Power Flow Systems Forum  

Go Back   Power Flow Systems Forum > PFS Forum > Cessna > C177RG exhaust development (Public)

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 03-05-2008, 04:12 PM
kentowl kentowl is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 3
Question Exciting News: First Questions

Thanks for the announcement, guys! Some

- Can you post install photos so we have some idea what's involved under the cowl? How maintenance access is affected?

- Does the increased power available require the large oil cooler mod for cooling?

- Is the K&N filter kit you sell part of the install? Do your estimated speed increases include K&N effects?

- 7 knots improvement in cruise suggests a huge power increase; perhaps other repairs/improvements on the testbed. What HP increase do you estimate from a new-condition engine?

mark me down as interested while budget constrained-
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 03-05-2008, 04:38 PM
tstrohmayer's Avatar
tstrohmayer tstrohmayer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 37
Default

Thanks for the questions!

Our marketing people are working on having some pictures available...stay tuned.

The increased performance does not require a larger oil cooler. We tested at maximum gross weight with and without the Power Flow Exhaust. Oil temperatures actually decreased with the PFS system.

The Challenger (K&N) air filter is not required for the PFS exhaust system, but the Challenger filter is an excellent product and we highly recommend it.

The speed improvements we saw with our test aircraft were independent of any other changes...in other words...we did not secretly install an IO-390 between the baseline and PFS test flights. It is an honest apples-to-apples comparison of the stock exhaust compared to the PFS exhaust. A Challenger air filter was installed for both exhaust systems.

We do not estimate a horsepower increase with this product because it often causes confusion and can be misleading (some people think that they need a high-performance rating to fly with a PFS System on a 200HP engine). The bottom line for us and for our customers is more climb and more speed...this system provides a substantial amount of both, guaranteed.

Thank you very much for your interest!
__________________
Tom Strohmayer
Engineering Manager
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 03-05-2008, 06:27 PM
jtreed jtreed is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 60
Default C177RG Exhaust System Picture

Click to make the image Larger.

We'll have more pictures in the future...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Labeled-ExhaustWeb.jpg
Views:	2508
Size:	86.1 KB
ID:	4  
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 03-06-2008, 08:25 AM
acerezo acerezo is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2
Default More Q's

Tom,

Your system looks very promising and I do hope you can find the interest level required to certify it.

I find the non-turbo 177RG is a very good aircraft but I miss some performance at altitude, where your system should help as advertised. We can only be grateful for your efforts in moving this mod forward.

Can you help me with the following Q's:

1- What is the difference in weight between the PFS system and the Cessna exhaust (including heating system changes)?

2- What is the difference in heater performance? Is it improved?

3- My aircraft has an IO-360-A1B6D engine modified with a Firewall Forward (FWF) Inc STC including higher-compression pistons. Power is increased about 7%. However, the airframe STC installation is such that the engine is de-rated (to the original power levels) by placard-limiting maximum manifold pressure. The only other airframe mod required by the STC is a larger oil cooler. In our case it all results in increased performance at altitude, similar Oil T's and lower CHT's. While I understand the cert process involved with the FWF airframe STC, I am not familiar with yours and therefore do not know whether the PFS exhaust is compatible with this mod. Based on the fact that the installed FWF engine delivers the same maximum power as the original engine, do you think they are compatible?

Thanks



Antonio Cerezo, '76 177RG
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 03-06-2008, 10:05 AM
tstrohmayer's Avatar
tstrohmayer tstrohmayer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by acerezo View Post
1- What is the difference in weight between the PFS system and the Cessna exhaust (including heating system changes)?
Since the design is still not locked, I can't give you a definite answer, but our system is projected to weigh close to 25 lbs. Our exhaust systems are typically within 5 lbs of the original.

Quote:
Originally Posted by acerezo View Post
2- What is the difference in heater performance? Is it improved?
We have not yet evaluated the heater performance but our criteria is "as good or better than the original".

Quote:
Originally Posted by acerezo View Post
3- My aircraft has an IO-360-A1B6D engine modified with a Firewall Forward (FWF) Inc STC including higher-compression pistons. Power is increased about 7%. However, the airframe STC installation is such that the engine is de-rated (to the original power levels) by placard-limiting maximum manifold pressure. The only other airframe mod required by the STC is a larger oil cooler. In our case it all results in increased performance at altitude, similar Oil T's and lower CHT's. While I understand the cert process involved with the FWF airframe STC, I am not familiar with yours and therefore do not know whether the PFS exhaust is compatible with this mod. Based on the fact that the installed FWF engine delivers the same maximum power as the original engine, do you think they are compatible?
This is a really good question. Generally, it is up to the installer (the IA signing off the installation) to determine that combined STCs are compatible, although the FAA will sometimes specifically prohibit or approve certain combinations. The requirement of a larger oil cooler indicates that the Firewall Forward STC has an affect engine temperatures. Since our system has not been evaluated with this engine, a cooling climb should be performed to ensure that engine temperatures would not exceed redline when corrected for a 100 deg day. I'm fairly certain it would pass, it's just something the FAA may ask to be demonstrated.

Thanks for the great questions!
__________________
Tom Strohmayer
Engineering Manager
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 03-06-2008, 02:07 PM
dtilman dtilman is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 72
Default Weight of the Power Flow

Quote:
Originally Posted by tstrohmayer View Post
Since the design is still not locked, I can't give you a definite answer, but our system is projected to weigh close to 25 lbs. Our exhaust systems are typically within 5 lbs of the original.
Let me point out that the stock exhaust we weighed came in at a little over 26 pounds. If our production unit stays about the same as the prototype, it is possible that the PFS exhaust will be the same or actually lighter than the stock exhaust.

We won't know the final numbers until the units are in full production, but as Tom says, we try to stay within 5 pounds of the original. This despite the fact that the stock exhausts are usually less complex and contain far less tubing. The C177RG stock exhaust, however, is quite a bit more complex due to the confined space of that cowling. Rube Goldberg might be proud (of both Cessna and now us).
__________________
Darren Tilman
General Manager
Power Flow Systems, Inc.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 03-07-2008, 11:14 PM
jgalak jgalak is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1
Default

Few questions:

1) What is the advantage of the ceramic exhaust over the polished?

2) How far does the exhaust protrude from the cowling? Is it more like the "classic" or like the "short stack"?

3) I have a Maple Leaf exhaust stack fairing, will this exhaust fit, or will I need to modify things?

Thanks,
Juliean
1974 Cardinal RG
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 03-08-2008, 08:04 PM
tstrohmayer's Avatar
tstrohmayer tstrohmayer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgalak View Post

1) What is the advantage of the ceramic exhaust over the polished?
The advantages are purely aesthetic. Both tailpipes have a mirror finish when new, the ceramic pipe will keep its luster while the standard, polished pipe will eventually turn brown.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgalak View Post
2) How far does the exhaust protrude from the cowling? Is it more like the "classic" or like the "short stack"?
It's a little bit of both. It comes out the existing outlet, but we wanted a slightly distinctive look, so the pipe angles back slightly (though not nearly as much as the original classic on the fixed gear Cardinals). We hope to have some pictures up soon. There is enough pipe visible that most people will find the ceramic option worthwhile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgalak View Post
3) I have a Maple Leaf exhaust stack fairing, will this exhaust fit, or will I need to modify things?
We have not tried our prototype with the Maple Leaf fairing, but since the tailpipe comes out of the cowl in the same location, there is a good chance it will fit as is. As soon as we have additional information on this combination, we'll post it here.

Thanks for the great questions!
__________________
Tom Strohmayer
Engineering Manager
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 03-09-2008, 04:21 PM
kentowl kentowl is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 3
Thumbs up Beautiful Design - Crossover Clearance?

Thanks for the image, guys - that helps a lot. Another query: I've noted a number of RGs with minimum clearance between the OEM crossover pipe and the motor mount. As Lord mounts sag over time, this becomes minimal and may even contact.

Does your layout add to the original clearance - or reduce it?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 03-10-2008, 09:03 AM
tstrohmayer's Avatar
tstrohmayer tstrohmayer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kentowl View Post
Does your layout add to the original clearance - or reduce it?
It looks as if the clearance will increase slightly with the PFS system. We hope to have pictures of the actual installation posted in the near future.

Thanks,
__________________
Tom Strohmayer
Engineering Manager
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Power Flow Systems, Inc.