3.8 V6 with Roots blower

Dod a Google search, there is alot of information on the Ford 3.8 engine in all their variations.

Frank

T-Bird SuperCoupe is the first thing that comes to mind...

"Do a Google search, there is alot of information on the Ford 3.8 engine in all their variations."

Little compared to the 5.0 V8 and other "desireable" (to hot rodders) engines. Many 3.8s get scrapped even in good running shape. Homebuilt airplanes are the purpose I am interested in, but I suppose they would be good for other things too.

What I wanted to know, are the supercharged engines common and do they turn up in wrecking yards still?

I imagine they turn up at the wreckers.... with a cast iron block and higher rpm, I can't see them being of interest to anyone with aviation in mind. Add the weight of the cooling system and the absolute lack of inverted fuel and oil systems.... I'm not saying it can't be done but there comes a time when we need to ask "why would I try...?".

Dave Blanton of Javelin Aircraft in Augusta, KS sold plans, reduction drives and accessories to put the 3.8 V6 in experimentla aircraft for nearly a decade. Quite a few flew.

Most aircraft engines including ALL turbojet and turboprop engines do NOT have continuous full inverted operating capability. Only one or two specially certificated Lycomings and some specifically modified other Lycs, Continentals, radials, and European inlines-used in competition and airshow aerobatic aircraft-have this capability. Neither the Thunderbirds, Blue Angels, Snowbirds, Red Arrows or any other military jet team have seen it necessary to install full inverted systems. Ten to thirty seconds inverted is their limit.

Normally-inverted Rangers are sometimes modified to run upright and the Wittman Tailwind used a 215 Olds aluminum V8 turned upside down. They don't count, they then need to stay that way.

No one except makers of overpriced yuppie junk, Harley Davidson and Lycoming, build air cooled engines anymore.

I actually wasn't interested in the blower per se, I thought it would have a beefed crank and lower end and be good to run normally aspirated or turbocharged.

Jim, over 600 3.8 Fords either flying today or have flown - none inverted that I know of. As for 3.8 SCs being common?? No. Quite rare in fact, at least here in Ontario Canada. Thunderbird SC was, I believe, the only application. May have seen a Cougar XR app as well. I've seen 2 in scrap yards up here - both with engines blown and over 300,00KM on the clock.

Most Javelin Fords went in non-aerobatic types but Dave's son David Lee had his ownn "Sport Trainer" aircraft which was aerobatic. No one went to the trouble of full inverted systems though that I know of.

Man... what is this??? Pick on Harley riders week??? (Another thread in another NG...).

Please don't confuse me with those white collar, two hours to put on the biker dud wannabes.... If you wish to express scorn, please direct it at white collar poseurs rather than fat old guys that ride for the ride rather than for the "image".

As far as the engine is concerned... I would think that the power to weight ratio would be one of the first considerations. I would also think that the rpm where peak torque occurs would be a major consideration.... I might be a high school dropout but I can understand what happens when a prop tip approaches the speed of sound.

The roots type blower helps the bottom end on these motors, even though I recall boost being limited to about 7 psi (easily changed, I imagine with pulley selection and wastegate mods) but they are designed as a relatively (for aviation purposes, I think) high rpm ramge as far as power production is concerned.

I can't speak for the Olds engine... Introduced in the 60s, it didn't work well for Oldsmobile.... AFAIK, the rights were sold to the Rover car company in England and it didn't work well there, either....Naturally, in an airplane the motor will get treated quite differently from a car engine.... this will probably have a great impact on the reliability aspect.

I'm sure that we can agree that you need a light motor capable of producing lot's of torque at low rpm... hmmm, maybe that Harley ain't so bad after all. You might check out S&S or RevTech motors.... Vee twin, lightweight aircooled motors... Dry sump systems and, AFAIK, fairly low rpm ranges for peak torque production. Not sure of numbers bu these motors can be had in displacements well over 100 CI.

Thanks for the info... when I was much younger, airplanes were my consuming interest... that was before girls and recreational pharmacology happened. All the same, I still think that these engines would be heavy and operate at a restrictive rpm range.... But, I'm not a plane builder. I'm not sure of what studies have been done regarding powerplant selection.... it just sems odd that, in this day and age, someone would bolt a lump of cast iron on the front of a plane...

But.... that's just me....

The H-D engines are also used in aircraft, although not as many. I have more respect for H-D than for the cheesy Japanese imitation Harleys, but still you have to admit the price is arbitrarily high. The old motorcycle that's _really_ well engineered is the Vincent, but that's another story.

Do a search for "Hog Air". He is flying a current production H-D engine. A FWF kit is like $8K, wihich is outrageous IMO, but, "he's got it you want it".....

"All engines are liquid cooled, either by glycol over the exhaust valves, or raw fuel through them."-the late Dave Blanton.