comparing the 140DZ and 160DZ
#1
Thread Starter

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: London, UNITED KINGDOM
Hi Dave,
I am considering upgrading from a 140DZ to the 160DZ and wanted to ask a couple of questions. I have heard that the 160 is more economic than the 140. Is this the case? Would you have any typical fuel consumption figures for the two engines??
Secondly, what sort of increase in rpm would expect for the 160 over the 140, given the same fuel and prop etc are used?
many thanks.
James
I am considering upgrading from a 140DZ to the 160DZ and wanted to ask a couple of questions. I have heard that the 160 is more economic than the 140. Is this the case? Would you have any typical fuel consumption figures for the two engines??
Secondly, what sort of increase in rpm would expect for the 160 over the 140, given the same fuel and prop etc are used?
many thanks.
James
#2
Senior Member
Given like fuel types, the 160 will burn more. Everyone may be getting fooled by the fact that they are turning bigger props and are able to fly at a more reduced throttle setting, hence the use of less fuel.
Probably 500 rpm difference static, but when you load the 160 it keeps pulling, unlike the 140 which doesn't have as much torque.
Probably 500 rpm difference static, but when you load the 160 it keeps pulling, unlike the 140 which doesn't have as much torque.
#3
Thread Starter

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: London, UNITED KINGDOM
Dave,
that's great. I don't really mind about the fuel consumption - it certainly isn't my main concern. Knowing the expected rpm increase gives me an indication of suitable props to try.
Thanks for your help,
James
that's great. I don't really mind about the fuel consumption - it certainly isn't my main concern. Knowing the expected rpm increase gives me an indication of suitable props to try.
Thanks for your help,
James



