Re: Running IO 360 Oversquare
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
aus.aviation only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

 Up
Re: Running IO 360 Oversquare         

Group: aus.aviation · Group Profile
Author: MICK MULLER
Date: Aug 31, 2008 02:58

Howdy Bernie, have a read of the following article by John Deakin.
http://www.warmkessel.com/jr/flying/td/jd/78.jsp
Actually, lots of articles by Deakin will argue that oversquare myth is
just that.
If you get the time, search around for a book by Kas Thomas called Fly the
engine. It is most illuminating. Apart from agreeing with Deakin that
oversquare is a hangover from the days of big radials, it also suggests that
leaning in the ascent is an acceptable practice, something that I had been
warned against in the past.
I often go back and refer to it whenever I hear people talk about shock
cooling - I am still yet to see any evidence that shock cooling exists.
However, I have seen plenty of evidence of bent or broken valve guides due
to stuck valves.
Mick

"BernieFlyer" gmail.com> wrote in message
news:y6mdndyT5IadFiXVnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
> Hi Team
>
> I have an IO 360 engine with a 3 bladed constant speed prop. I was taught
> to never operate with engine power (manifold pressure) greater than rpm eg
> 23 inches of MP and 2,300 rpm. I have read though that this is something
> of an old wives tale and that indeed there can be advantages in reducing
> rpm and running the engine with say 24 inches and 2,200 rpm. This reduces
> cylinder wear and piston speeds but does it stress the engine to a higher
> level? There is a lot about "big bore" IO 540s and how they are getting
> better life running oversquare. The IO 360 is a 4 vs a six but the
> cylinders in both have the same capacity.
>
> I am interested in the views of those more of an engineering bent or
> anyone who has a well informed view on the matter.
>
> Bernie
no comments
diggit! del.icio.us! reddit!