It looks like that at 4200 RPM (about 69% rated horsepower) it's getting 0.361 BSFC, which is outstanding. What BSFC do you suppose the EP 915 would get at best BSFC? And at what power setting?
I think you are mistaken. If the BSFC stated at 00:30 is accurate, that is terrible fuel efficiency. It's in g/kWh, not imperial. 361, not .361. It should be closer to 225-250, others wise its as efficient as a small turbine.
@@chippyjohn1 this is a TURBOCHARGED engine, at MAXIMUM power. 55 L/hr (14.53 gal) Is 87.325 Lbs/Hr Into 143hp is 0.61 Lb/Hp/Hr at AFR = 10.9-11, Lambda 0.74, and 16psi boost (2.09atm absolute). This is normal for this sort of engine. Lycomings TIO series are somewhere around 0.7 BSFC.
@JJ People need to stop comparing fuel economy to an engine from 1920 and saying 21st century engines running inefficiently is normal as that's how a 100 year old engine runs. In standard measurement under 1 bar of boost an air ratio of 14.25:1, or 225-250 g/kWh is reliably achievable. We have modern technology such as wide band, steel pistons, advanced engine management. Running an efi engine as inefficiently as a carburettor is not normal.
@@chippyjohn1 I can't tell whether your comment is aimed at my post above, or whether your post above and your post below should be taken together as a response to my post, or exactly what you mean. So, I will restate exactly what I mean, to wit: 0.361 BSFC, as stated, means 0.361 lbs of fuel per horsepower-hour. There is no one BSFC for an engine, it is always stated at some RPM / Horsepower / Fuel Flow. BSFC is not calculated at some specific air/fuel ratio, not at some RPM, not at some manifold pressure, and not at some torque. It is calculated and some measured horsepower and fuel flow and can vary throughout the range of operation of the engine. So, in the dyno range from which I made the statement of a 0.361 BSFC, it was taken at 4200 RPM. At some other RPM, it would likely be different in some amount,.
Doesn't this engine put out 140hp stock I see boost is about 15 psig . So where is the extra power. I thought it would be 170hp to 180hp and torque well over 200lbs
@@EdgePerformanceNorway Yeah but it had a bsfc of 360 at 5500 which is max cruise. That just seems extraordinarily rich. Do you measure what the exhaust back pressure is. The Rotax exhaust looks quite restrictive.
So.... it actually makes MORE HP than what they advertise. Good to know! :-)
If running under ideal conditions yes
I wonder how many HP you guys can get out of that engine if converted to an EP 915...
180-200 easily I’m sure.
It looks like that at 4200 RPM (about 69% rated horsepower) it's getting 0.361 BSFC, which is outstanding. What BSFC do you suppose the EP 915 would get at best BSFC? And at what power setting?
There’s not much to improve on efficiency, but more power to be unleashed
I think you are mistaken. If the BSFC stated at 00:30 is accurate, that is terrible fuel efficiency. It's in g/kWh, not imperial. 361, not .361. It should be closer to 225-250, others wise its as efficient as a small turbine.
@@chippyjohn1 this is a TURBOCHARGED engine, at MAXIMUM power.
55 L/hr (14.53 gal)
Is 87.325 Lbs/Hr Into 143hp is 0.61 Lb/Hp/Hr at AFR = 10.9-11, Lambda 0.74, and 16psi boost (2.09atm absolute).
This is normal for this sort of engine.
Lycomings TIO series are somewhere around 0.7 BSFC.
@JJ People need to stop comparing fuel economy to an engine from 1920 and saying 21st century engines running inefficiently is normal as that's how a 100 year old engine runs. In standard measurement under 1 bar of boost an air ratio of 14.25:1, or 225-250 g/kWh is reliably achievable. We have modern technology such as wide band, steel pistons, advanced engine management. Running an efi engine as inefficiently as a carburettor is not normal.
@@chippyjohn1 I can't tell whether your comment is aimed at my post above, or whether your post above and your post below should be taken together as a response to my post, or exactly what you mean. So, I will restate exactly what I mean, to wit: 0.361 BSFC, as stated, means 0.361 lbs of fuel per horsepower-hour. There is no one BSFC for an engine, it is always stated at some RPM / Horsepower / Fuel Flow. BSFC is not calculated at some specific air/fuel ratio, not at some RPM, not at some manifold pressure, and not at some torque. It is calculated and some measured horsepower and fuel flow and can vary throughout the range of operation of the engine. So, in the dyno range from which I made the statement of a 0.361 BSFC, it was taken at 4200 RPM. At some other RPM, it would likely be different in some amount,.
Doesn't this engine put out 140hp stock I see boost is about 15 psig .
So where is the extra power. I thought it would be 170hp to 180hp and torque well over 200lbs
Stock engine, stock boost. It’s showing ABS pressure. So 7.5psi boost
Great video, tks a lot
Is that BSFC accurate for this engine, seems incredibly rich, along with the rich lambda reading.
It is, but it’s rich running in Power Mode and WOT. At ECO it can sometimes run as lean as 15:3.1
@@EdgePerformanceNorway Yeah but it had a bsfc of 360 at 5500 which is max cruise. That just seems extraordinarily rich. Do you measure what the exhaust back pressure is. The Rotax exhaust looks quite restrictive.
oil pressure shows -0.1 how it is possible to run
You need to look at the BUDS software. Oil pressure is 380-450Kpa