Club Homepage Forums Classified Ads Buy & Sell - Everything But Airplanes lyc. or cont.

What is the pros and cons between the lyc. 152 or the cont. 150 other than about 10 horsepower? Service history? Tbo does either engine typicaly make their tbo? I have been told that the cont.is cheaper to O/H but the lyc. lasts longer so it breaks even in the end. is this true? Any opinions would be great. Thanks.

I'll let the guys n' gals fight it out, but to me, it's the classic Ford Vs. Chevy argument! I own 150's, and love'em! I've flown 152's (50+ hours last month) and love 'em!

What I really need is something with a pair of afterburning General Electric J-85's in it, after I win the lottery! (but I'll still have my 150's, for those "slow" days!)

All things being equal, IMHO the extra hp and the longer TBO makes the Lycoming a better engine. Having said that, the 150 is a 14 volt airplane vs. the 28 volt 152 (12 volt accessories/bulbs are less expensive); the 150 has 40 degrees of flap vs. the 152's 30; the 150 just looks better vs. the 152's not. I own a 150 and wouldn't trade it for a 152 unless it had long range tanks and a 150hp Lycoming.

Hee Hee! Sounds like something I could say. Hey! Wait a minute, I did do that! Well, Mr. Ed still does not have the long range tanks!

Any ways, I need to agree with Tim on all of his points. Plus a couple of my own. I have found that the 150 will get off the ground and climb better then the 152. The 152 also has a bad habit of fouling out spark plugs. The 150 has a reputation of having cylinder / valve problems. But, if you run em lean and hard, (plus a good dollup of MMO every so often), you will find the O-200 to be a very reliable engine. 150's are also usually much more inexpensive to purchase compared to 152's.

Those are my thoughts!

The Lycoming engine is less prone to carb ice than the Continental. That's because the intake manifolds for the Lycoming are routed through the oil sump to warm up the air.

I have a 152. My TBO is 2400hrs. I have about 400 hrs to TBO. I would be looking to OH a 150.

This would be a biggie to me. Carb ice could ruin a guy's day! The only 152 I'm familiar with is Bill Warner's, which seems to be relatively trouble free and performs quite well IMHO. A 28v electrical system would be a negative though and a clean 152 does command a premium price. Additionally there are many STCs for the 150 that do not necessarily apply to the 152.

All in all, it's a personal choice. I think more of a Ford vs. Mercury thing <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I find this very very interesting. I keep hearing folks having problems with carb ice in concern of the O-200. Yet, in the six plus years we owned 72G, I can recall experiencing carb ice only once. And that was so fleeting that it barely remains a memory. And here in the PNW the climate is as prime a location for carb ice if there ever were one. I was very conscious of using carb heat when ever I reduced power. And I always pretty much ran that engine throttle to the firewall.

This is totally off the wall, for with my understanding of carb ice, it really should not make any difference. But, about the only thing I can think of that I might have done differently with 72G than most other folks was that I never ran that engine full rich. Always peak RPM or just rich of peak.

Coincedence??

I think not, Bill! I also lean as aggresively as I dare (without 4-channel egt/cht) and have not experienced a single incidence of carb ice on an O-200. At least 2 incidents I know of reported on this forum that were thought to be carb ice by others, had suspicious symptoms pointing elsewhere! I agree that the induction system design of Lycomings keeps the induction tubes warmer, but the carb is still somewhat insulated by a gasket and hangin' in the breeze! The O-200 carb is bolted to a manifold bolted to the crankcase, and does receive some heat transfer. Both carbs are warmed by engine cooling air passing through the cylinders, but the O-200 carb is more exposed to this airflow and not shielded by the oil sump, so probably runs just as warm as the Lycoming carb. I'd have to check this theory with remote sensing thermometers on both installations to be sure, but I really don't think we'd see much difference, if any!!

I have flown behind both kinds of power plants. In fact, I have more hours in a 152 than in a 150 presently ... but that will change as I fly the wings off Juliet.

I have the opposite experience with carb ice than Bill. And I too, live in the PNW. Almost every flight gives me some carb ice. Sometimes it is to the point of leaving the heat on and leaning for the entire flight. At other times, it is a short duration one time shot sometime during the flight.

Carb ice is not a big deal if you pay attention. If rpm drops a little, pull on the heat and check for ice. Since Juliet seems to be a champion ice maker, I also check every 15 minutes or so just by pulling on the heat. If all I get is a drop in rpm, great. If she stumbles a bit, I will leave the heat on until things smooth out. If you stay aware, it is not a big deal.

The 152 I flew the most was 67705 at Tailspin Tommy's at 0S9. This airplane had a recently overhauled (by Tommy) engine and the Sensenich prop. That airplane typically climbed at 700-800 fpm at gross. Cruise was a pretty consistent 95 knots at 2450 rpm or above. Fuel burn was 6 to 6.5 gph.

Juliet is a 150 with a cruise prop and 1600 hours on the mill. At full gross the best climb I can get is 350 fpm. With just me and full tanks, about 100 pounds less than gross, climb is 550 fpm at 80 mph. Cruise is 115 mph at 2450 rpm. Fuel burn is between 4.5 and 5.25 gph.

It took me a little while to get used to Juliet's climb performance, transitioning from a 152 that climbed like a homesick angel. But once I developed th discipline to nail and maintain Vy (which seems to be 80 mph in Juliet, it is not clearly defined in the POH) I don't even think about it.

If purchase price were not an issue, I would probably jump for a 152. Actually, if purchase price, and operational costs, were not at issue, I would have a 172.

For inexpensive flying, it is hard to beat the 150.

Reg