"Bryan Wilkinson jr." wrote:

Hi All-

I was just thinking about the short - lived Cessna 175 with the reduction
gear on it . What was the ratio on the gears , and was it just the
market rejecting the arrangement or more functional reasons ?

Anyone looked at  using the unit en mass or its internals ?

Fly good - Build good - Bryan

Not good.

External spur gear reduction, 4:3 ratio (1.33:1) 3200 engine rpm = 2400
prop rpm.  This is a ratio that doesn't suit us.

The parts are real expensive if you can find them. I've had some bad
experiences with them although some have had these engines go nearly twice
TBO.  Continental GO-300, TBO was 1200 hours, the cylinders tended to run
hot, same basic cylinder as an O-200 but with slightly different cooling
fins.  The C-175 seemed to be best suited for cross country work where
temperature excursions were few and far between.

The not good parts are:
1) It's a real heavy set of gears, I had my engine apart twice.
2) They are known to make a lot of metal that plugs up the oil system.  The
first time I split the case I had to use a pry bar to get the crank out of
the bearings in the split case half.  The bearings were stuffed full of
metal, it was a sight to see.  The last time I saw the oil screen it was
collapsed from the metal shavings plugging it up.  We then parted the plane
out and bought a C-182.
3) It would be a bunch of work to machine a bell housing and input shaft to
work with that gear set.  Again you would be turning the prop about 4000
rpm when the rotary engine was just getting up to speed.

Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode

 
The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter.  Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            
Copyright 1998-2003 All world wide rights reserved.