Continental o 200 vs rotax 912. Rotax engines exis...

  • Continental o 200 vs rotax 912. Rotax engines exist today mostly in Experimental aircraft or LSAs, although more certificated manufacturers are eyeing Rotax. I would only consider the O200 on a Zenith 750 which has a max gross weight 220 pounds heavier. that is the most frequent objection I have heard vs the 912 on the 701. Engine options include new Rotax 912ULS, maybe a UL, less likely a Honda conversion, and very possibly a smaller "real" aircraft engine. I'm wondering about the prices Engine HP Weight(lbs) Comments ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rotax 503 50 85 Great Plains VW 1600CC 55 160 The Rotax 915 iS is a turbocharged, four-stroke, liquid/air-cooled piston engine developed by BRP-Rotax in Austria. All suffered main bearing failure or cracked crankcases. The fuel burn of my continental C-85 is pretty much the same as what skysteve is reporting for his 912. The ad stained that it has a -200 and burns less gas than a Rotax 912S. I know the rotec looks cool but avoid it like the plague as well. ROTALK is a web based support system which provides a common access point for locating key Information - Education - Support for their Rotax Aircraft Engines such as the Rotax 912, Rotax 914, Rotax 912 iS, Rotax 915 iS, Rotax 503 and Rotax 582. What About the Rest? So the firewall-forward package is different—and limited to the Rotax 912 or 912S, where the kitbuilt might also house the O-200 or IO-240 Continental, O-235 Lycoming or Jabiru 3300. The Continental O-200-D is attractive and becoming more common thanks to the Cessna C162 Skycatcher. ) Rotax accomplishes this mainly by turning the engine twice as fast: Redline is 5,800 rpm for takeoff and typically 5,000 rpm in cruise. The Continental engines are horizontally opposed 4 cylinder 4 stroke engines. 6dB (A) reduction in noise If you own a Cessna 150, drop us a line The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions - Lycoming, Continental and Rotax - Guys and Girls, I've heard a bit here and there on this site about the trusty ol 'nentals and how thirsty they are and others hints about how different engines behave. This engine is considered the standard against which all other 100hp class engines are measured. Despite this, some still don't believe it can be a reliable engin I can’t comment on the O-320 or the 915 but over the last 12 years I have got about 20K hours operating O-200’s and 6K hours operating the Rotax 912. It carries a horsepower rating of 100 at 2,750rpm. Hi all, Does anyone have info on engine mounts to fit a Continental O-200 into an RV-9A? Reason I'm asking is that the 125Hp Certified Franklin 4A-235-B31 (which shares engine mounts with the O-200) is listed on Franklin Engines website at $6900 new. 302 votes, 118 comments. Re: O-320 vs Rotax 915is A very thought provoking subject. Would prefer to run on car gas. I was wondering if any Rotax mechanic or authorized repair center had comments on the costs of operation and maintenance between the Continental O-200 and the Rotax 912. But, what's the weight difference between the 100 HP rotax (incl radiators, coolant, cowlings, etc. Just spent some time on Ebay and found enough yellow tagged parts to build an fresh O-200 for well under 10K. Modern Rotax is one of a few modern manufacturers that is seeking to challenge our notions of what an aircraft engine can do. However, I've heard from people May 1, 2011 · Cont -200 and Rotax 912 S/ULS fuel efficiency comparison I was perusing Barnstormers and came across and ad for a Kitfox SupeSport experimental. Ok, so they are not really similar except for the power output. When a good friend of mine was shopping light sports I had this discussion with him on Comtinental 0-200 vs Rotax. Re: How can I make an informed decision choosing between similar engines? by Hambone » Thu Jul 09, 2020 9:35 am Just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons, a new Continental O-200 runs about $30K. include the standard electric start and built-in gear box. Double the fuel consumption (6-9 gph) using aviation fuel versus auto gas and double the weight (250+ lbs for the Continental/Lycoming) why would anyone consider it a viable option over the Rotax? Rotax 912 engines are considerably popular in Europe and in the United States as they do not require AVGAS fuel, ensure less fuel consumption than competing engines, e. It was just a cream puff. I did a overhaul on my C-85: machined case halves, ground cam, new O-200 crank cylinders and pistons, new oil pump and new mags. Unlike the O-200 I feel better buying a used Rotax. The experience's I've had with engine issues, three do date stemmed around the accessories, not the engine itself. The 912 ULS has a dry weight of just 132 pounds, compared to 199 pounds for a Continental O-200-D or 200 pounds for a Lycoming IO-233-LSA. Jabiru Bird Facts Jabiru mycteria A Z Animals Nov 16 2025 The jabiru Jabiru mycteria is a large stork native to Central and South America It inhabits wetlands and The 912 is more fuel efficient and lighter than comparable older engines, e. ) and the O-200 Continental firewall forward installations? Advantages of the Rotax over the aircooled bulletproof direct drive Cont. The machining aspects of the Rotax engine also remind me of the Porsche “four banger”. " I would like to start a discussion about comparing the fuel consumption of similar engines: the Rotax 912 and the O-200. After looking at -320 new prices, used Re: O-320 vs Rotax 915is That’s the most time I’ve heard of on a single 912 yet. And accidents involving Continental O-200-powered craft were as numerous as you'd expect for the length and depth of its presence in general aviation aircraft. If the O-200 — with its breaker-point mechanical magnetos and single manual-mixture-controlled carburetor — is the "old dependable" of LSA engine offerings, then the Rotax 912 series of engines must be the "new dependable. The O-200 was introduced in the 1950s and was installed in many aircraft, the most popular being the Cessna 150. . As far as I can tell, the least expensive certified aircraft engine available are the 80hp Rotax 912 A/F. Rotax 912 or 0-200 continental which is quieter? by Mark Gregor » Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:08 pm My avionics shop guys were talking about how the high rpm rotax is so loud compared to a lycoming or continental. , Continental O-200, but originally had a shorter time between overhaul (TBO). If you want to read a comparison between the Rotax 912 series and the Continental O-200, look up articles on the subject by Ron Wanttaja. Continental O-200 and long TBO, even up to 2000 hours, depending on an engine series. It won’t work. g. I know - it's not allowed under ELSA rules. Where the 912 weighs 125 pounds (claimed) dry, the O-200 is 176, and the IO-233 is around 200 pounds. Fuel injection gives a small gain, and direct injection another small gain as you move towards diesels which take the crown for efficiency in terms of fuel relative to output. Here again, many occurred through no fault of the engine. I know potatoes, potatoes a failure is a failure regardless of the how. I’ve seen some used mid time engines that are in the same price range as used O-200’s. Likewise, overhaul parts are monopolized. The powerplants available range from 80hp to 130hp, and target the weight range of generally 2-seat aircaft wi… Might also look at UL power as an option. So, if one can sacrifice 50 lbs of useful load, then the option of O-200-D looks rather attractive. The GA community is screaming for an advancement under the hood but equally values reliability. The legacy engines weigh quite a bit more than the Rotax 912. Hey folks. indeed the O-200 is tried and true, and Im not particularly found of Rotax's death grip on overhauls and parts. Re: O-320 vs Rotax 915is Probably right Brown Bear, as efficiency fuel to brake horsepower wise really hasn’t changed since WWII. As far as the small Continentals are concerned—well, the replacement is here. Like all Rotax engines, these do best on unleaded mogas because the lead in 100LL eventually fouls plugs and accumulates as sludge in the gearbox. Wrapping up my 2nd build and exploring my next money pit. Jul 9, 2020 · The other point I would raise is that the Zenith Cruiser performance with the Continental O-200 appears to be very decent. For example, the gearbox magnetic drain plug on the Rotax does not utilize a gasket of any sort. At least with the Rotax 912 and two 200-pound people you can still carry 11 gallons of fuel. But the rest of the Kitfox SLSA is off-the-rack Super Sport Series 7. I have read that Continental produced about 50,000 O-200s. Data shows the Rotax 912 has better reliability than the traditional workhorses. There's been a lot of talk lately in various specific kit-related threads about engine choices for the experimental light bush plane class. Cont -200 and Rotax 912 S/ULS fuel efficiency comparison I was perusing Barnstormers and came across and ad for a Kitfox SupeSport experimental. Is that true? I dont have enough rotax experience to make an honest assessment. On introduction, the TBO was only 600 hours, which was double that of previous Rotax engines but far short of existing engines of comparable size and power. The Rotax is a very reliable engine. However, our “Continental” category suffered by lumping a number of different models together. Jun 7, 2008 · The Rotax 912 is significantly more expensive, last I checked. With a lighter, and higher powered Rotax 912ULS or 912iS engine, it should be even better. But I wasn’t looking or thinking globally, nor did I consider that new airframes would be developed just because the 912 was light and compact, fitting into places ill suited for, say, a Continental O-200 or Lycoming O-235. ii) 20% better climb cruise performance due to the constant speed propeller. Most horsepower ratings are for a new engine, at max power with a min pitch prop or club prop. Pricing is for stand alone new engines, and no core or i) 10,000 litres less fuel burn over the 2,000 hour life of your engine. His contention was that the O-200 was more proven and more mechanics knew how to work on them. Earlier iterations of the O-200 and O-235 engines used magnetos to generate and distribute ignition system spark and updraft single-throat carburetor fuel-metering systems. This community is for discussion among pilots, students, instructors and aviation… Rotax seems to be loved by a lot of people, even preferred over the Lycoming/Continental in many situations. I’ve had a cam round off, mag issues, oil leak to a cooler but nothing that would make me characterize it as junk. Radiator systems are available from Rotax but are all most always waived by the manufactures for a custom unit that fits the design more closely. ? What are the primary differences between the Continental O-200-D and the Rotax 912IS? (Example: fuel burn, overhaul times and costs, decarb, performance, reliability etc. Why don't they produce engines up to 300 hp to compete with Lyc/Con? Is there something fundamentally limiting in their design? It seems like there would be a huge market if they can make The IO-240 is a ‚modern‘ injected Continental engine found in the Katanas (Americans didn’t accept the Rotax 912 powered The 912 ULS has a dry weight of just 132 pounds, compared to 199 pounds for a Continental O-200-D or 200 pounds for a Lycoming IO-233-LSA. It is a direct drive 4-stroke, 4-cylinder engine of 200cid. I would presume the purchase price of each engine new is comparable (within a tow or three thousand dollars) and there is a savings in engine weight and fuel consumption using the Rotax. Threads possibly related to this one Fuel economy How Lycoming (and Rotax, and Continental) build engines Four seat modern high-wing Rotax STC conversion for a C150 / O-200, and overhaul costs The Rotax engine reminds me of the Porsche 356/super 90/912 engine because of some of the crankcase features and the small push rod tubes. Hjem / Søkeresultater for “continental o 200 vs rotax 912” Pris Passform/stil/materiale Produkter Filtre tights club Now imagine a DA42 with the -VI aerodynamic tweaks and the Rotax 916. Lycoming & Continental engines in today’s evolving aviation landscape. May 16, 2025 · An in-depth comparison of ROTAX vs. 307K subscribers in the flying community. Too heavy for many LSA missions, but it has a pretty darn good track history! I'm thinking about building an E-AB. At first glance they are pretty similar (both are 4-cylinder, I am very familiar with the O-200, having hundreds of hours behind it in my C150M I owned for many years. Looking just at the O-200, the Rotax 912 and the O-200 have nearly identical statistics. Aside from weight, the O-200 seems a much simpler approach. 1 that shows the average monthly number of I called and talked to Continental regarding their current new O-200 offerings for the experimental market. The -200 runs off of 100LL only, right? I suppose the higher octane will give greater energy per volume the way diesel does over gas. Designed primarily for light-sport, experimental, and ultralight aircraft, it builds directly on the architecture of the widely adopted 912 and 914 series. Minimum 100 hp, max 180 but more likely 115-150. Rotax has limited overhaul facilities to 3 in the US according to California Power Systems. The up-front cost of buying a new engine may favor the Rotax 912ULS slightly, but the O-200 has a huge "installed base" so a used low-time O-200 would probably be considerably cheaper to acquire. Rotax 912 vs Lycoming O-235, compared to each other. For this reason the chart comparisons are for Rotax 912-914 engines without radiators ROTALK is a web based support system which provides a common access point for locating key Information - Education - Support for their Rotax Aircraft Engines such as the Rotax 912, Rotax 914, Rotax 912 iS, Rotax 915 iS, Rotax 503 and Rotax 582. 200 Kg ligher, not even mentionning the 12% weight advantage of Mogas vs JetA. Rotax 552 lbs Jabiru 544 lbs Continental 532 lbs Lycoming 492 lbs From this, I conclude that the Rotax is the lightest engine out there, with the Jab weighing 8 pounds more, the Continental 20 pounds more, and the Lyco a whopping 60 pounds heavier than the Rotax! The Rotax 912 has proven itself as the uncontested leader in the 100hp aero engine segment. Continental Motors started in 1905 and has been one of the most common aircraft engines with a wide support network and parts availability. I am wondering what are advantages and disadvantages of these two designs, e. (All three of these engines are rated at 100 horsepower. ) In the case of the Rotax 912 the weight of 123 lbs. Moving towards more demanding aircraft applications, Rotax, by 1989, developed a four-stroke, four-cylinder, engine: the Rotax 912, with versions eventually ranging from 60 to 75 kW (80 to 100 hp), followed by a turbocharged 115 horsepower Rotax 914. Anyone? On the left above is the Continental O-200 as removed from a 1959 Cessna 150. Your best bet though is the Rotax. Hi, somebody could tell me the differences between Rotax engines and Lycoming or Continental engines??? The aircraft manufacturer are using Rotax for light sport aircraft and forget a little the classic brands, why is better these engines (Rotax 912 ULS for example)??? Cessna are using that for the sky catcher. Is the extra weight of the O-200 an issue with the CH650. If you want a radial look at Verner instead. Jan 21, 2018 · Thanks Alan. No such case the the O-200. Reply reply BrtFrkwr • Reliable and widespread, you may be flying the same O-320 your grandparents flew. The popularity of the research object is illustrated with the Google AdWords tool in Fig. Still, numerous reports involved engine stoppages, heat-related power loss and other engine problems. I’ve flown too many IO-540s to consider them junk, in my experiences they’ve been rock solid. iii) The STC kit and Rotax engine is 18 Kg lighter than the O-200 which potentially means one hour more fuel on board. iv) 4. Trained in a DA20 with O200 Continental. Are there any successful conversions of the -12 with a dinosaur engine? Don’t try to convert me to Rotax. That 20K hours on the O-200 is over 13 overhauls/factory rebuilt replacement engines and only one made over 2000 hours. W&B is easily adjusted in the DA42: its engines sit near CG, and the different existing iterations have already made use of the ability to move ancillaries such as TKS between nose and tail. Anyone? Still the bestselling Rotax is the time-tested carbureted 912 series, available in 80-hp form as the 912 UL or with 100 hp as the 912 ULS. An 0-200 for example is only pushing about 85-90 hp since they dropped the timing from 28 deg back to 24 deg to save cracking the heads. lz0e1, 7dpji, pq6i4n, gcuad, 2l4uxu, vsduc, 55jp, yadk, jc86, kgpm,