What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Is any body actually flying an LS motor

stewyracer

I'm New Here
I love to read, and read, and read about different subjects I am interested in. I have read and read about LS engines in aircraft, But I cant ever come across current info on anyone actually flying the LS motor.
A little back ground, I am a mechanic by trade, I own and solely operate a golf cart and motorcycle shop. I build things all day, therefore I decided to build an airplane. I chose an RV-10, (for more reasons than I have time to discuss). I love the fact that I have a choice to put an automotive engine in an RV, and have read all the pro/not too many cons. But i have not heard from anyone on the forums about THE SIMPLE, I FLEW MY LS MOTOR IN MY RV AND THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS IN THE SKY.
Now I don't want to start a debate thread, I just want to hear from people actually flying an LS in an RV, so I can make a decision as to what engine I am going to run.
 
I know of one guy who had a LS powered RV 10, he lost it in a post landing fire.

As I recall, the fire had nothing to do with the LS setup.

He was very happy with the plane and engine setup, last I heard he was going to build again and use another LS setup.

Havent seen him here for 10 years or so------and cant remember his name.
 
LS engines are awesome for sure. Own a few myself and seen them take a lot of abuse, and make a ton of power also.

From my little research the gearbox has been the biggest hurdle in any auto engine that requires one. Lots of harmonics there.
 
Several non-RVs flying with LS power for some time and some new ones about to fly.

I bit heavy for a -10 unfortunately. With a light gearbox, composite prop, rad behind the C of G and twin batteries mounted well aft, it's possible. You'd have to use an electric prop with most gearboxes as they have no provision to get oil to the prop. Those that do are expensive and really heavy.

Unless you're a gearhead/ fabricator and or engineer, I wouldn't attempt it.
 
Rv-10

A local flew several hundred hours with an LS engine in his 10 but eventually replaced the LS with a Lycoming

Lots of starter issues . Dependability issues on fly outs with our group. The joke was that the rest of us had to save empty seats so his pax could get home.
 
LS motor

There was a Republic SeaBee at Oshkosh a few years ago that had converted to a LS-6 engine. Search for info on the “Lake Tahoe Special” Seabee. I read it was lost in a landing accident a while back when it hit floating debris and ended up sinking.
 
Last edited:
check out...

http://autopsrus.com/rv-10

I was going to go down this road but the timing didn't work out. Looks like a nice setup albeit a bit heavy...

I did talk to a guy in Georgia who is flying one...he seems to like it after a substantial amount of tweaking. I seem to recall him saying that it will out climb the lyco and out cruise it...if you want to burn the fuel.

When I asked if he would do it again, there was a long pause...
 
We've supplied a number of EFI systems for GM V8s in aircraft. You can see some of them here: http://www.sdsefi.com/gm.htm

To my knowledge there were 5 RVs with LS power, a 7 and four 10s. None of those 10s still have the LS installed and all 4 had incidents. I saw the 7 listed for sale about a year back.

There may be more I don't know about but you probably won't see them posting here on VAF due to the hate they usually receive for straying off the air cooled path...
 
Last edited:
...and

"...There may be more I don't know about but you probably won't see them posting here on VAF due to the hate they usually receive for straying off the air cooled path..."


...and that is a shame...
 
I would be careful to not confuse hate with legitimate concern. I came into this menagerie with an open mind to propulsion options. It was right before an infamous incident involving an RV10 and an egg. I wasn't around for the early stages of that history but did study the aftermath, and it was littered with red flags.
I don't know the exact numbers but anytime a small fleet percentage has a disproportionate share of unfortunate results, it affects all of us directly in the pocketbook. It gets us in the insurance market, the resell market, the kit vendor health market, and the angry spouse market.

I believe that our E-A/B communities have a responsibility to care for each other, especially the old sages (which I hope to be considered some day), with regard to the new entrants and wannabes (which we vitally need replenishment from). Some love is perceived as tough. So be it.

There is value in innovation and wisdom in proven results. Ask Boeing.
 
Last edited:
As someone intimately involved with auto conversions for over 25 years and flying one for 17, my advice for a long time has been for anyone contemplating one is to think long and hard. They should gather as much independent information as possible. If they don't have the mechanical background, it almost certainly won't turn out well in the end and even if they do, it still might not.

Few FWF engine package vendors know what they are doing over the broad spectrum required to make such a package reliable so one shouldn't think that you can just hand over a wad of cash and all will be well either.

Folks here are all adults and can make their own decisions. Some will be bad. That's life and unfortunately sometimes death.

There's a fine line between sage advice (hopefully from someone who's actually gone down the path and knows something) to innovation-killing attack. We've seen both here on VAF. Remember, some people don't have the same mission or goals as you do. Some really want to learn and do something different from the masses. I wouldn't condemn those folks for trying if they are well aware of the possible pitfalls before they start.

Regarding the Lloyd -10 accident. I posted an analysis of that here years ago. IMO, personality and decision making were more causal than the engine type up front if you look at the GPS data and NTSB report.

We've seen a few accidents (some also fatal) here with Lycoming powered RVs where people didn't follow good advice or show good judgement either. Some types of folks are just destined to go down this path with predictable results...
 
Last edited:
one more point

?.ok, I always fly behind a Lyc, or an old Cont....but I have WAAAAAAY more experience overhauling, rebuilding, & troubleshooting small-block chevvies in stock cars.
I know almost NOTHING about my Lycoming.
Which one is safer for me to fly behind?
perhaps a question I don't want the answer to.
 
As someone who often browses for sale aircraft while my build slowly progresses I will state an observation of mine which you might want to take into consideration. Non ?standard? engine configurations are often difficult to sell. I realize we never plan to sell our machines but life sometimes doesn?t go to plan. While you may decide the risk is reasonable others may not.
 
?.ok, I always fly behind a Lyc, or an old Cont....but I have WAAAAAAY more experience overhauling, rebuilding, & troubleshooting small-block chevvies in stock cars.
I know almost NOTHING about my Lycoming.
Which one is safer for me to fly behind?
perhaps a question I don't want the answer to.

I though that way once upon a time. Trouble is, the basic powerplant is the easy part...
 
Ross,

I get what you're saying and can't disagree. However your resume and capability is far different than the average Van's customer. You can probably count on one hand the guys in your clubhouse.
However, the numbers don't lie. Something like 3 of the first 4 RV10 hull losses were alternative and the 4th flew into a thunderstorm.

I remember being an idealistic newbie about 14 years ago and espousing on this forum about changing Van's fugly seat belt system with something more like an automotive inertia reel system. Some guys have since done exactly that, but a poster whom I've grown to highly respect said such could very well be unwise and to "trust Van's". So I did and went stock Van's on the restraints.

Van's could no doubt sell a lot more kits to a broader audience if there were attractive propulsion packages at lower cost. So far they haven't embraced that route. Quite the contrary actually.
Back in the day I talked at length with Jan and Bud Warren who both had attractive pitches to a newbie like me but the comment about trusting Van's (from you) resonated and I went the Van's way and with the passage of time am ever so glad that I did. Now I'm saving to buy your system to add to it.
 
?.ok, I always fly behind a Lyc, or an old Cont....but I have WAAAAAAY more experience overhauling, rebuilding, & troubleshooting small-block chevvies in stock cars.
I know almost NOTHING about my Lycoming.
Which one is safer for me to fly behind?
perhaps a question I don't want the answer to.

The one that has several million flight hours behind it, if you are not intimately familiar with working on it.

On the "hater" mentality, it's definitely evident among folks that dislike auto engine conversion, but not limited to them for certain. I unfortunately caught a LOT of heat from folks when I decided to put an IO-360 on my 9A, with one guy (former VAF member) going so far as sending me an email telling me that he fully intended to sue my estate after I killed myself for the rise it would cause on his insurance rates.
 
LS 1 engine in a 3/4 size P51 replica

You can google the referenced aircraft and see the beautiful aircraft a gentleman built.

The aircraft, I believe, was built and flown by a Mark Hoyle. It had a number of hours on it but there was an in flight engine stoppage with aircraft making a safe off airport landing.

With a little research you might find some useful information of the aircraft builder/ pilot.
 
Non ?standard? engine configurations are often difficult to sell. I realize we never plan to sell our machines but life sometimes doesn?t go to plan. While you may decide the risk is reasonable others may not.

Yup, that one is on the list if people don't already know. You'll never get the same price with a non-standard engine.

I know I didn't build my plane with resale in mind. If I get zero for it at the end, I'm ok with that. I'll have learned a lot, enjoyed the experience doing the FWF and supporting systems and building it plus flying it for 2-3 decades hopefully.

You won't get much for a 20 year old car either but people still but new ones and suffer massive depreciation.

Airplanes are mostly poor investment vehicles.

You do these things for the satisfaction and enjoyment.
 
OR...

"...Knowing what they know now, they might have decided to do a clean sheet design, rather than relying on the proven results of the 737..."

Or, they could have invested in the 757, which is a MUCH better aircraft...:D
 
Ross,

I get what you're saying and can't disagree. However your resume and capability is far different than the average Van's customer. You can probably count on one hand the guys in your clubhouse.
However, the numbers don't lie. Something like 3 of the first 4 RV10 hull losses were alternative and the 4th flew into a thunderstorm.

Van's could no doubt sell a lot more kits to a broader audience if there were attractive propulsion packages at lower cost. So far they haven't embraced that route. Quite the contrary actually.
Back in the day I talked at length with Jan and Bud Warren who both had attractive pitches to a newbie like me but the comment about trusting Van's (from you) resonated and I went the Van's way and with the passage of time am ever so glad that I did. Now I'm saving to buy your system to add to it.

Yes, I'm certainly saying that few people have the skills to do an alt engine conversion and make it successful and lots of attempts have turned out bad or tragic as we've seen. I've seen many myself over the years which is why I offer the advice I do.

"What do you think about this engine Ross?" 90% of the time I advise them to consider a Lyconental instead. Fortunately, most heed that advice in the end though some might get part way down the path before they realize their folly.

I think you made the right choice for you.

Certainly too, the safety record isn't so good as you and I both pointed out.
Some people fairly ask because they don't know all these things. We should gently point out the facts in aid of letting them make a more informed decision.
 
I love to read, and read, and read about different subjects I am interested in. I have read and read about LS engines in aircraft, But I cant ever come across current info on anyone actually flying the LS motor.
A little back ground, I am a mechanic by trade, I own and solely operate a golf cart and motorcycle shop. I build things all day, therefore I decided to build an airplane. I chose an RV-10, (for more reasons than I have time to discuss). I love the fact that I have a choice to put an automotive engine in an RV, and have read all the pro/not too many cons. But i have not heard from anyone on the forums about THE SIMPLE, I FLEW MY LS MOTOR IN MY RV AND THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS IN THE SKY.
Now I don't want to start a debate thread, I just want to hear from people actually flying an LS in an RV, so I can make a decision as to what engine I am going to run.

Brian Robinson has been installing and flying them for over 20 years. He has probably had the most success of anyone that I've read about. I've emailed him on and off over the past two decades and he has been very responsive. If I was going to consider an LS, he would be one of my first calls. Brian lists the RV 10 as suitable installation candidate.

http://v8seabee.com/conversion-kits/compatibility.html
 
Last edited:
Yes, but...

"...Knowing what they know now, they might have decided to do a clean sheet design, rather than relying on the proven results of the 737..."

Or, they could have invested in the 757, which is a MUCH better aircraft...:D

Performance wise, absolutely. I've flown both and the 757 (-200 version) is an amazing airplane.

However, passengers want cheap seats and the airlines oblige so they are interested in cost per available seat mile. The 737NG (and MAX) wins on most counts.

As to the clean sheet design, Boeing's two largest 737 customers (SWA and RYA) would most likely demand a common type rating with the 737. That would be a bit difficult to achieve.

Sorry for the thread drfit.
 
Yep

Yep, and that is why a brand new 737-900 looks like it is 40 years old inside...

I too, have flown the 757 and currently the 737. I long to return to the 757 because it is such an awesome aircraft. The 737 may be a cheap seat but coming across the country this morning at 340, those passengers would likely have paid the premium for the 757 to get the smooth ride at 420...

I don’t think they can put any more lipstick on the 737...
 
Brian Robinson has been installing and flying them for over 20 years. He has probably had the most success of anyone that I've read about. I've emailed him on and off over the past two decades and he has been very responsive. If I was going to consider an LS, he would be one of my first calls. Brian lists the RV 10 as suitable installation candidate.

http://v8seabee.com/conversion-kits/compatibility.html

Brian has been doing it for a number of years but there have still been failures on customer aircraft. One was stranded in the far north for many months after a piston failure.

While his Hy-Vo drive seems very reliable, it is very heavy and expensive. Not suitable for an RV IMO.
 
Brian has been doing it for a number of years but there have still been failures on customer aircraft. One was stranded in the far north for many months after a piston failure.

While his Hy-Vo drive seems very reliable, it is very heavy and expensive. Not suitable for an RV IMO.

Don't disagree with anything you said. They aren't for me, but if I was going to give it a go, I think I'd spend some serious time with Brian.
 
That RV-7 has been purchased and the new owner has posted a video on youtube here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrZoPhC3TF8&t=213s&ab_channel=UltimaJP

We've supplied a number of EFI systems for GM V8s in aircraft. You can see some of them here: http://www.sdsefi.com/gm.htm

To my knowledge there were 5 RVs with LS power, a 7 and four 10s. None of those 10s still have the LS installed and all 4 had incidents. I saw the 7 listed for sale about a year back.

There may be more I don't know about but you probably won't see them posting here on VAF due to the hate they usually receive for straying off the air cooled path...
 
Brian has been doing it for a number of years but there have still been failures on customer aircraft. One was stranded in the far north for many months after a piston failure.

While his Hy-Vo drive seems very reliable, it is very heavy and expensive. Not suitable for an RV IMO.

To put this in better context, the aircraft was stranded in the far north for many months simply because it was the far north, not because of anything like a problem getting parts. The north imposes many logistics challenges so when something happens there, even to certificated aircraft with certificated engines, repairs often take many months to execute. In this instance the owner faced many challenges in scheduling, including scheduling his own vacation time, to revisit the aircraft with a new short block in hand and perform the necessary swap, then flew home. The good news is a local car mechanic was able to do the short block swap. That's not something one can say about a Lycontinental engine where finding hands-on expertise can be more of a challenge.

The performance of that VeeBee with the LS engine is inspiring. The original SeaBee powerplant left MUCH to be desired in terms of performance.
 
I have pics of that plane at my home base. It popped up on Ebay and my friend bought it. There was a lot of work done on it to get it to the point it could be test flown. It scared the pilot pretty bad and after a while they gave up on it and sold it. I recall that the main problem was the geared drive that was having problems keeping the RPM in check. Interesting concept.

-Marc
 
So an individual has acceptable results with an LS engine in an RV.
How about a Porsche PFM 3200 and a certified airplane. Oh that's been done.
So if you put a "Liconental"(that one, humored me) in results are more predictable. Now everything that you put together and received the airworthiness certificate for lets you hit the start button you get to fly phase 1 for 40 hours.
There are 11,200+ RV's with what would be considered to be acceptable results.
 
Back
Top