparing a LEZ to a Berkut, it appears to me that the main differences are fuselage construction, the Berkut is molded, the LEZ is one off fiberglass over carved foam. The Berkut uses the Roncz 1145MS Airfoil made from carbon fiber, and the wing is a LEZ wing with a straightened trailing edge, a enlarged aileron and is constructed out of carbon fiber.

 

From what I have found searching around, it has been claimed that a Berkut with the IO-540 in level flight under the right circumstances will hit 300+ MPH. In comparison the Berkut has a larger canopy, and it would appear a larger fuselage profile than the LEZ, I am considering that with the 300 hp engine, and all of the other aforementioned mods, along with the shorter Long Ez canopy, I could potentially have an aircraft that would Cruise at 240-250 knots.

 

Assuming I could pull 240 Knots out of it, with 55 gallons of usable fuel on board, Consuming 13.9 per hour, that would give a range of 828 NM, and would get there in just under 3.5 hours! This is with a 30 minute reserve.

 

If I could extend the fuel capacity to 74 Gallons, as with the Berkut this would pump that range up to 1156 NM, and get there in 4.82 hours, again with a 30 minute reserve.

 

So wanting to see how this works out on a map, I made one with my 3 major centers of opperation, Corpus Christi, Tx, Livingston, Mt, and Lancaster, Ca.

 

 

I am thinking it would be a pretty outstanding bird if it all came to fruition. What do you all think?

[Waiter]

Time to make a commitment and start building :-)

 

Waiter

[Beastus_Maximus]

Time to make a commitment and start building :-)

 

Waiter

Hopefully at or around the first of the year

 

Thinking of calling it the "Super Long Ez" heh a "SLEZ"

[Big Steve]

Why do you want to turn a nice flying light little airplane into motor hog. The plane does not need that kind of weight or horse power. If I remember the original longeze was promoted without a starter and a 025 c1c that weighed in at 250 lbs. Your motor is over 150 lbs heavier than the plane was designed for. Its your money your time and your life. I built one with the 0235 c2c motor it flew beautifully carried me my cousin and all the fuel we could stuff in it anywhere we wanted to go. It got 30 miles to the gallon and got there fast. If it aint broke why fix it? STeve

[Drew Swenson]

The extra 111 lbs of engine wt is not the only weight gain. You will probably need to rebalance the plane with another 70 lbs in the nose just to compensate.

 

I don't have my Longez anymore---but using the sample wt and balance from the POH (basic wt=730----yah right) just to ball park it:

 

Putting in your weight of 265 gives you a cg at 98.8 with no pax, no bags, and 150 lbs of fuel.

 

The POH is based on the O235 (about 245 lbs)---so I added another 164lbs to the "oil station" to simulate putting in the engine that you want.

 

I assumed a ballast station of 0 inches (-5 inches may have been a better choice)---but is variable depending upon how long your nose is---and many make long noses to minimize the ballast.

 

To get your cg back to 98.8, I had to add another 70 lbs to the nose to compensate (and that may have been an addition to ballast already there).

 

Or you could put the ballast more forward with a longer nose at station minus 18. This would bring down the ballast to 45 lbs

 

The point is, an airplane is like a teeter totter----you can't just add a lot of wt to one side of the teeter totter without balancing the other side.

 

I believe the Berkut was designed with the 540 in mind---and its body was appropriately stretched to compensate for the additional rear weight.

 

Then again...you could increase your body weight to 435 and then you would not have to add any ballast

[Beastus_Maximus]

Then again...you could increase your body weight to 435 and then you would not have to add any ballast

Thats right, I shall go to the gym, I will spend eons there pumping iron and eating protein by the barrel, I shall surround myself with a wall of VASCULAR STEEL! mua ha ha ha....

 

Ok, Zipping right back to reality...

 

I definitely see where you are coming from, I think if I do this I am probably going to have to stretch the fuselage, and move the cabin forward.

 

This would be much simpler if Berkut was still building kits....

[Drew Swenson]

As long as you are moving weight around the aircraft---or stretching the nose forward, you should not run into any issues. If you start playing with the position of the canard in relation the the wing, then you will need to get some expert help---don't try on your own without knowing what you are doing.

[Beastus_Maximus]

As long as you are moving weight around the aircraft---or stretching the nose forward, you should not run into any issues. If you start playing with the position of the canard in relation the the wing, then you will need to get some expert help---don't try on your own without knowing what you are doing.

Definitely, I got one plate in my head already , I don't need another!

 

If it comes down to making major modifications like that, I will definitely seek out the assistance of some one who is well qualified in such things.

[schmeddz]

Definitely, I got one plate in my head already , I don't need another!

 

If it comes down to making major modifications like that, I will definitely seek out the assistance of some one who is well qualified in such things.

Make the nose longer and put the battery farther forward. The old nose is ugly anyway.

[TMann]

If you are building with the Infinity retracts, and lengthen the nose, you can move the battery AND the hydraulic pump forward (and anything else you can think of) and you may be able to do this with no ballast at all.

 

GIB & Fuel has very little impact on the CG in the Long-EZ but still has to be considered for the gross weight. That said, one of the limits that effects the licensed gross weight would be determined by the abilty of the landing gear to handle that weight.

 

Consider this: The Cozy (a 4 passenger aircraft) has the same lifting surface area in the wings and canard as the Long-EZ.

 

That said ........ build the airframe and save the power plant decision for late in the build. The technology will be completely different by the time you're ready.

[Beastus_Maximus]

Those are some very good points, thinking about it, I think my best bet would be to find some one who has Berkut plans, and get a set of copies, then build my wing and canard to berkut specs seeing as how it is designed for that powerplant combination. Then use the EZ canopy, and seating ect, I think the lower fusalage is pretty similar, and I do have a different engine cowling in mind than the stock EZ any how.

[Jack Morrison]

My E Rarcer had a sefio540 lycoming 360 hp. Had to put 25 lbs in the nose at -5, had two 27 lb batteries in the nose, and had to carry a 25lb lead weight in the cock-pit for proper cg. I cruised at 250 mph, not 250 kts and had a fuel burn of 20.3 gph. That is about 12 mpg. My best top speed was 291 mph at 10k, that is 253 kts. My fuel burn at that speed, 2980 rpm with a 66/103 prop, burned about 26 gph. My engine with the supercharger, electronic wastegate and TSIO cylinder heads and excessories weighed in at about 500 lbs.

 

Jack

[Beastus_Maximus]

The E racer is based off a Cozy with no back seat basicly isnt it?

 

I wonder how the cabin width effected your top speed and fuel economy?

 

I have always wanted to build an E-racer with the chevy small block as they were designed, but from what I understand that isnt the best combination.

[Jack Morrison]

I beleive that Shirl designed the E racer before Nat designed the Cozy three. It is a widened longez with retractable gear. The E racer is the same width as the Cozy 4. My E racer had a chev V6, supercharged 300 hp engine in the mid location, mark1. Let me put it this way, had the chev engine caught on fire in the mark 1 location, I would for sure not be writeing this post. The engine behind the firewall , mark 11 version, saved my bacon. Fuel burn is all about HP and high speed. Above 200 kts, it comes at a high price.

 

Jack