Reliable Suby???

Chopper Reid

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
1,326
Location
Pooncarie. Australia
Aircraft
Rosco built, Suby 2.2, pod
Total Flight Time
4600 gyro hours
There are a few here on his forum that openly state they would only fly with a Lycoming or similiar because of so called reliability etc.
Thats all fine and to those of you who dont know any diferent I think you are the loosers.

My gyro has a 2.2 fuel injected, electronic ignition Suby, came out of a wreck with a so called 70, 000K's and was stuck straight in to the gyro, its now got 3475 hours without being overhauled and still going strong and a mate of mine got 3800hours pushing a RAF and there are plenty of other subys that have got around 3,000 hours.

Anyway, the last week or so I have been doing some spotting for neighbours and I have been looking for stock isolated or caught on high ground after this area had around 10 inches of rain in 5 days and created a flood overnight. The ceeks were all running and much of the river flats were covered in a sheet of water. An engine out would mean wet feet at best and at worst a landing in deep water and cut off from high ground with absolutely no way to get my gyro out without geting a chopper in to haul my gyro out. The closest chopper to me would be 4 hours away so it would be a big deal getting my gyro out. The river flood is on its way down so leaving it till all dried up would not be an option.

Whats the point of my rambling, well, its to show you guys who are frightened of flying that an old suby is reliable and trustworthy engine cause if I didnt have the ultimate in confidence in it, I would not take off full stop!!

Hopefully, I have some photos here to show you the type of country I was operating over.

Last photo was of my airstrip ? after a bit of heavy rain, looks more like a river :)
 

Attachments

scottessex

Sling-Wing Pilot
Joined
Nov 12, 2003
Messages
11,081
Location
central, ga
Aircraft
Dominator 582
Total Flight Time
200+
What redrive? Sounds like a great setup, do you have any idea of the weight?
The Subarus have proven to be a good choice in engines it would seem.
 

dingbat

Newbie
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
320
Location
Isle of lewis Scotland UK
Aircraft
Q.C.ChallengerII ,And Dinbat Gyrocopter
Total Flight Time
Taking PPLM and PPLG Student
suby

suby

Hi,

I have a 75hp scooby!

And it is as sweet as a nut!!..mot sure of the box is it a C or E.......:confused:



G.





Laa.PRA.BRA.............:plane:
 

Attachments

animal

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2004
Messages
5,933
Location
Deleon Springs Florida.
Aircraft
Hillman Hornet N8063D
I still loved the EA-81 with the Amax redrive. to bad they don't still make that redrive,from what I have heard.
 

barnstorm2

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
14,572
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Aircraft
2-place Air Command CLT SxS (project), & Twinstarr Autogyro
Total Flight Time
750+hrs and climbing
......so called reliability etc.
Thats all fine and to those of you who dont know any diferent I think you are the loosers.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

I have an uncle that has been smoking like a chimney for 90 years and is fine.

I have 3 relatives that have died early from lung cancer one in his 40's.

My relatives that still smoke use my uncle as their rational to keep smoking not the deceased relatives despite the statical significance of the larger science as well as family history.



I had a soob 2.5 loose an oil pan pickup, threw a rod and put me in a bean-field last year. Less than 500hrs on a expert installtion.

I had a redrive grind a soft gear and ruined a 5K miles 2.2 engine with metal fileings.

I had a lean mixture from a holly carb melt the exh-valves of a 2.2. (forced landing)

I had an intake manafold leak also melt th exh valves of a 2.2 (forced landing)

Local RAF owner went through 3 soobs 2.2's now has a few hundred hours on a 2.5.


I am putting a 2.2 on my current build project. I do love the soobs but when you run enough numbers for statical significance you don't beat the Rotax or Lycoming engines.

The numbers just don't show it. Sorry.


Bang-for-the-Buck = cant beat the soob.

Reliably = cant beat purpose built aircraft engines.

Car engines that get 2-3k hours get bragged about by the owners and get lots of verbage
Car engines that die early don't get bragged about by the owners and do not get lots of verbage

Aircraft engines that get 2-3K hours don't get bragged about because that is not unusual or impressive by aircraft engine standards.


When you put a soob on a gyro, some people get a George Burns, other people get a Sammy Davis Jr., Edward R. Murrow, Nat King Cole, Johnny Carson, John Wayne, Yul Brenner, Walt Disney, Bette Davis, Humphrey Bogart, Tom Snyder, Steve McQueen,Gary Cooper, Duke Ellington, Desi Arnaz, George Harrison, Morton Downey ,Jr, Carrie Hamilton, George Peppard, Gracie Allen, Louie Armstrong, Lucille Ball, Count Basie, Barbara Bel Geddes, Amanda Blake, Bill Blass, Rosemary Clooney, Bob Fosse, Clark Gable, John Gotti, Don Knotts, Groucho Marx, Robert Mitchum, First Lady Pat Nixon, Jackie Onassis, Vincent Price, Lou Rauls, Harry Reasoner, TX Governor Ann Richards, George C Scott, Ed Sullivan, Spencer Tracy, Lana Turner, Ernest Tubb, Peter Jennings...

But still George Burns is the example.

ALL ENGINES CAN FAIL. When you fly over terrain that you can not land on there is more to consider than just your engine(s).


I buy and use soob's in gyros because they are very reliable for a converted engine and cost about $2000-$4000 to implement.
I buy and use aircraft engines in gyros because they are more reliable than a converted engine but I only have bought 2 because they cost $10,000-$20,000


.
 
Last edited:

hillberg

Newbie
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
2,543
Location
Low Earth Orbit
Certificated powerplants, will allways do better than a junkyard engine, I've seen the Lycoming powered fixed wing and helicopters go well past the" recomended "overhaul at the 3000 hr mark- the Idea of a automotive engine lasting over 300 to 400 hours @ max power ? I have yet to see...seen a lot of wrecks caused by a converted powerplant, You get what you pay for...and some conversions cost more and do less.
 

Rehan K.Janjua

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,558
Location
Rawalpindi-Pakistan
Aircraft
AirCommand 582
Total Flight Time
1200hrs
Hello All

Engines of 80-180 hp piston type. Im for converted auto engine.
Records of Subaru engines prove it. But then it needs love and
respect of a certified aircraft engine.
Cheap engines get less attention and often are misused.

The technology advancements in auto engines have reached Generation 8
or above and surpasses all other prime mover engine types.

Ford hybrid truck engine converted to aircraft use has reached
heights of 60,000ft and can run for days.

Other excellent Japanese engine conversions come with fuel injection
turbo intercooler twin cam 16valve variable ignition and valve timing
ECU and on and on.

Suzuki K10B 100-125hp. 165lbs. US$250. H/L 2000hrs.

Regards.
Rehan
 

swfarrier

Newbie
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Messages
60
Location
Chama, New Mexico
I don't know how fair it is to call a Subaru a junkyard engine as even Lycomings get rebuilt, Right? Also, it seems in my research I remember reading that the Subaru unit was originally designed as an aircraft engine. Just wish I knew where I ran across the information. Any one item on an engine, two or four stoke , if it is defective becomes the weakest link. As far as fuel injection computers are concerned they either work right or don't. Way above my head and besides, I'm old school, anyway. Jim.
 

barnstorm2

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
14,572
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Aircraft
2-place Air Command CLT SxS (project), & Twinstarr Autogyro
Total Flight Time
750+hrs and climbing
Hello All

Engines of 80-180 hp piston type. Im for converted auto engine.
I am too, because of PRICE.

Soob numbers do NOT show the reliably of aircraft engines. Otherwise, EGGENFELLNER would be a bigger name in our industry then ROTAX.


The technology advancements in auto engines have reached Generation 8
or above and surpasses all other prime mover engine types.
In CAR implementations yes. But cars are designed to idle quietly, operate at low and variable RPMs and do not have redundant systems.


Ford hybrid truck engine converted to aircraft use has reached
heights of 60,000ft and can run for days.
Anecdotal.



Suzuki K10B 100-125hp. 165lbs. US$250. H/L 2000hrs.
Yes, but for $250 and 165lbs do you get the REDRIVE?
Does it need a battery and charging system to run?

Once you take a soob, can make it comparable to a purpose built aircraft engine with a redrive you get this:

http://www.eggenfellneraircraft.com/Subaru/Subaru.html

http://www.ramengines.com/id2.html

$14,000 - $25,000

.

Don't get me wrong. I LOVE SOOBS and I do not hesitate to fly one.:noidea:

They are wonderful and for a conversion very reliable.

But they are NOT purpose built aircraft engines and therefore you get what you pay for.:drum:

-No AD system
-Every installation is custom R&D
-Requires Battery and charging system to work
-Requires Redrive
-No redundant systems
-Not purpose built
-Requires computer/wiring config
-Not tested in situ

But for a savings of $6000-$20,000 I am willing to put up with that for a country field flyer. :usa2:

But don't tell me they are nose-to-nose with a purpose built Rotax or Lycoming :violin:
 
Last edited:

automan1223

Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
3,760
Location
Oriental, North Carolina
Aircraft
2p Tandem Air Command "Big Red"
Total Flight Time
250
Classic half assin it.

Classic half assin it.

Tim,

not to start a fire here but every single one of your gripes is the direct result of half assing it by some wanna be wrench head with 20 bucks of tools gleamed from a garage sale in a 5 gallon poly bucket. Except for the soft gear and even that could be avoided by putting in a magnet and filter in the return line from the redrive (why was not one installed) ? It would have only resulted in loss of redrive if flown to failure but you would have had to been DEAF, not to hear the gear grinding away. I know I had one go soft on me too but if its cracklin like popcorn then why fly it ? Oh I forgot you can land a gyro anywhere....Even the vac leaks and lean mixes are easily found before they become a problem with less than 300 bucks worth of instrumentation.

While fly boy who started this thread flys over croc infested road warrior landscape, chances are he just has a lot of luck. Frankly his style of tempting fate by mouthing off is really bad form.

Never tempt Murphy like he is doing ! but thats only my experience.

Subaru engine are only as good as their installation. Stan turbine out proves my point here, the best "aircraft" rated hardware is only as good as its weakest link and its professional installation.

J

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence



I had a soob 2.5 loose an oil pan pickup, threw a rod and put me in a bean-field last year. Less than 500hrs on a expert installtion.

I had a redrive grind a soft gear and ruined a 5K miles 2.2 engine with metal fileings.

I had a lean mixture from a holly carb melt the exh-valves of a 2.2. (forced landing)

I had an intake manafold leak also melt th exh valves of a 2.2 (forced landing)

Local RAF owner went through 3 soobs 2.2's now has a few hundred hours on a 2.5.


I am putting a 2.2 on my current build project. I do love the soobs but when you run enough numbers for statical significance you don't beat the Rotax or Lycoming engines.

The numbers just don't show it. Sorry.


Bang-for-the-Buck = cant beat the soob.

Reliably = cant beat purpose built aircraft engines.

Car engines that get 2-3k hours get bragged about by the owners and get lots of verbage
Car engines that die early don't get bragged about by the owners and do not get lots of verbage

Aircraft engines that get 2-3K hours don't get bragged about because that is not unusual or impressive by aircraft engine standards.


When you put a soob on a gyro, some people get a George Burns, other people get a Sammy Davis Jr., Edward R. Murrow, Nat King Cole, Johnny Carson, John Wayne, Yul Brenner, Walt Disney, Bette Davis, Humphrey Bogart, Tom Snyder, Steve McQueen,Gary Cooper, Duke Ellington, Desi Arnaz, George Harrison, Morton Downey ,Jr, Carrie Hamilton, George Peppard, Gracie Allen, Louie Armstrong, Lucille Ball, Count Basie, Barbara Bel Geddes, Amanda Blake, Bill Blass, Rosemary Clooney, Bob Fosse, Clark Gable, John Gotti, Don Knotts, Groucho Marx, Robert Mitchum, First Lady Pat Nixon, Jackie Onassis, Vincent Price, Lou Rauls, Harry Reasoner, TX Governor Ann Richards, George C Scott, Ed Sullivan, Spencer Tracy, Lana Turner, Ernest Tubb, Peter Jennings...

But still George Burns is the example.

ALL ENGINES CAN FAIL. When you fly over terrain that you can not land on there is more to consider than just your engine(s).


I buy and use soob's in gyros because they are very reliable for a converted engine and cost about $2000-$4000 to implement.
I buy and use aircraft engines in gyros because they are more reliable than a converted engine but I only have bought 2 because they cost $10,000-$20,000


.
 

barnstorm2

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
14,572
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Aircraft
2-place Air Command CLT SxS (project), & Twinstarr Autogyro
Total Flight Time
750+hrs and climbing
the soft gear and even that could be avoided by putting in a magnet and filter in the return line from the redrive (why was not one installed) ? It would have only resulted in loss of redrive if flown to failure but you would have had to been DEAF, not to hear the gear grinding away.

While fly boy who started this thread flys over croc infested road warrior landscape, chances are he just has a lot of luck. Frankly his style of tempting fate by mouthing off is really bad form.

Never tempt Murphy like he is doing ! but thats only my experience.

Subaru engine are only as good as their installation. Stan turbine out proves my point here, the best "aircraft" rated hardware is only as good as its weakest link and its professional installation.

J
1. I did not fly it to failure I caught it. Shavings would have clogged the filter (handfull) and starved system of oil (duh).

2. Agreed. Bad news.

3. Does Stan have a purpose built turbine??? I could have sworn that was a generator turbine or a turbine converted for aircraft use not one purpose built for light helicopter use. Well you learn something every day... Also, I thought that was a engine-saver cut-out (user error) not a mechanical failure? (Tubines-Pistons, another topic all together)

.
 
Last edited:

automan1223

Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
3,760
Location
Oriental, North Carolina
Aircraft
2p Tandem Air Command "Big Red"
Total Flight Time
250
Purpose built ?

Purpose built ?

We could argue in circles about the term "purpose built". Stan did pay a hefty sum for a kit that included a "complete" assembly where all the bugs were supposedly worked out ? . Not something he had to cobble together from hardware store ?.......... Lets not split hairs, failure is failure. Engine out is an engine out.

Tim, an ICE (engine) or a turbine (compressor) are only designed to do 1 thing. There is no big mystery about how they accomplish it or how to improve ones success if you give it enough thought.

But you make my point clear.

USER ERROR. USER INCOMPETENCE lack of foresight, IMPATIENCE... usually end attempts at whatever one is trying to accomplish. There are of course oh $hit moments where even the backups fail and then you have mad max here who has been overlooked by old'e man Murphy.... That's life. Fly safe.

J






1. I did not fly it to failure I caught it. Shavings would have clogged the filter (handfull) and starved system of oil (duh).

2. Agreed. Bad news.

3. Does Stan have a purpose built turbine??? I could have sworn that was a generator turbine or a turbine converted for aircraft use not one purpose built for light helicopter use. Well you learn something every day... Also, I thought that was a engine-saver cut-out (user error) not a mechanical failure? (Tubines-Pistons, another topic all together)

.
 

automan1223

Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
3,760
Location
Oriental, North Carolina
Aircraft
2p Tandem Air Command "Big Red"
Total Flight Time
250
Craftsmanship.

Craftsmanship.

Just to clarify, I was not trying to imply that Stan, his tools or his workmanship fit into the garage sale tool category....
 

bmoore2156

Newbie
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
1,005
Location
Siletz, Or
Aircraft
Converted RAF
Total Flight Time
300 hrs in my RAF
The ej22 IMHO has proven to me to be a suitable aircraft engine. If a backyard mechanic installs it, there will be some issues. They may or may not cause a engine out.
The "aircraft" intake manifold that RAF built for mine wasn't suitable for a car. They will crack and your engine will run lean. I would be supprised if more than a few % of the failures originated from defects in Subaru parts.
Brad
 

cleatus99

CFI/CFII
Joined
Sep 4, 2005
Messages
380
Location
Rhome, Tx
Aircraft
Calidus 912, Mooney 201
Total Flight Time
1900+
I love these discussions, It's like left Vs right.....
Neither is totally wrong, but neither is completely right.

My Cherokee has a Lycoming O-360 - 180 HP
My AirCommand has a Subaru EJ22 - ~140 HP


I've talked to a ferry pilot he once showed up to Deliver a New Citabria, with a New Lycoming engine he made it 15 minutes before the prop dead stopped landed on the road below, called factory they came got him and the plane, they put another new lycoming engine on it, he took Airlines home...


I was at Decatur Airport some guys were doing a STC development install on a Cessna, they ran this NEW Lycoming O-540 for .2 hours it spun a bearing ate itself....


I had a Continental O-300-D on my C-172, engine had 2800 SMOH, it was tired still ran. I ebay'd the Cessna.. Engine needed a overhaul bad. But it was still a "Legal Engine"


I talked to a Pipeline patrol pilot, They fly 40+ Hours a week, Overhaul their Engines once a year at TBO..... Most make it to TBO... They decided once to keep running and Engine past TBO, see how well it would go.... They got nearly 4000 Hours out of it... before it wouldn't pass 100 hr.... The engine was junk, needed new Crank, Cam, Rods, Case, everything worse itself out.....


I now respect TBO, I also Respect Bullet Proof Lyconsaurs & Continentals (chinese owns them soon) I also believe Automotive engineering has advanced way past Aircraft ICE engineering. But they get to roll out a new model every year. Use 15 million customers as guinea pigs and move on to next model. Aircraft engines are designed for reliability, Auto engines are designed more for economy. When a Lycoming gets hot it'll fly you till it quits, when an automotive engine get's out of parameter it may Limp, or shutdown completely to save Warranty costs... Not a great thing, at any Altitude above ground level.

I think a Soob is great for a gyro, it's cheap and if it quits worst case scenario is crash really slow. Now a 4000Lb airplane that stalls at 70 MPH I'd like a certified engine.



PS I think a Schweizer 300C could use a Good 6 Cyl Subaru... It sure wouldn't need that great big fan on the cylinders... and would be baby smooth. You'd hardly notice the rotor shake :)
 

JEFF TIPTON

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
DICKSON, TN
Aircraft
Grumman AA5
Total Flight Time
1280
Sometimes the certified engines do not make TBO either. Proper maintenance can make a big difference in longevity.
 

Attachments

barnstorm2

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
14,572
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Aircraft
2-place Air Command CLT SxS (project), & Twinstarr Autogyro
Total Flight Time
750+hrs and climbing
Sometimes the certified engines do not make TBO either. Proper maintenance can make a big difference in longevity.
Exactly. ALL ENGINES can and do fail.

Understanding and good upkeep is key.

The soob block is 'bullet proof' but not so much that many belt drive re-drives broke soob cranks and busted case bearings because of poor design and user over-tightening.

The soob heads are phenomenal but not so good as to survive the poorly designed carb and intake system made by a major engine converting supplier.

Bang for the buck you can not beat them, and I love to fly converted engines, but I don't let my exuberance for the cheap, advanced power-plants distort reality and my judgement (and that goes for aircraft engines also! ).

.
 
Last edited:

StanFoster

Newbie
Joined
Nov 16, 2003
Messages
16,880
Location
Paxton, Il
Aircraft
Helicycle N360SF
Total Flight Time
1250
I couldnt help but see my name mentioned by Jonathon. All one has to do is read the posts from Jonathon towards me, and just decide for yourself the intent. I am NOT an expert on Subarus like Jonathon is....and I am not trying to be sarcastic. Jonathon knows his stuff on that engine. I am not an expert on turbines either. What I am an expert on is learning from past mistakes and building on others experiences. I was the reason for my flameout.....not the turbine. I came in here belly up admitting my error, and what I have done to improve my flying...and what I have done to further improve my turbine.

My overzealous collective input way exceeded the power available either by fuel delivery and or belt tension.

This is Monday morning quarterbacking, but after talking to the factory and asking about my upper fuel control limits.....I found out that my particular turbine needs more fuel. They have concluded that my outlet pressure shows that my turbine is more efficient than normal, meaning it pumps more air. They since have told me to turn my fuel on a little more. My fuel control arm has a higher backward movement now allowing more fuel. I can turn it up to 160 horse just by backing out a screw, but I dont want to do that. I just want a little more reserve in case I absolutely need to pull a lot of collective sometime. I am installing a micro switch on my fuel control arm soon, and this will turn on a light in the dash telling me when the fuel control arm is delivering all the fuel it can. That will be a warning light for me to back off the collective. I believe this would have told my neanderthal collective arm the day of my flame out to back off.

I also now have my main fuel solenoid on fail safe.....meaning if I lose my voltage, it wont shut the fuel off.

Any engine can quit and I never have said my turbine cant quit like someone on here claims I have said. I challenged that person to show where I said it...and that topic went away. He cant prove his false claim.

I repeat, any engine can quit and my turbine is no exception. Why do you think I practice forced landings all the time in my gyros and now my helicopter?

Now to get this back on the Subaru topic. After watching Tim O'Connors certified Lycoming in his Twin Star, and how it just seems as dependable as anything, and ditto with Vances same experiences, you cant beat certified engines. A good Subaru install is a distant 2nd, but was more than satisfactory for me. But if I were to do something I never do...like fly over a vast forest of solid trees, or a large body of water, I would be much more comfortable with a certified engine. I feel my turbine is close to being as reliable......but time will tell. I may very well have my turbine flameout due to its fault and not the pilots. Thats why I will always practice forced landings......and they are fun anyway.

Stan
 
Last edited:

LarryMc

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
11
Location
East Moline, Illinois
Aircraft
Zenith 601 HDS plans-built
Total Flight Time
450
Hi guys,
Kitplanes did a nice article on auto conversions versus the type certified engines and the conclusion was that after 200 hours, the auto conversions would be more reliable and less likely to give you trouble. The assumption that if fuel, redrive, electrical and engine dependant systems are done well enough to get past the magic 200 you have a bettter engine than the Lyc, Cont or Franklin.
 

aerialvisitor

Gold Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
220
Location
Jacksonville, Fl
Total Flight Time
1000+
So who makes the best Soob conversion? Where can a person go to learn about caring for an aviation converted Soob? Does PRA have seminars like EAA for different aspects of rotorcraft? Are there better automotive engines (like the Yamaha)? Somehow I don't think being a typical male who knows just enough about cars to be dangerous will get the job done. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

Dave
 
Top