Cruisair O-360

L

lemar

New member
I note that there are some Lycoming O-360 engines in Cruisairs. Is there an STC for this or a 337 that can be copied for this conversion?

What about the IO-360 Continental? Anyone ever done this conversion?

I have a Lycoming O-435 with my project and am considering an engine change before I start the rebuild.
 
I have an O-360 in my Cruiseair and a friend on the field has one to. I can get you copies of the 337 for the change out if you decide to do it. My 337 is only about 2 paragraphs long. Don James has one 337 I think is 2 or 3 pages long. Both airplanes use a commanche nose bowl and a new skin on the bottom with a cutout for carb and the rest of the cowl is stock. I posted a picture of mine on the web sit myplaneonline.com you can see the cowl. :lol: :lol:
 
Randy, Thanks! I am interested in the documentation. I'm a ways from starting this rebuild as I have to finish my Champ first. That should be done by spring.

I note that you fly to McAllen and I'm planning on being there in mid Feb. If you're not to far from there, I may be able to stop over to see your airplane.
 
It's a pity that no one has yet employed a Continental IO 360 in either a 14-13 or a 14-19. It can produce 210hp and would probably run smoother than a large bore four banger. Plus its fuel burn would be no more, or probably less, than the O-435.

My 14-19 has its original O-435 Lycoming, updated with high compression pistons and half inch valves. Smooth engine! If yours has been sitting unpickled, though, or has been pickled but not rebuilt in the last 20 years, by all means dump it.

When my O-435 breathes its last, my fantasy engine is a TSIO Continental 360....hey, I can dream :)

Jonathan
 
Randy,

Was your 0-360 done on a 337 only, without a STC?

If so I would like a copy. I have 86768 with 0-360 but it was put in with STC, I think a one time STC.

Kent1@cccomm.net
 
Hi Randy-

What's your fuel burn with the O-360?
What do you cruise and at what percent power?
What's your climb rate?
 
WARNING I took the best set of 0-360 conversoin paperwork I could dredge up to my local FSDO (The FAA is always there to serve you and promote aviation advancement and safety) and they responded that they would require "engineering data" from a certified aeronautical structrual engineer before approving a new installation.....they don't care if there are 15 of them out there flying .........they will not put their stamp of approval on anything without other people and data to back them up.......check it out before you get enthused or start spending $ Ken ....your ever vigilant A&PIA
 
This is so typical of the new breed of FAA cats. Many of them can't accept a design that has tens of thousands of hours on it for proof of it's safe appliaction. My own experience with our local FSDO indicates that they would like to see the low end of general aviation just go away.

I have been harrased by ACO and FSDO. Many of them don't even understand their own FARs. Many of them seem to have the power to enforce their incompitence though. I have ran into some of them that don't even know engineering when they see it. You are never considered an engineer if you are seeking a major modification, they always want you to go someplace else and get enginnering, like a DER or DAR, most of which are retired FAA employees. Now Isn't that strange?
 
On the older airplanes, antiques, warbirds, and experimentals ,I work on, I find that using the approach I used in latin america years ago, sometimes works. If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with BS. A lot of the newer generation FAA guys couldn't tell you the difference between and airplane and a motor boat--unless it is written in stone in the "Bible" and comes directly out of Washington. It is a sad thing when people are not trained to use common sense.
 
Dave The O-360 does not help in speed much. I cruise at a sold 140 mph at 25 sq. but my climb is REAL GOOD I can load 4 adults full of fuel 95* and climb out at 500' One thing I have found out about the cruiseair is if the tail comes up it will fly. I think I have about 1000 hrs on sense the rebuild and there has NEVER been anywhere that I have wanted to go that the cruiseair has said no. My wife and I will load it up(you know wives) and climb out at 800' up to about 6000' Then I have to start leveling out. I have had it to 14500 and could still climb at about 50'

The 337 I have for the engine would be laughed at If you showed it to The (friendly) FAA. I found out from Don James (he has a 46 with a O-360) That his STC is stamped as a one time only . It took him over a year with the Feds to get his sighed off.

I believe there are 2 Con IO-360 in Cal. They where at the Columbia Gathering :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
Bellanca nuts, Check out my response in the new issue of 'BC.' I know of no multiple STCs on the Lyc O-360 series in the the model 14-13. All have been field approvals-some of them gruelling for the owners. My experience with the Continental IO-360 in the T-41B and O2 would lead me to believe that it would be a hot running installation in a Cruisair. The O-435 is a good engine-but dated and heavy. None of these possible installations grant a gross weight increase. Ideas???????? Dan Cullman
 
Actually, Dan, the O-435 creates MANY cooling problems as it is, regardless of whether it's mounted on a Cruisair or a Cruisemaster. CHTs mostly. The heavier Continental O470 runs cool on the -2 but it has a later day cowl - when engineers finally understood engine cooling on large, flat sixes - unlike the Cruisemaster's massive smiling grills...the Navion's up-flow cooling, the E-225 reverse airflow problems on early Bonanzas and so on. But you can't put a big bore "As Strong as the Nation" Continental on a Cruisair, as you know. Oh what a rocket ship THAT would be :)

I'm curious, Dan. Why do you believe - how do you know, as you probably know rather than believe in these matters - that the small Continental six would have cooling problems? It seems like it would be a wonderful engine for that airframe.

Jonathan
 
Dang it, I should read more closely. You have experience with the small Continental six in *other* airplanes that had heat problems with that engine.

Sorry....
 
Jonathan, My experience with the IO-360 was courtesy of the US. Army, in the Cessna T-41B and O-2. It could be poor bafflling-but it seemed tome that the CHT was near redline most of the time, especially in the summer. The Franklin powered Cruisair had poor baffling, at best. This can be improved {done by me} and the results are good. The O-435 in the 14-19 was not one of GM's great achievements. The baffling/cooling left a lot to be desired. Stinson had it 'OK" in the L-5,but even that could be improved. If you want to see great baffling, look to some of the modern kit/homebuilt A/C. Dan
 
Bellanca nuts, again...... Be advised, the O-435 engine originally installed in the 14-19 is not normally the one installed in the 14-13 conversion. There are a few differences. Just ask. Dan
 
Dan:

Do you mean the O-435C by any chance? I was told the O-435A - the one of the Cruisemaster - meant "Automotive" for its accessories, and the C stood for Commercial, but this could yet another of the many stories I've been told. One thing that's indisputable is that the two are NOT the same when it comes to accessories. There are parts specific to the A that are unique compared to all the others (O-435-11, GO435 [geared version used in the Navion 260], O-435K, and so on, not to mention the VO-435 used in the original Bell 47 helicopters). This can mean PURE AGONY if an accessory gear comes up bad during overhaul...as I learned in a most painful way. :cry: I recall driving hours, over a mountain pass in miserable weather, to meet up with a guy in an out-of-the-way place who had the accessory gear I needed. Oh, what we we'll do for our beloved Triple Tails. :roll:

G.M. claimed at the time that he chose the O-435 over the E-185 or 225 was due to the O-435's ability to operate continually at redline. This is what articles on the Cruisemaster quoted him saying when the aircraft made its debut. I think it was more a matter of expense. The O-435 was a military surplus engine. One trick, devised by an interesting British mechanic, was to add sides to the cowl flap on the original Cruisemaster to prevent reverse airflow. Previously it made no difference to the CHTs whether the cowl flap was open or closed. Afterward the flap was effective but it had to be deployed at all times. Russell applied his typical critical and unyielding eye to the baffling and we'll see if it makes a difference.

Then again, the Continental E series engines were no bargain either...except you can still find parts for them.

Jonathan
 
Oh, and if you're reading, Joe, this was not the overhaul you did for me. This came up during the engine tear-down following my jolly experience with the landing gear in Oregon after an annual.
 
The O-435C engine was a military O-435-1 engine with a 'C' stamped on the data plate. Period. The accessories were different than the 'A' engine, which, indeed had automotive derived accessories. The cylinders were different, as well. Not much else! Parts can be found for all. A good engine, but it and the prop weigh at least 100 pounds more than a Franklin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top