Seawindsna@aol.com wrote:

Dear Paul,
We just got a call from the FAA this morning telling us about it and that the
pilot was OK but have not received a return call from the builder as of 6:00
PM.  All we know about the engine is Subaru.  What do you know?

If it is a Suburu obviously it was the 160 HP model or the Seawind
would never take off. If so that engine is a hand grenade at 160 HP. 
I give it less than 10 hours plus or minus 9 at 160 HP. Most car piston
engines
are good for 40 HP average. The EAA is partially to blame for this sort
of thing because of all their unqualified hype on auto piston engines
one reads in Sport Aviation.

Please warn your builders.

Here is some stuff we have published on this subject in the past.

Peter Cowan/Lexi Cameron wrote:

Do you feel equally strong about not getting 250 out of the 3.3 dual
overhead cam engine?

Peter, I want to warn you there are people sitting up in Canada with
anti product liability laws that are promoting piston auto race engines
for use in aircraft here in the states. I am not naming anyone. 
A piston race engine has a life expectancy of only several
hours at the HP levels they are quoting.

It would be hard as heck to sue them if it blew up and killed somebody.

NTSB report on a Subaru engine aircraft crash.

SEA98LA039

On February 24, 1998, approximately 1430 Pacific standard time, an
experimental Cessna 150F, N8794G, nosed over during
the landing roll following a forced landing after a loss of engine power
near Fife, Washington. The private pilot and his
passenger were not injured, but the aircraft, which was owned and
operated by the pilot, sustained substantial damage. The 14
CFR Part 91 flight, which departed Auburn Municipal Airport, Auburn,
Washington, about 30 minutes earlier, was being
operated in visual meteorological conditions. No flight plan had been
filed, and there was no report of an ELT activation.

According to the pilot, the aircraft, which was registered in the
Experimental Exhibition category, was powered by a
modified Subaru Legacy automobile engine. He said that while
demonstrating the aircraft to an acquaintance, the engine
experienced a partial power loss. Soon thereafter, the engine lost all
power, and the pilot elected to land in a nearby farm
field. He said that his touchdown on the soft terrain was successful,
but as he applied brakes to stop prior to an upcoming
ditch, the nose wheel dug into the soft terrain and the aircraft nosed
over.

Although the owner, who was the individual that modified the engine for
aviation use, was quite sure that a camshaft gear
locating pin had failed, an engine teardown revealed that was not the
case. Instead, it was found that the head on one of the two
exhaust valves in the forward left cylinder had broken off of its stem
and fallen into the cylinder. The piston itself had been
torn into numerous small pieces and much of it was found laying in the
cylinder. The piston pin was still in the end of the
connecting rod, but none of the piston was still attached to the p

This is some excerpts from SDS's web site.
http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html


" Subaru EJ22 and is fitted with an SDS EM-2F EMS. Injectors are 
Bosch 480cc/min. Turbo is a Garrett TO3 with -50 compressor and 
stage 3, .63 turbine section. Max takeoff power will be in the
225-240 hp range at 50 inches and 5600rpm."

"Specs on the stock EJ22 are hp-130@5400 rpm and peak torque
137ft/lbs.@4400 rpm. Compression ratio is 9.5 to 1. The stock
turbo version puts out 160hp@5600 rpm and 181ft/lbs. at only
2800 rpm. Compression ratio is 8.0 to 1. My targets on the
modified engine are 220 hp at 5500 rpm (takeoff) and 165 hp at
4250 rpm for max cruise. These numbers should be easily obtained
at low boost pressures (40 and 36 inches respectively) with
several modifications to improve engine airflow and a far more 
efficient turbocharger and intercooler system. The factory
system is poorly matched for constant high power use. The fuel
consumption target is .4 lbs./hp/hr. This will be helped by
raising the compression ratio back up to around 9.5 to 1 for
increased thermal efficiency and should be safe when burning    
100LL."

Who ever wrote this stuff for SDS is smoking something he should'nt.
250 HP out of any 2.6 L (159 cubic inches) piston engine, even 
for only five minutes at a time, is a hand grenade that could 
explode at any minute.

Assuming that it really has 250 HP:
The car see's 250 HP for less than a second once or twice each time
it is accelerated at full throttle. 99.9% of the time it is generating 
less than 30 HP. No way is it comparable to a heavy duty 200 HP  IO-360
let alone an O-540.

As I stated over and over on here car piston engines
are light duty devices. 

The Mazda rotary is an exception for a car engine. I.E.
three moving parts, a bullet proof eccentric shaft, a cast
iron rotor, a steel lined combustion chamber and no valves 
to break or burn let alone camshafts and camshaft drive gears.

The projected TBO stated here  is dreaming. Riener Hoffman, one of 
the biggest fans of the Subaru dropped a valve and crashed in his 
experimental Subaru powered Cessna 150.

The Subaru makes a good 80-100 HP aircraft engine.

Paul Lamar

 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.

http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org