Powerplant 71 73 74 78 79 80

71-Nacelle/Cowl
73-Engine Fuel & Controls
74-Ignition
78-Engine Exhaust
79-Engine Oil
80-Starting

The choice of power plant options seems fairly straight forward. An IO-320 160 hp Lycoming seems to be the engine of choice for most recent -3 builders. An injected engine would provide the power, aerobatic performance and efficiency that is desired.

In considering a fixed vs a constant speed type propeller, I am not convinced that the added performance of the constant-speed prop is worth the weight, cost or complexity involved in that type of installation. At present, I am leaning toward the simplicity and weight saving advantages of a fixed-pitch prop.

1 thought on “Powerplant 71 73 74 78 79 80

  1. Keep it simple like Van did in N17RV and it will work fine for you the more systems the more problems to contend with. Take a look at an Aeronca Champ and its systems, basic and worked great. Even knew a fellow and flew with him that flew one IFR back in the 60s and worked fine for him at that time. Also was a senior Pan Am pilot out of Seattle. Times have changed for that type of flying but just saying.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s