112 Hot Shot

[Pete]

HOT Shot, the best thing that happened to Commanders. It made my 114 a real airplane and a treat to fly.

 

[Planecents]

HOT Shot, the best thing that happened to Commanders. It made my 114 a real airplane and a treat to fly.

I know exactly what you mean Pete

 

[carllee]

I have a used 112 Hot Shot system that I'm currently overhauling. I'm going to make it available for sale later this month, and ready for install by the end of April. It will be essentially an all new system with all new, or remanufactured major components, fasteners, and hardware. If interested please contact me through my website: www.rcmnormalizing.com

This is still available, if anyone out there wants to get the most they can get out of their 112, this is your chance

 

[cmykytiw]

Will it work on the 114? If so I’m interested Sir.

 

[carllee]

Will it work on the 114? If so I’m interested Sir.

Nope. Two completely different systems.

 

[Charlie]

...if you plan on flying above 10K, over mountains or just to fly over some weather (at least in a 112), buy one of the turbocharged birds. My 112 is not, and even with a low time engine, 2 passengers, baggage and a healthy load of fuel, shes what I would call anemic above 10-11K. The 112 Commanders are great flatlander mounts. Their sweet spot seems to be 3500 to 8500.

I have a used 112 Hot Shot system that I'm currently overhauling. I'm going to make it available for sale later this month, and ready for install by the end of April. It will be essentially an all new system with all new, or remanufactured major components, fasteners, and hardware.

When I bought 94J in 2017, a turbo was a "must have" for me, due to living at 5,200 feet & there are alot of high DA days. Over the years, I've come to recognize how superb the Hot Shot system is. This past weekend I took 94J up for a "familiarization flight," much of which was to get used to the new digital MP/Tach gauge & AV-30. I settled on a cruise at 9,500, and used a few different power settings. While it was relatively calm at surface, the wind at altitude made it a bit bumpy over some of the mesas. Trying out some settings on the AV-30 was fun; I still have much to learn with the unit. It provides such superb info - at one point I put in the DA setting and saw 145TAS at 10,800 DA. Power was 25/25 at the time, with a ground speed of 159 (some tail wind). This level of performance gives me such an appreciation of what a Hot Shot conversion can do, especially after all I've learned on this forum about the Hot Shot & compared to a NA 112.

That Carl has a 112 Hot Shot system still available is a surprise to me! From what I understand, they are not an "always in stock" unit. What an incredible upgrade to a Commander!

 

[steve267]

Carl, just curious does the HotShot work only with carburetor 112 or will it work with fuel injected version as well.

It is indeed a great system.

Regards,
Steve

 

[neald]

Carl, just curious does the HotShot work only with carburetor 112 or will it work with fuel injected version as well.

It is indeed a great system.

Regards,
Steve

Steve,

It only works with the fuel injected version. Specifically, the HotShot modifies the IO-360-C1D6 engine to turbo-normalize it (sea-level manifold pressure available up to the max authorized altitude of 16000 feet) and the airframe to accept the modified engine. The result allows 163kts+ TAS at 16000 and significant improvements in airspeed and available power at all altitudes.

Regards,
Neal

 

[carllee]

Hi Steve,

All of the 112's are fuel injected, so yes the Hot Shot system works with the fuel injected 112's like yours. The only carburated Commanders are the 112TC/TCA.

 

[Airotto370]

Sounds like it’s time to turn that last Hotshot into the IO-390 Turbolizer we’ve been talking about!!!

 

[carllee]

Here's some old text and a graphic from the RCM website that some of the newer owners may not have seen. Perhaps this should be posted in the FAQ section for people trying to decide which model Commander to purchase.


In considering any aircraft performance, the cost of any potential increase associated with that performance must be considered. If that were not true, this website would not exist and we would not be talking about Commanders. We would all be flying VLJs or turboprops, or if we were still talking about Commanders we would be talking about power-plants far more exotic than what is currently available. The old cliché “bang for the buck” comes to mind. As much as I hate to use a cliché to describe aircraft performance the question "what's it cost"? must be answered when considering which aircraft is best suited for your needs. And what kind of performance will best suit the type of flying you typically do. For instance, if you are an Airshow Pilot fuel efficiency and mid to high altitude performance is not your concern, you need the raw horsepower of a large displacement engine. If you use your plane only on weekends to pop over to the next town for that $100 hamburger, increased performance may not be important to you at all, but, if you use your plane for long distance cross country flying, touring, or business you may want to consider the high altitude performance, speed and fuel efficiency of a turbonormalized power-plant. Below is a chart that shows how the various Commander models compare on a "mock" long cross country flight, from Southern California to Northern Maine, and what the costs associated with that flight would be.

Costs include the following averages/20 years:

Aircraft acquisition
Aircraft upgrades
Annual maintenance
Hanger storage
Insurance
Taxes
Fuel burn

Flights were calculated on flight planning software using actual owner performance reports posted for public review on this website.

 

[carllee]

Here's another one that might be good for the FAQ section:

 

[Rcahamilton]

Carl, if you ever get a 114 hot shot system available, I would be interested.

 

[carllee]

Here's the owner reported performance data from the FAQ section that I used to produce the above chart:


Owner Reported Performance, Cruise


o112/A

4500ft, 24MP, 2500rpm. TAS 140 knots at 11.8gph, 11C. 2550lbs.

4500ft, 24MP, 2400rpm, TAS 140 knots at 11.5gph, 5C, 2340lbs

5000ft, 24MP, 2430rpm, TAS 136 knots at 10.3gph, -4C, 2550lbs

5500ft, 23MP, 2500rpm, TAS 143 knots at 12gph, +5C, 2400lbs

o112TC/TCA

8000ft, 31MP, 2400 rpm. TAS 145 knots at 12.5 gph, 4 deg., 2500lbs

7000ft, 31MP, 2450 rpm. TAS 147 knots at 13 gph, 51F, 2700lbs

8000ft, 31MP, 2350rpm. TAS 141 knots at 11.5 gph, -4 deg C., 2750 lbs.

12,500ft, 31MP, 2350rpm. TAS 146 knots at 11.5 gph, -4 deg C., 2750 lbs.

8,000ft, 30MP, 2400. TAS 138kts at 12.6gph, -4 deg C, 2500lbs

o112 Hot Shot

12,000ft, 25.5MP, 2400rpm. TAS 149kts at 12 gph, -15C, 2500lbs.

16,000ft, 25MP, 2400rpm. TAS 162kts at 12.5 gph, ISA, 2500lbs.

o112B

5500ft, 24MP, 2500rpm, TAS 139 knots at 12.4gph, +4C, 2450lbs

o114

6500ft, 23MP, 2510rpm. TAS 146.4 at 13.9gph, 7C, 2550lbs.

5500ft, 23.5MP, 2450rpm. TAS 143 at 12.7, 15C, 2700lbs.

6000ft, 24MP, 2300rpm. TAS 146 at 11.4, 51F, 2700lbs

11,000, 20MP, 2400rpm, TAS 150kts at 12.5 gph, -12C, 2700lbs

o114 Hot Shot

8,500ft, 21.7MP, 2320rpm. TAS 139 at 12.2gph, 16C, 2,700lbs

12,000ft, 24.1MP, 2500rom. TAS 157 at 16.1gph, 20C, 2700lbs

12,000ft, 24.1MP, 2500rpm. TAS 148 at 11.9 (LOP), 20C, 2700lbs

o114B

7,500ft, 21MP, 2500rpm. TAS was 150 knots at 14.8 GPH, 4 deg. C, 2950lbs

7500 MSL, 21", 2300 RPM, 150 KTAS, 14 GPH, 12 C, 2950 lbs.

o114TC/115TC

11,000, 29MP, 2200rpm, TAS 160kts @ 15.4gph, -12C, 2975

o115 (see 114B)

oSuper Commander

7500 MSL, 22.5", 2500 RPM, 170 KTAS, 18 GPH, 12C, 2950 lbs.

 

[wilkinsb44]

If you still have the rebuilt Hot Shot for sale PM me. I dropped a request for information on your rcmnormalizing web site about a week ago requesting information.

 

[carllee]

Here's an interesting analogy. I had this posted on the old web site too.


Owner Reported Performance, Cruise


112/A

4500ft, 24MP, 2500rpm. TAS 140 knots at 11.8gph, 11C. 2550lbs.

4500ft, 24MP, 2400rpm, TAS 140 knots at 11.5gph, 5C, 2340lbs

5000ft, 24MP, 2430rpm, TAS 136 knots at 10.3gph, -4C, 2550lbs

5500ft, 23MP, 2500rpm, TAS 143 knots at 12gph, +5C, 2400lbs

Average TAS 140 knots at 11.5gph

TBO 2,000 X 140 knots = 280,000 nautical miles per engine overhaul

TBO 2,000 X 11.5 gph = 23,000 gallons per engine overhaul


112 Hot Shot

12,000ft, 25.5MP, 2400rpm. TAS 149kts at 12 gph, -15C, 2500lbs.

16,000ft, 25MP, 2400rpm. TAS 162kts at 12.5 gph, ISA, 2500lbs.

Average TAS 155 knots at 12gph

TBO 2,000 X 155 knots = 310,000 nautical miles per engine overhaul

TBO 2,000 X 12.25 gph = 24,500 gallons per engine overhaul


Using the owner reported performance numbers as a reference, the 112 Hot Shot will travel roughly 10% further, 30,000 nautical miles, in-between engine overhauls. The earth's circumference is 21,640 nautical miles, so you could fly around the world, and still have time left for a couple trips across the US on the extra range the Hot Shot gives you!

To fly the same distance with an NA112 as with a 112HS you'd have to overhaul your engine, and fly 10%, 200hrs, of it's useful life, and burn 2,300 gallons more fuel!

Engine overhaul $20,000 x 10% = $2,000

2,300 gallons fuel @ $4.00/gal = $9,200

So, it costs around $11,200 more to fly an NA112 the distance/TBO of a 112HS.

 

[Dober]

There is a 112 on Barnstormers right now that would be a perfect Hot Shot candidate

 

[Quest4Air]

Here's an interesting analogy. I had this posted on the old web site too.


Owner Reported Performance, Cruise


112/A

4500ft, 24MP, 2500rpm. TAS 140 knots at 11.8gph, 11C. 2550lbs.

4500ft, 24MP, 2400rpm, TAS 140 knots at 11.5gph, 5C, 2340lbs

5000ft, 24MP, 2430rpm, TAS 136 knots at 10.3gph, -4C, 2550lbs

5500ft, 23MP, 2500rpm, TAS 143 knots at 12gph, +5C, 2400lbs

Average TAS 140 knots at 11.5gph

TBO 2,000 X 140 knots = 280,000 nautical miles per engine overhaul

TBO 2,000 X 11.5 gph = 23,000 gallons per engine overhaul


112 Hot Shot

12,000ft, 25.5MP, 2400rpm. TAS 149kts at 12 gph, -15C, 2500lbs.

16,000ft, 25MP, 2400rpm. TAS 162kts at 12.5 gph, ISA, 2500lbs.

Average TAS 155 knots at 12gph

TBO 2,000 X 155 knots = 310,000 nautical miles per engine overhaul

TBO 2,000 X 12.25 gph = 24,500 gallons per engine overhaul


Using the owner reported performance numbers as a reference, the 112 Hot Shot will travel roughly 10% further, 30,000 nautical miles, in-between engine overhauls. The earth's circumference is 21,640 nautical miles, so you could fly around the world, and still have time left for a couple trips across the US on the extra range the Hot Shot gives you!

To fly the same distance with an NA112 as with a 112HS you'd have to overhaul your engine, and fly 10%, 200hrs, of it's useful life, and burn 2,300 gallons more fuel!

Engine overhaul $20,000 x 10% = $2,000

2,300 gallons fuel @ $4.00/gal = $9,200

So, it costs around $11,200 more to fly an NA112 the distance/TBO of a 112HS.

HA .. I LOVE THIS ANALYSIS/COMPARISON ......A.B.C's of selling right Always be Closing!

And from my own playbook ...when you are the best at what you do, don't be scared to prove it!

I love that.

Phil

 

[carllee]

Thanks Phil! I like that one too. Just being a messenger - repeating what I've been told in a slightly different order.

 

[Medevac]

I saw some figures in there and it made me wonder - is there an STC for a turbocharged 114, not just turbonormalised? It wouldn’t take much boost to get the same power as the Super Commander.