Titan engines

[Streamside357]

I know a lot of Kitfoxes are using the Rotax 9 series, but does anyone have an opinion on the Titan engines. I am thinking of the X340 for a 7SS. I was also thinking of overhauling a Lycoming. I fly mostly in the central US but want to head out to Homeland and see the backcountry.

Clarence G.
A&P with IA
Private Pilot SEL

[Eric Page]

It's been done. Many details available in this build thread: https://teamkitfox.com/Forums/threads/9651-Jeffs-340-Kitfox

[Shadowrider]

What about UL power?

[Streamside357]

Thanks for the link. I was wanting to know a bit more about the Titan compared to the Rotax. In the link, Jeff talked about how great the climb performance was. He did not mention much about cruise. As I am planning on a Super Sport and not the STi, cruise is just as important to me as climb. When I e-mailed John at Kitfox, he mentioned in his reply that the Titan is heavy and really pushes your CG forward.

As for the Rotax UL power, I think very highly of the Rotax’s. In my years as an A&P tho, I have only really looked at them from a distance. I am more familiar with the Lycomings and Continentals. I know these engines are all reliable, but even Trent Palmer threw a piston rod out the side of a case.

Clarence G
A&P with IA
Private Pilot SEL
Planning 7SS

[Benbell4140]

Originally I was in the same position as you. Based on my research Jeff has the only super sport wing powered by the 320-340 engine. The factory model was an STI and also the guy building up in Alaska has the STI wing. My personal choice was the continental O-200 but John McBean did tell me if I were considering an O-200 then I should just go with the Titan. I chose the O-200 after talking with a few owners that use the O-200 and it saved me a considerable amount of money over the Titan. It’s all about what your mission is. My mission was to outperform a J-3 and have side by side seating and I’m pretty sure my airplane will exceed my expectations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Maverick]

I have built two Kitfox 5s, one with a C-O200 and now one with a R912ULS. Maybe not fair to compare with a 7SS but it does level the playing field for comparison of performance from a flying prospective. I find that the R912ULS performs better all around and I attribute that to the lighter weight (777lbs vs. 870lbs). However, I will say that my prior flying experience with a dozen different planes I've owned that everyone of had a Continental motor, I'm far more comfortable with a Continental. It sounds like you might be in the same boat as me thinking that the slow RPM high cubic inch motors have proven their reliability for 80 years so why change. However, with gaining more and more experience in flying behind the R912ULS I am gaining more confidence. And, I've had some high RPM small cubic inch motors that were very reliable in several cars. I guess my stubbornness to accepting the R912ULS is finally giving way to modern technology being applied to aviation. In fact, yesterday I heard of a R912ULS motor with 3,000 hours on it that was torn down and rebuilt and all the parts still met factory specs so the only parts that were replaced were new rings. Is this true? I am not a witness to it but, I believe my source given his 30 years of experience with Rotax engines.

As for the failure Trent Palmer had, yes, he threw a rod but he also admitted that he was flying an old engine that was originally built as an R912UL eighty horsepower engine that had been modified by the prior owner. His admonition was don't modify your engine. Buy the one you want and leave it stock. Now maybe that notion has changed with more modern Rotax engines but, given that these engines were designed to be what they are, buy the horsepower you want in the first place and at least you'll know your engine is most likely to be reliable for a long time.

And, then there's the fuel burn. How many hours can you afford to fly and how fast do you need to get there? What are the performance requirements you have. An TX340 may be necessary if you need to go faster and carry more weight but given the gross weight restrictions you have on the airframe will you even have enough payload to do what you want if you go with the TX340? And, if it's more HP you need the R915iS will give you 140hp. I'm just saying the first time I built, I went with my gut, the second time I went with faith in friends that I have that have flown Rotaxs for 20-30 years. The short of it is, I was satisfied with both but certainly prefer the performance of the Rotax more than the heavier C-O200.

[Streamside357]

Thanks Maverick. I have thought a lot about this engine choice and it seems like everyone is trying to convince me that the Rotax is a better choice. I get it. The Rotax is a better fit for this aircraft. Its power to weight ratio and fuel burn are better and the turbo gives you better performance at higher elevations. And I get that not a lot of builders are using the Titan XO340 because of this.

Well, as I put on my last post, planning a 7 Super Sport build. At this point I think I am just going to have to get my fuselage FWA kit ordered and get that going. Then I will have to see what my budget and what is available before I make a final choice.

Clarence G

[Benbell4140]

This is exactly what I did. Fuselage kit first to give me some time to decide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Billy]

Hello Clarence,
I had a 0-320 e3d when I decided to build my kitfox. Looked at all the other comps., as far as aircraft kits and decided on the SS7. understanding from John that he had good things to say about the performance... but it is a heavier engine......... so with that I made the personal decision , I had my engine rebuilt with 160 hp Lycoming cylinders, roller lifters, $16,500. carburated MA-4 ,Vans airbox and inlet on lower cowl, plane power alt. and skytec lightweight starter. 82 " Whirlwind prop and Vetterman exhaust, dual p-mags, single 10" Dynon with Garmin G200b radio intercom ( trying ) to do everything to keep it light , but with that said I will be in the low 900#'s range when done. so my driving decision was already having the Lycoming, liked the simplicity of these engines , flying by myself most of the time is my platform for these choices , I camp, hunt and fish usually alone... I hope this may help you , good luck I am always eager to help ,with my adventures building and sharing what I have done. My cell if you would like to talk, 360-914-0014 Billy

[Denalifox]

Flying my O-320 B2B powered STi this week. Will give you some numbers. Price wise, O-320 is waaay cheaper and you can just have Lycon work your top end over and achieve the same power for much less. If you have any questions feel free to ask. I also put a Piper Super Cub cowl on the front as well. Turned out beautiful. Weight wise I was at 933# a couple weeks ago, I suspect Ill be in at around 950#. Will find out tomorrow.

[Denalifox]

here is a snapshot of my first start last week. Prop is a Catto 84/37.

28359
Flying my O-320 B2B powered STi this week. Will give you some numbers. Price wise, O-320 is waaay cheaper and you can just have Lycon work your top end over and achieve the same power for much less. If you have any questions feel free to ask. I also put a Piper Super Cub cowl on the front as well. Turned out beautiful. Weight wise I was at 933# a couple weeks ago, I suspect Ill be in at around 950#. Will find out tomorrow.

[109JB]

Nice picture except for the young person who appears to be standing directly in the plane of the propeller.

[Billy]

Hello Lauren,

I really like your airplane, congratulations . I like your choice fabricating your own cowl too. I used the carbon cowl from kitfox for the 235 and underestimated the amount of modification I had to do to get the 0-320 inside of it. , had I known, your route would have been a better choice and it looks very nice, so good on you ! can't wait to see your test flight numbers ,hope you can share those with me, Take care, Billy

[Streamside357]

Thanks Billy and Lauren. I just got to get the kit and get started on building it and someday I will be right up there with you guys. I keep looking at the STi and I am beginning to think that is what I want to build.

Clarence G
A&P with IA
Private Pilot SEL
Planning 7 SS or STi

[AlphaMike]

I'm not judging anyone, but I think it's fair to mention, Continental (Titan) is wholly owned by "Aviation Industry Corporation of China". Which is a Chinese state owned aerospace company headquartered in Beijing. Yes, we buy stuff made in China every single day of our lives. I get it. Just wanted to throw that out there for those who care but didn't know.

[efwd]

Much appreciated. I utilize this sort of info daily.

[109JB]

Just saw the picture and wanted to point out that it is not a good idea to have that young person or anyone else for that matter standing in the plane of the prop.

[AlphaMike]

Much appreciated. I utilize this sort of info daily.

You're quite welcome. Nothing like using our hard earned dollars to empower the enemy of democracy.

[Mitch]

You're quite welcome. Nothing like using our hard earned dollars to empower the enemy of democracy.

Thank you for this statement, very true words. I am glad to see that someone has the guts to say it.

Mitch

[TheFlyingDoc]

I know this is an old thread but thought someone might look at it again.
I fly a Kitfox 7 SS with a continental O-200 (on 26" ABW). I have also flown a 7SS with rotax912UL (on 8.5's) and a 7 STI with 915is (on 31" ABW). As much as I like my plane, the performance difference was very notificable. Both rotax out performend my plane in climb and cruise.

I get about 95 mph in cruise at 2550 RPM. The 7SS 912UL was at 120 mph. The 7STI 915is was 115 mph.

at sea level the 912UL had about a 200 fpm climb advantage over mine (flown the same day)
at 5000-6000 ft altitude summer day in Idaho, the 7STI 915is had about 800 fpm climb advantage over mine. Also the STI wing dropped the landing speed by about 10 mph (I have not put VGs on mine yet and he had VGs also so that will play a role)

Takeoff roll was barely noticable between mine and the 7SS 912UL (maybe 50 ft), but the 7STI 915is cut about 100-150 ft off the takeoff roll even in the mountains in the summer.

I have no experience with the titan engines.

Hope that helps.

[ken nougaret]

I fly a 7 ss with a stock o200 and 8.00 size tires. I get 103 mph IAS cruise. I understand the slower climb though.

[airlina]

When making these performance comparisons , you have to be sure that you're comparing apples to apples as they say. You don't mention what type of airspeeds the given figures are. What you are after are TAS (true airspeeds) not IAS for conditions on a given day. Also other conditions like loading of each airplane, how they are faired (ex. are the lift struts airfoiled) tire size (that you did mention) and prop type and pitch, type of gear etc . If the IAS airspeeds in each plane aren't correct than the the airspeed numbers you see will not be correct. I have a Series 5 with a Continental IO-240 engine (125HP) . empty weight is a porky 960lbs (heavy engine at around 250lbs, autopilot and stuff) well faired with airfoiled lift and stab struts , grove gear with Desser 8.50 (22") tires , Sensenich wood prop (70 3/4"dia. x58 pitch) . Having said that my TAS is 120 mph at 2500 RPM @ mid density altitudes of 3000-8000' . average day climb rates on a standard day at a solo weight of 1200-1300lbs would be around 800fpm at Vy. So before doing an engine change , I would verify that all your numbers are good and to do this you have to do a side by side test to each airplane you are comparing to. Bruce N199CL