Talk:Lycoming O-320

Article

This was OCR'd from someplace and needs editing. There might be potential IP issues.

Lubrication

I know lubrication is important but do we really need so much information? Biscuittin (talk) 17:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I've removed most of the lubrication text. If anyone thinks I've been too ruthless they can always restore it. Biscuittin (talk) 17:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Fuel type

The list of engines clearly shows a variety of allowable fuels for this engine type and in fact, the plane in which I fly has an STC allowing the use of 87 octane car gas so stating 100 octane as the only fuel type for this engine is inaccurate.Es330td (talk) 14:50, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

The specifications stated are for the O-320-A1A model and not for all O-320s. You are quite right O-320s in general can be run on many different fuels, depending on the model and modification status. The Type Certification Data Sheet specifies 80/87 as the minimum fuel grade for the O-320-A1A and that is what the specs for the O-320-A1A should reflect. Any aviation product can be modified in anyway via STC as long as it is approved, so there is no point in adding that, except if you want to start an STC section to descibe the mods available. - Ahunt (talk) 15:33, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Given that the article is for the O-320 in general, and not the O-320-A1A specifically is it appropriate to state specs for a specific model instead of the range of values over the -320 line? I don't want to go the STC route; I included that only as an example that differs from the specs listed.Es330td (talk) 20:09, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

For all the WikiProject articles on aircraft types and engine types the specs are specifically for one model or variant as a representative example. It prevents giving all the specs of all variants which would take up up a lot of space or the confusion of showing all the differences between the models in the specs. Instead, this is what the variants section is for, to explain the differences. In the case of the O-320 variants this article does give the minimum fuel specified for each variant. It maybe worth a new text section to descibe the different fuels approved. - Ahunt (talk) 20:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The statement that there are STCs to operate the carbureted O-320, but not the fuel injected variants, on automotive gas, is not quite correct. The distinction is based on compression ratio, only those that are carbureted *and* low compression can obtain such approval. I will edit that, with a link to the EAA page that tracks mogas STCs. Altaphon (talk) 01:12, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lycoming O-320. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402152100/http://cessnaowner.org/memforums/topic.html?id=8409 to http://cessnaowner.org/memforums/topic.html?id=8409

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)