National Aeronca Association Bulletin Board

I have the O-200 installed with the Wagner STC. You need to get the longer engine mount because if you don't the support brackets on the oil sump will rub against the engine mount. The long mount just give you sufficient clearance. I have the small starter and alternator as well. But the real problem was one oil sump support bracket.

Thanks for that note!

I visited the project last week and we hung a C-85-12 case on the original mount to see how the accessories would fit. The mags, the SkyTec and a B&C 12.5 alt. fit great! (By my measurements, the B&C 30A alt. would fit as well.)

We were just about to lock in the plan for the original mount. Good to know about the oil sump--that wasn't on the case we used.

(For what it's worth, we were able to install and remove both the mags and the starter with the engine still snug on the mounts--no need to loosen it for extra clearance.)

Alan,
Sibriggs is correct if you are using the 6qt O200 sump. The standard C85 sump will clear. I put the 6qt sump on my C85 in the L16 which has the short mount. I had to modify the sump to flange braces for the clearance needed.
Paul

It's been a while since I last posted on this thread, but wanted to say the A-65 engine mount works just fine with the O-200. The Sky-Tec starter can even be installed without loosening the engine from the mount! The only remaining worry is cowling. We used the conical mount adapters, but the front of the engine case is pretty close to the nose bowl. (We modified the oil sump brace to fit.)

Things are still moving forward on the project, but it will be next spring, I think, before it flies.

I used the short mount with my 0200 conversion (L16A) and the conical adapters also. There is interference with one oil sump brace but clearance can be obtained by using a piece of round stock and bending the in brace 'slightly'. I worried a bit about it cracking loose from the pan but it didn't happen. I did wind up having to make all new front and side baffles but I modified the rear Cessna 150 baffle to fit and it worked fine. If I have one complaint with the conversion it's that it's hard to get the oil temperature up to 180 or so. I expected that with the 0200 in the Aeronca pressure cowl high oil temperature and cylinder temperature might be a problem but typically I see around 160 for oil temp and cylinder temperatures of 350 degrees...maybe 425 degrees on a long climb.

Having said that, the Wagner conversion is not a 'drop in and go'. It took a lot of 'creative' engineering especially to get the air cleaner to come out of the nose bowl in the right spot.

Mike

I also have the Wagner 0-200 STC. I vaguely recall that, according to the stc, you can not use the 65 hp mount. You have the option of building a mount or using a 90 hp mount. You might want to check it out before you get too far down the road.

I built my mount about 1" longer. No clearance problem with the tank.

Dennis

Mike--
Amen to the "creative engineering" for baffles and carb box! The carb box is about solved, but baffles are still underway.

How's your performance? Belatedly, I've been hearing the O-200 doesn't turn up high enough to give much more HP on takeoff than an A-65. I'm beginning to wish I'd built up a "super 85" instead of going with the O-200. Planning to use a Sensenich 69CK52.

With my 0200 Conversion I'm guessing I see over 800 ft/min on climb out. That's using my GPS for indication. Might be a bit higher or lower as the digits tend to lag a bit. I own both an A65 Champ and the L16 and there's no comparision as far as climb out especially on a hot day. They're both on the heavy side with the Champ at 835# and the L16 at 950# but I'm a light guy and usually fly alone anyway. Speed seems to be somewhere between 90-95 mph. I have a 69x50 prop and see about 2600 rpm on the take off roll. I can't say anything bad about the conversion other than it takes more fuel than I'm used to as the A65 would burn slightly over 4 GPH and the 0200 seems to be somewhere around 6-7 GPH but I haven't really taken it on any distance either for comparision proposes. Usually cruise around 24-2450 rpm.

Regarding Dennis's note above: he's correct that Wagner specifies you can either build your own mount or use the longer Champion mount. However, I think it's fairly common to use the short mount and I don't know why (other than paperwork) it would really make any difference as both the long and short mounts are made of the same thickness tubing (.035 if my memory is correct). Wagner specifies a thicker tubing building his mount, though. I sent mine out to Wag Aero and had it inspected and rebuilt before I installed the engine.

Mike

Thanks Mike! Can't tell you how happy I am to hear your performance results. I have a lot of time and $$ into the O-200 rebuild--new Milleniums, balanced crank and rods, new cam, etc.

We debated the mount choice a long time before using the short one. In the end, we felt the long mount was mainly an accomodation for the O-235 and long starters/generators on O-200s. With the extra weight of a metal prop and engine accesories, it seemed like keeping the arm shorter was worth the change.

Onward and upward!

I seem to remember some talk in the 80's about riveting a large pan, as in baking shallow bowl, to the firewall to get a little more clearance in the back of the case. Cut hole, rivet bowl in in place.

My L16 had the 'pie plan trick' when I bought it. Must have had a -12 in it at one time with the long starter but with the Sky Tec it's not necessary so I removed it and riveted a plate over the hole. It does seem to me that there's not a lot of room between the back of the firewall (with the pan) and the fuel tank. I think the long starter weighs around 13 pounds and the Sky Tec 9 pounds.

Mike

The early 7ECA's with the O200 had a flat plate that had about 6 screws in it. When you needed to get the starter out you pull the plate for the needed room to slide it aft. Now they didn't have the tank in the way.
Paul