I don't think anyone suggest the O200 doesn't make more power than a C85 and from experience I know without a doubt it does. There are always rumors that a C90 makes more power than an O200 but I have never seen actual comparable evidence. I have seen dyno graphs and they all show the O200 making slightly more HP. The thrust test I've seen are comparing an O200 propped for a C150 vs a C90 propped for a 140A. The larger diameter prop on the 140A is going to make more static thrust. The proof I need to be a believer is the same diameter prop on both engines pitched to reach their static RPM rating. The C90 has a higher lift cam but is limited to 2475 rpm I believe. The O200 can run 2750 continuous.If the O-200 doesn't make more power/thrust than the C-85, why is it popular to replace the C-85s on 140s with O-200s?
So you actually bought a 152 with Lycoming cylinders and most likely 108 hp. The retarding AD on Continentals is unlikely to be applicable to many engine still in the fleet (though it is possible of course).The Cessna 150's O-200 had at one time an AD that required retarding the mag timing. I bought such a 150 and realized that because it had actual Lycoming cylinders, the mag timing could be returned to the original. it definitely made a difference, especially in climb performance. It would be worthwhile to investigate the paperwork for the plane in question. You may be able to gain some "free" horsepower.
Brand new to the site…first post so “Howdy”! I had a 1972 A150L Aerobat growing up in the 1980’s and we looked into putting a 150hp conversion on it (which it desperately needed for Aerobatics)…problem was the conversion took the aerobatic certification away …Thinking with all the 150's out there, there isn't an STC for the Continental 0-240 that Reims did for the Areobat
Welcome aboard!Brand new to the site…first post so “Howdy”! I had a 1972 A150L Aerobat growing up in the 1980’s and we looked into putting a 150hp conversion on it (which it desperately needed for Aerobatics)…problem was the conversion took the aerobatic certification away …
Parts availability.If the O-200 doesn't make more power/thrust than the C-85, why is it popular to replace the C-85s on 140s with O-200s?
makes sense to me. Rotax appears to be about 10k cheaper for the same or better turbo power.I'd be happy if someone could come up with an STC to replace the O-200 with a Rotax as an engine change only and not a change to the aircraft (not enough of mine made to make it cost effective to get an STC for the aircraft). That's not going to happen, alas.
FWIW: I believe someone did get an STC in the EU and is stilling working on getting it approved in the US. But you also could go the Experimental/Exhibition route and put a Rotax on your aircraft with as minimal modifications as you want right now. Its one route a number of people have taken to install different engines without an STC. Why wait on someone else to do the work?I'd be happy if someone could come up with an STC to replace the O-200 with a Rotax as an engine change only and not a change to the aircraft
And essentially nobody with an aircraft in the value range of those fitted with an O-200 is going to select either of those options. They will instead have their existing engine overhauled or IRAN'd by an independent engine shop or A&P mechanic, at lower cost. Cessna 150s and the like are mostly hobby planes in 2023, with owners unwilling to splurge on unnecessary expenses. These are planes that independent owners fly for limited hours and keep running at minimum cost. Flight schools with money fly 172s and Pipers.For an O-200 it's 46K for a factory new and 44K for a factory overhauled engine.
Cessna putting the continental in the skycatcher instead of a rotax has always seemed like a miss, especially considering the prototype has a rotax
But then again, there's a lot of things about the 162 that was a miss.
I would make a spreadsheet and summarize the total time on components and the dates they were installed for magnetos, spark plugs, spark plug wires, exhausts, alternator, vacuum pump, cylinders, hoses, oil cooler, engine mount, and go from there. If some of those are pretty new then it makes zero sense to replace them.Its impossible to get any remotely firm prices out of anyone locally. I assume cam and lifters are all junk at this point. New bearings. Cylinders are all fairly new. Bottom end hasn't been open since 1973 so..... 2200 SMOH. I still have great oil pressure and 10-13 hours before dumping in another quart. One OH shop said to run it until 2500 hours then overhaul.