IO-240?

Ask Questions and Offer Advice Related to the Cessna 120 & 140 Type

Moderators: 6183, 6643, VIP529, 529

Forum rules
You must be a member of the Cessna 120-140 Association in order to post new topics, reply to existing topics, or search for information on this forum. Use the "Join" link in the red menu bar.
8238
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 3:57 pm
Name: Devin F
Aircraft Type:
Occupation:
Contact:

IO-240?

Post by 8238 » Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:19 pm

Amazingly, I don't think there is an STC for installation of a continental IO-240 in a 120/140. At least not one I am able to locate. I find that amazing because the 240 is in the same series as the O-200. For specs see continental's website, scroll to the bottom on the page to see the 240: http://www.continentalmotors.aero/engines/200.aspx

Anyway, this would mean either creating an STC (which I am not opposed to, but I have heard it is costly...) or getting field approval. I know the FAA is very picky on field approvals now, but I would think that an engine in the same series as the stock engine (c90 and O-200 anyway) would be likely to get FA if anything? I will call my local FSDO and ask about it.

The reason for wanting the IO-240 is to have a plane that obviously has more power, but not too much impact on legal useful load. Also, the ability to run floats is appealing to me if choose to do so. The O-290 isn't super appealing to me because Lycoming no longer supports the engine.

The last part of the equation is a core exchange. I have an email out to Continental asking if they would work with me on taking a c85, c90 or O-200 core in exchange for an IO-240 either overhauled or new. I am still in the market for a plane btw, obviously :lol:

Curious to hear the thoughts and inputs of board members!

8238
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 3:57 pm
Name: Devin F
Aircraft Type:
Occupation:
Contact:

Re: IO-240?

Post by 8238 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:23 am

So got some updates.

From the FAA: changing an engine requires an STC if you exceed the power of the stock engine, period.

From Continental: They will only let you use and engine for a core towards a different engine if there is an STC in place for the new engine. And base price of a new IO-240 is 49k and 46k for rebuilt :lol:

Looks like I may be going with a rotax if I want to go through the process of getting and STC.... It will be cheaper between being the engine and hiring the engineer! Also that leaves the possibility of putting a ground adjustable prop or even a constant speed...

529
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 7:00 am
Location: Michigan
Name: Victor G
Aircraft Type: C-120
Occupation: Work on airplanes till the cows come home..........they're still out.
Contact:

Re: IO-240?

Post by 529 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:53 am

A worthwhile question.

A welcome change in terms of power and weight. I would guess............cost wise probably not so much.

I do know that Lycoming powered Cessna 170's get a premium, but Not always to the amount you put into the project. The cost of an I0-240 would be almost double the average going price of most 120/140's. Would you get that back out of it later? Not certain.

How many people would just opt for a different airframe at those prices? most probably.

STC's are costly. What they really are is time consuming to generate.

8374
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2018 11:20 pm
Name: Jesse R
Aircraft Type:
Occupation:
Contact:

Re: IO-240?

Post by 8374 » Thu May 16, 2019 7:37 am

I know this thread is a little old but someone else has put a Rotax on a Cessna 150. Here is the link https://rotax-cessna.com
I would love a 135hp turbo Rotax on my 140 with NO weight penalty. 186.5lbs dry. I would definitely donate money into a go fund me account for the development of this. I think others would also. And if you were able to partner with the Company that already developed the one for the 150, the engineering would not start from scratch. But is the cost of the upgrade worth it in the end.

8452
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2019 12:22 am
Location: NE Texas
Name: Larry B
Aircraft Type: 1948 Cessna 140
Occupation: Retired Automation Engineer, Nothing to do and all day to do it.
Contact:

Re: IO-240?

Post by 8452 » Thu May 16, 2019 10:53 am

Gag!!

I can’t imagine downgrading a Cessna 120 or 140 with a Rotax.

Sorry, but that is my opinion. Only being honest.
Larry Bible

Returned to the club after three years away due to life’s changes
1948 Cessna 140, O200A, Ragwing, Custom IFR Panel
1966 Mooney M20F/J

8359
Posts: 121
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2018 10:53 pm
Location: KSNA
Name: Tamer A
Aircraft Type: 1946 C120 O-290-D
Occupation: Engineer
Contact:

Re: IO-240?

Post by 8359 » Thu May 16, 2019 12:15 pm

8452 wrote:
Thu May 16, 2019 10:53 am
Gag!!

I can’t imagine downgrading a Cessna 120 or 140 with a Rotax.

Sorry, but that is my opinion. Only being honest.
Have you flown a rotax before? I have about 50 hours in 3 different rotax aircraft. I actually quite like the engine. It sounds like a sewing machine and takes a bit getting used to the higher RPMs, but it's a reliable, efficient platform. Very easy to work on as well.

8374
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2018 11:20 pm
Name: Jesse R
Aircraft Type:
Occupation:
Contact:

Re: IO-240?

Post by 8374 » Thu May 16, 2019 3:00 pm

Not a fan of the sound but do like those engines. It’s hard to beat an engine with 70 years of newer tech. I saw on AVweb this morning though that Bye Aerospace expects to get final FAA certified of their all electric trainer in early 2021. Maybe we should skip the stc for the Rotax and work on one for an electric motor. :roll:

User avatar
5115
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 7:00 am
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Name: Martin Tanguay
Aircraft Type: C140
Occupation:
Contact:

Re: IO-240?

Post by 5115 » Thu May 16, 2019 8:43 pm

Doing mostly bush and up north remote airports or dirt strips, I like our old Continentals for simplicity and reliability. You get a dead battery, no problem you can hand start the engine (i do it all the time in winter to practice and give my battery a break). Don't try to start a Rotax by hand with the gearbox. I know they are proven technology, they have gazillions of hours on them so far...but all that electronics that goes on those engines makes me a bit nervous in the woods.
My 2 cents, but lets not put brakes on progress anyhow.
Martin Tanguay
Intl Cessna 120-140 Association - Canadian rep
C140, C-FJAR, 1946, sn:9168, O-200, ragwings

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 8451, Bing [Bot] and 1 guest