Page 1 of 1

Titan vs UL Power

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 9:23 pm
by Swoopjack
Does anyone know what the difference was between the UL power 180 horsepower engine and the Titan 180 horsepower engine? I spoke to Harrison Smith at Sun and Fun 15 when he flew the UL power superstol XL down and he seemed very pleased with it. Then they changed over to the Titan. I just wonder if the UL power develop some problems that I never heard about or if they just like Titan better. Did they dump the UL's or are they still a good option?

Re: Titan vs UL Power

PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2016 6:09 pm
by BDA
I just ordered the Titan option for my own reasons. When I spoke with them about the different engines in June they said the Titan way outperforms the UL. Didn't get details.

Re: Titan vs UL Power

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 5:44 pm
by Winston
I recently swapped out my UL 350iS for a Rotax 912 ULS because of the way UL attaches the prop flange to the end of the crankshaft. Instead of forging the flange as an intregal part of the crankshaft, UL has a short (less than 1/2") spline on the end of the crankshaft that engages a spline on the prop flange which is held in place with a large bolt that threads into center of the end of the crank shaft. The asymetrical loading on the prop (I was running a 2 blade Cato, 74 x 34) causes this connection to loosen up, both stretching and wearing the bolt threads and the spline teeth, especially on the flange. It doesn't take much to get a perceptable vibration.

I had almost 600 hours on the UL and went through three prop flanges and bolts before I finally gave up. The factory was no help and told me that the spline wasn't even neccessary and that the bolt by itself was all that was needed. I was sorry to have to make the switch as the UL ran well and I had no other problems.

As I understand it, the 6 cylinder versions have the same prop flange attachment as the 4 cylinder so running a large prop will likely eventually be a problem. I have attached a photo of an old flange next to a new one.


Re: Titan vs UL Power

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 8:12 pm
by Swoopjack
Thanks for the replies. I figured it must be some things that people weren't liking. I like being able to burn mogas but in the long run the best engine will be the best.

Swoop out

Re: Titan vs UL Power

PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:17 pm
by stede52
I have to agree with Winston, even though my UL was running better and more power then it ever had(after I corrected a bad valve grinding issue and did an upper end overhaul), I would definitely take the Titan over the UL for the simple reason of Lycoming history. I'm currently flying the Titan in my carboncub and it has astonishing torque and power and it's cheaper then the UL. UL definitely needs to look at their pricing if they want to complete with the Titan.

Re: Titan vs UL Power

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 5:55 pm
by Leandro
You might also be interested in the Rotax 912 turbo conversion made by Vz POWER.

There is a SUPERSTOL flying with it in Bolivia. You get 120hp, a lot of simplicity, and a much smaller bill than if you go for a Rotax 914.

Re: Titan vs UL Power

PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2017 6:52 pm
by mikepliske
I live on 3 acres, and have a 220' straight, and another 350+'.
I'm seriously considering the SuperStolXL and flying it out of my own backyard.
Based on what I've read, it seems the max engine weight allowed is about 305-315 lbs.
Does anyone know why the UL520is (200hp) could not be installed?
As an ex AF pilot / current commercial pilot, modern FADEC (a throttle only) capabilities
really interest me.
I too have noticed, since the Titan came out, I haven't read much re: SSXL with the UL engine.

Also, with the 29" tires, does the SS XL really only sit 7'6" tall? (8' garage/hangar door or 9' ??)

Re: Titan vs UL Power

PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:01 am
by BDA

I am not to the weight and balance phase yet, but from those that I have talked to that have completed XL planes with the Titan (265# ?) Heavy battery in the back and still need lead in the tail.

SO, I am planning rear, rear baggage for survival gear and tool box, and possible fuel storage to make up for the extra weight.

A heavier engine than the Titan would make this a real problem. Light is the goal right?

Maybe look at the Yamaha conversions for more power.

Re: Titan vs UL Power

PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:22 am
by jheit39
According to Gary, Troy, and Harrison at Just, along with the prop manufacturer, the UL engines were not making quoted rated power. The Titan pulled over 780 pounds of thrust with 355 ft/lbs of torque during test runs at Just. The engine that Just has on their blue demo plane weighed 259 from the factory. Weight up front was not an issue for that plane.
The differences between the two are night and day. With the exception of the accessories, the Titan is built using certified PMA parts but since Continental doesn't have the TC for that design(Lycoming does) it is sold as experimental. However, Continental is pursuing full certification on their line of Titan engines. UL makes great experimental engines and they are very advanced with electronic ignition and fuel injection... but, Titan offers all of that too.