B: Re: Re: Re: Debonair with 260HP IO470N

[A J DeMarzo]

Larry;
The engines have different parameters, thus remarking certain gauges would
be part of the installation as listed on the STC instructions.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Larry Gaines" <lcg at inreach.com>
To: <beech-owners at beechcraft.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 11:20 AM
Subject: B: Re: Re: Debonair with 260HP IO470N


> Jerry,
>
> GAMI does not make a baffle kit for 470's.  The BDS set-up is far superior
> to the factory baffles, so this is something you would want to do anyway.
>
> -C and -N cylinder assemblies have different compression ratios, so they
are
> definitely not inter-changeable.
>
> Someone said engine gauges needed to be re-marked when going from a -N to
> a -C.  Why?  The sending units have no clue what the heck they're screwed
> into.  If you change senders, then you need to make sure everything is
> calibrated correctly.  Do these two engines operate at different allowable
> temps and pressures?  I would have to look, but my guess is, No.
>
> Larry
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "flyinghigh" <flyinghigh at cableone.net>
> To: <beech-owners at beechcraft.org>
> Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 9:01 AM
> Subject: B: Re: Debonair with 260HP IO470N
>
>
> > Hi Lee, was the BDS baffle kit an option you elected to take, or was it
> > mandated by the STC?  Was the GAMI baffle kit a consideration?  Were you
> > having heating problems before, on your non N?
> >     You mention much beefier cylinder head cooling fins.  I wonder if
> > there're differences between -C and -N cylinders which would not allow
> them
> > to be interchanged?
> >    Jerry Osborne,  N8323D, J35, D-5405, IO-470-C, 71085-7-C.
> > 928 775 3404, 9881 E. Tatum Cir., Prescott Valley, Az 86314
> >
> > From: "Leland Yonkers" <lyonkers at adelphia.net>
> > > I recently upgraded to an N engine. I also installed a BDS baffle kit.
I
> > > chose the N because it fit my flight profile and budget. I believe a
550
> > > would have given me more performance and better fuel economy at
similar
> > TAS.
> > > I didn't necessarily need the improved speed and I didn't think the
> > reduced
> > > fuel burn would result in a reduction in life time operating costs. I
> had
> > > had a ground strike so I had to buy a new prop anyway so that was not
a
> > > factor to me.
> >     > I am very pleased with my decision. I see a greater increase in my
> TAS
> > than
> > > many report. I believe this is attributable to how poorly my old J
> engine
> > > was performing. The acceleration and climb are significantly better.
> Again
> > > this may be due to how badly the old J was running when it bit the
tool
> > > cart.
> >     > Another vast improvement has been the CHTs I have not been above
360
> > on any
> > > cylinder. The BDS baffle and the much beefier cylinder head cooling
fins
> > are
> > > responsible for that.
> >     > Bottom line: for my flight profile and budget the N was the best
> deal.
> > > Lee
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>