What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

New IO-0390-EXP119 Option for RV-14/14A

Scott McDaniels----I'll bet you have a ball getting to play with new stuff like this. They bring you a new engine variant and say-Hey Scott, take this and put it in a 14A an make everything fit under this. Oh---and the exhaust hasnt been designed yet, and the induction hasnt been done either. Have fun.---

Lucky guy---

Tom

This was somewhat a collaborative effort with Lycoming (a benefit from our customers being a major consumer of Lycoming engines I would guess) so the configuration of the engine wasn't a surprise, but yea, this is what we enjoy doing.

The prototype shop is just a small part of the whole project. It was very much a team effort with engineering starting the ball rolling with a design concept and then it evolving from there as it gets worked on for real.

I was personally only involved in this project to a small degree during the development phase but I did get to do quite a bit of the final performance verification test flying. Perhaps Greg will be sharing details about the development process and testing, some time in the future.

I will tell you, that having the opportunity to make take-off and landing attempts at gross weight, over and over again while you fine tune the technique, while trying for the shortest (demonstrated) take off and landing distance possible, was a lot of fun (if not somewhat stressful at the same time :eek:).

Even though this is what we do, the whole team that worked to get accurate distance measurements was somewhat in a state of jaw dropped to the ground as it began to sink in what level of performance this airplane was achieving.

I still find it hard to believe, but I can assure you, the performance #'s being presented are real and come from a large amount of very detailed flight testing that took place under a number of different pilots.
 
I actually asked Lycoming specifically about this the other day. There is not a location for a B/U alternator on the EXP119 engine. Many newer certified aircraft have moved to using a second, dedicated backup battery rather than a backup alternator. Also, adding the accessory pad back to the lighter-weight engine would negate a significant amount of the weight savings you get with the EXP119 version.



And the weight savings go away with a 2nd battery.....

I'd rather have 2 alternators and 1 battery vs 1 alternator and 2 batteries, but that's just me..............


At least I don't care about the tach drive :)
 
And the weight savings go away with a 2nd battery.....

I'd rather have 2 alternators and 1 battery vs 1 alternator and 2 batteries, but that's just me..............


At least I don't care about the tach drive :)

How about 2 EarthX batteries? Or you always have the option of the original engine version.
 
The problem is everyone has a different ideal engine.


I'd rather go full electronic. EFI and electronic ignition for maximum power and efficiency (at slow speeds too). 2 alternators for safety.

Save the weight with the magnetos and the magneto drive parts........


At least we agree on not needing the tach drive..............
 
And the weight savings go away with a 2nd battery.....

I'd rather have 2 alternators and 1 battery vs 1 alternator and 2 batteries, but that's just me..............


At least I don't care about the tach drive :)

I agree with Ed on the two alternators and one battery vs one alternator and two batteries debate. With two alternators you can have electrical power until your fuel runs out. Also, alternators don't need to be replaced as often as a batteries do (hopefully...).

Maybe a version where you have the "vacuum" drive (for the second alternator), but no tach drive. If I could have it, I would also like to have the accessory drive set up for a remote oil filter too. Not a screw on adapter (there would be no way to screw on an oil filter), but a location for two AN fittings that plumb into the remote oil filter hoses. That gives you plenty of clearance for any of the secondary alternators and makes oil changes so easy, they are actually fun (well, almost fun...)

I was curious about the location of the prop governor; front/back/both?

Overall, this sounds like a great improvement in power and weight for us. Thanks!!!

Jeff
 
A quick teaser photo showing a fairly clean view of the affected area of the aircraft - the newly designed lower cowl and the exhaust ramp cooling duct (which is in the closed position in this photo). This depicts the final configuration and was taken during some recent performance testing flights.

We'll have more visuals published soon.

Greg, the new lower cowl looks great. I just hung my engine and am planning to add a Superior cold air sump and Vetterman crossover exhaust, realizing I'd have to do some modifications to the lower cowl. Do you have dimensions on how the new Van's crossover exhaust dimensions compare to the Vetterman as they leave the tunnel and/or could I get dimensions/plans of the lower cowl? I'm wondering if I could just order the new lower cowl if it would work with the Vetterman crossover?
 
I already installed the baffle With the 4” flange on my engine but the flange part on the oil cooler side is back ordered due to an “engineering change”. In reading some of the posts above the new oil cooler scat tube is 5”. Will I need to rip out the aft baffle (riveted and RTVed) or will there be an adapter flange to go from 4” to 5”?....Scott or anyone from Vans..... or can I get the old style 4” flange part?
 
I’m curious about the shift to a 5” oil cooler SCAT hose. The RV-10 (IO-540) uses a 4” hose and I never had an oil temp problem.

I fully agree that for glass IFR a thoughtful two battery and one alternator design provides for a far more robust power distribution scheme than one battery and two alternators - but the small amount of weight saved by eliminating the vacuum pad seems odd.

I wonder if the engine can come with a dual belt flywheel to support a second alternator. I know of an RV-10 like this - it is clunky but it works.

Carl
 
I’m curious about the shift to a 5” oil cooler SCAT hose. The RV-10 (IO-540) uses a 4” hose and I never had an oil temp problem.

I got a look at a Cirrus SR20 with the IO-390, it has a 5” duct to a very large oil cooler. Unable to locate any info / PN on the cooler but did get a few photos.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2669.jpg
    IMG_2669.jpg
    279.9 KB · Views: 363
  • IMG_2668.jpg
    IMG_2668.jpg
    375 KB · Views: 348
Greg, the new lower cowl looks great. I just hung my engine and am planning to add a Superior cold air sump and Vetterman crossover exhaust, realizing I'd have to do some modifications to the lower cowl. Do you have dimensions on how the new Van's crossover exhaust dimensions compare to the Vetterman as they leave the tunnel and/or could I get dimensions/plans of the lower cowl? I'm wondering if I could just order the new lower cowl if it would work with the Vetterman crossover?

We don't have that exhaust/sump dimensional comparison, sorry. I can tell you it's a relatively tighter fit with the new cowl to the new exhaust. We don't have dimensional drawings that show the difference between the two that we can publish, at least at this time. Basically we have put this new configuration together as a complete system, with the intent that you're either all-in or all-out. I have no doubt that Clint could build or modify an exhaust to fit, but you'd need to ping him on that one of course. In other words, youi're welcome to try but we don't have the actual comparison info to be able to share it with you since we don't have the Superior sump nor the Vetternan crossover exhaust to try to fit here.
 
A quick teaser photo showing a fairly clean view of the affected area of the aircraft - the newly designed lower cowl and the exhaust ramp cooling duct (which is in the closed position in this photo). This depicts the final configuration and was taken during some recent performance testing flights.

We'll have more visuals published soon.

I am really pleased to see this cowl design. This is just about as good as you can do with a two-pipe exhaust. It is very similar to my plans to modify my -8 cowl. (As soon as I can get good baseline data first).

A key is to provide a radius lip at the bottom edge of the firewall in the areas above the pipes to help smoothly accelerate flow around that corner and out the exit.
 
I am really pleased to see this cowl design. This is just about as good as you can do with a two-pipe exhaust. It is very similar to my plans to modify my -8 cowl. (As soon as I can get good baseline data first).

A key is to provide a radius lip at the bottom edge of the firewall in the areas above the pipes to help smoothly accelerate flow around that corner and out the exit.

Agree. I've been crawling under A-models with owners for years, describing such a dual, outboard pipe configuration, but most folks just don't get ambitious enough to make the change to a flying airplane. The 14's recessed tunnel makes it a natural.

Oh, and the new variable exit looks conceptually familiar ;) https://vansairforce.net/community/showpost.php?p=715842&postcount=145
 
Last edited:
5" scat

I have had 5" scat to my oil cooler since my 8 was built. I had heard that the angle valve had high oil temps. With the 390 I rarely see oil above 200 in climb and 185 range in cruise.
 
Any noticeable change in cockpit noise?

Has anyone doing the test flying, with the new configuration, noticed the airplane to be quieter inside?
 
I already installed the baffle With the 4” flange on my engine but the flange part on the oil cooler side is back ordered due to an “engineering change”. In reading some of the posts above the new oil cooler scat tube is 5”. Will I need to rip out the aft baffle (riveted and RTVed) or will there be an adapter flange to go from 4” to 5”?....Scott or anyone from Vans..... or can I get the old style 4” flange part?

I don't know the specifics of how they intend to integrate the change over.
It is possible that the back order is the result of the 4" version being dropped from production, or that since the welding shop is swamped with work, that it is just back ordered because of lack of inventory.

If it turns out to be the former, it will not be to difficult to change in place as long as you are willing to use a few blind rivets at the bottom.
 
Has anyone doing the test flying, with the new configuration, noticed the airplane to be quieter inside?

If it is, it is not enough that it is noticeable.

From the outside, the perception is that it is very slightly louder but that may just be the result of it having a different tone rather than an actual higher SPL.
 
I don't know the specifics of how they intend to integrate the change over.
It is possible that the back order is the result of the 4" version being dropped from production, or that since the welding shop is swamped with work, that it is just back ordered because of lack of inventory.

If it turns out to be the former, it will not be to difficult to change in place as long as you are willing to use a few blind rivets at the bottom.

Also, for Bsquared, someone from our team here will be reaching out to you directly to determine what to do next. Check your forum PMs, I sent one yesterday. Thanks!
 
Exhaust "engineering change"

Greg (and/or Scott),

I have a similar question as Bsquared, but about the exhaust kit (-14A). Mine has been backordered since mid-February, and when I contacted Van's a few days ago, they said that the exhaust had been "pulled for a redesign by our engineers."

Will this newly redesigned exhaust system - for my old-style engine (IO-390A) - fit within my current lower cowl, etc.? Any timeline on the backordered exhaust kits?

Thanks,
Alex
 
Greg (and/or Scott),

I have a similar question as Bsquared, but about the exhaust kit (-14A). Mine has been backordered since mid-February, and when I contacted Van's a few days ago, they said that the exhaust had been "pulled for a redesign by our engineers."

Will this newly redesigned exhaust system - for my old-style engine (IO-390A) - fit within my current lower cowl, etc.? Any timeline on the backordered exhaust kits?

Thanks,
Alex

The previous exhaust system has not been discontinued. Will check on all this and let you know.

The new exhaust does not fit the old cowl.
 
Are the parts for the 5" scat tubing to the oil cooler are already available and can be retrofitted to the existing/flying 14s?
 
Are the parts for the 5" scat tubing to the oil cooler are already available and can be retrofitted to the existing/flying 14s?

The new oil cooling parts will soon be available for retrofit. From earlier in the thread:

The parts that ARE useable with the 390A are the rear-right-side baffle wall and tube attach flange, the 5" SCAT tube that runs to the oil cooler, and the metal components that mate it to the oil cooler. Those are now being changed to the standard parts in the 14/14A kits, and we can supply them to people who already have the 4" tube components, of course, as a retrofit.

When they're all available to order, we will be sure to post on this thread.
 
Exhaust drumming on floor?

If it is, it is not enough that it is noticeable.

From the outside, the perception is that it is very slightly louder but that may just be the result of it having a different tone rather than an actual higher SPL.

The new exhaust pipes look optimized for minimum drag, but don't appear to have any downturn and are pretty close to the bottom skin. Haven't you had any issues with the exhaust pulses drumming on floor? I would think it would be noticeable compared to the original configuration where the exhaust pipe exits further aft below the tunnel and spar carry-through. Many (most?) of the RVs out there are using some sort of downturn at the end of the pipes to reduce noise and vibration in the cockpit and lessen the risk of cracks or smoking rivets in the bottom skin.

Overall, this update to the -14 is awesome! I have been planning a number of changes to my -14A to pick up a few knots...I was thinking about reducing the size of the tunnel and lower cowl cooling exit, and then putting cowl flaps on each side of the lower cowl. But those custom changes would take countless hours and the new configuration Vans has engineered is as good or better with no head scratching or custom modifications required. Thanks!
 
Exhaust ramp cooling flap and range

How much effect on cruise airspeed and oil temp/CHTs do you get with the exhaust ramp cooling flap open vs. closed? I assume it makes a measurable difference in speed and engine temps or you wouldn't have bothered adding a cockpit control to make it adjustable...

Also wondering how the new package effects range at 55% and 75% power. If the additional speed is primarily due to better engine intake/exhaust efficiency and airframe drag reduction, then the range should increase. If the additional power is gained primarily by pouring more fuel through the engine, then range may be reduced (or break even?) vs. the original specs.

Thanks,
 
Greg (and/or Scott),

I have a similar question as Bsquared, but about the exhaust kit (-14A). Mine has been backordered since mid-February, and when I contacted Van's a few days ago, they said that the exhaust had been "pulled for a redesign by our engineers."

Will this newly redesigned exhaust system - for my old-style engine (IO-390A) - fit within my current lower cowl, etc.? Any timeline on the backordered exhaust kits?

Thanks,
Alex

Due to the extended lead time on the exhaust and no firm delivery promise I canceled my order with Vans and ordered a Vetterman about 4 weeks ago. Clint is building mine this week so I should get it in about 10 days A few hundred bucks cheaper as well but you will need to modify your lower cowl.
 
Haven't you had any issues with the exhaust pulses drumming on floor?

I haven't noticed any difference between the original exhaust configuration and the new 4 in 2 system.

How much effect on cruise airspeed and oil temp/CHTs do you get with the exhaust ramp cooling flap open vs. closed? I assume it makes a measurable difference in speed and engine temps or you wouldn't have bothered adding a cockpit control to make it adjustable...

Also wondering how the new package effects range at 55% and 75% power. If the additional speed is primarily due to better engine intake/exhaust efficiency and airframe drag reduction, then the range should increase. If the additional power is gained primarily by pouring more fuel through the engine, then range may be reduced (or break even?) vs. the original specs.

Thanks,

All good questions, and ones that we will post details about when all of the detailed flight testing has been completed.

I don't think any testing has been done regarding speed influence made by use of the cowl flap and I don't think any is planned. The cowl flap is only intended to be used when a bit more cooling margin is desired for ground operations, take-off, and climb in hot OAT conditions.

There should never be any instance that the cowl flap would be left open for level cruise flight, and in the conditions that a lot of people fly in, they may not have to ever open it at all.
 
With the new IO-390 EXP119 what prop is being used? Is the change in weight in the Prop and Engine combination or Engine alone? Depending on what the changes are for intake air and cooling could make a significant difference in drag. I'm really looking forward to viewing some photos of this new combination. Cheers to Lycoming and everyone who worked these changes.
 
With the new IO-390 EXP119 what prop is being used? Is the change in weight in the Prop and Engine combination or Engine alone? Depending on what the changes are for intake air and cooling could make a significant difference in drag. I'm really looking forward to viewing some photos of this new combination. Cheers to Lycoming and everyone who worked these changes.

The airplane currently has the same Hartzel blended airfoil propeller that was on the airplane when the IO-390A engine.

Greg posted a couple of videos to the Van's Aircraft Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/vansaircraftinc?rf=116496588410595
yesterday that give a few peaks at some of the details.
 
Purge valve?

Scott, is Vans using a purge valve with the Airflow Performance setup on the 14A? I believe it's an option to reduce issues with hot starts.
 
Scott, is Vans using a purge valve with the Airflow Performance setup on the 14A? I believe it's an option to reduce issues with hot starts.

No, we are not using a purge valve.

We have noticed no change in hot start performance compared to the Precision / RSA style injection system that was installed previously.
 
Scott, is Vans using a purge valve with the Airflow Performance setup on the 14A? I believe it's an option to reduce issues with hot starts.

Mark, the purge valve can be handy for hot starts, but its real purpose is based on the use of a drum-style mixture valve on earlier AFP bodies. The drum valve is easy to machine and shrugs off dirt, but it also has a leak rate of 1 to 3 lbs per hour in ICO. The purge valve diverts the leakage fuel back to a tank, rather than allowing it to dump into the engine manifold.

Anyway, earlier FM-200's like mine have drums. The FM150 and the FM-200C have a disc mixture valve, much like RSA/Precision/Avstar...low leakage rate with the red knob in ICO, and as Scott says, no purge required.
.
 

Attachments

  • Airflow Performance Mixture Valves 1000w.jpg
    Airflow Performance Mixture Valves 1000w.jpg
    84 KB · Views: 345
  • Mixture Valves 2 1000w.jpg
    Mixture Valves 2 1000w.jpg
    116 KB · Views: 318
Last edited:
What if you want the purge valve?

Call Airflow Performance and order the parts. Easy to install. Feed hose from the servo runs to the valve. Valve mounts on the side of the divider. Need a line back to a tank line upstream of the cockpit selector, and a push/pull control cable. Done.
 
Last edited:
Engine swap?

Anyone have a delivery date upcoming on the standard 390 or T-bolt that wants this new motor? I need a motor yesterday! Weeks from getting the new motor, but my baffles, cowl, etc are already finished for a standard/t-bolt 390. Lycoming wants $37400 for this one time deal for this EXP and it will be ready to ship in weeks, not months.

PM me or email [email protected] for questions. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Thank you Dan Horton for the sidebar article "Speaking Truth to Power" in the December 2020 Kitplanes. A very easily understood application of performance equations to the -EXP119 installation package.
 
Thank you Dan Horton for the sidebar article "Speaking Truth to Power" in the December 2020 Kitplanes. A very easily understood application of performance equations to the -EXP119 installation package.

+1 for dan horton's sidebar addition!
makes you wonder how much untapped performance is slumbering in all our -7A's, -8's, -7's, -8A's etc... considering the trivial firewall forward to fuselage/cowl exit/nosegear mount interface... there must be lots of drag there.
 
You're quite welcome.

It's easily understood because it's dumbed down to my level ;)

Seriously, (1) it is a back-of-the-napkin approach, (2) based on reported performance. A professional (which I am not) would probably want more tests, use far more detailed methods, and arrive at slightly different numbers.

Please be aware of an error in the paper magazine version, the substitution of a division sign (/) where there should be a minus sign (-). The Excess HP Change equation should read...

Excess HP Change = ((new ROC - old ROC) x weight) / 33,000

It has been corrected in the online magazine. My fault, typed it wrong and missed it in proofreading.
 
Back
Top