Canard Community Forum  

Go Back   Canard Community Forum > Firewall Backward and Forward
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

View Poll Results: Which engine are you using, installing or planning on?
Continental 2 1.64%
Deltahawk 7 5.74%
Jet 2 1.64%
Lycoming 31 25.41%
Rotary 48 39.34%
Subaru 8 6.56%
Other Diesel 5 4.10%
Undecided 16 13.11%
Other Automotive 1 0.82%
LS1 V8... 405 HP 1 0.82%
Jabiru 5100 1 0.82%
Voters: 122. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 01-25-2006, 08:43 AM
Nathan Gifford Nathan Gifford is offline
Nathan Gifford
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tickfaw, LA
Posts: 897
Default

1000 Continental?? I thought Dust lives in Michigan...how close is he to Chicago? Did the dead vote??
__________________
Nathan Gifford
Tickfaw, LA USA
Cozy Mk IV Plans Set 1330
Better Still --> Chapter 9

Last edited by Nathan Gifford : 01-25-2006 at 01:29 PM.
  #92  
Old 01-25-2006, 09:46 AM
John Slade's Avatar
John Slade John Slade is offline
Flying TurboRotaryCozyIV
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: KWST
Posts: 3,836
Default

I fixed the vote the way it should be.
I'm from Florida.
I can do that.
  #93  
Old 01-25-2006, 02:20 PM
Dust's Avatar
Dust Dust is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Troy, Michigan
Posts: 7,963
Default

A trend - i see a trend - 100% increase in the conti crowd

but wha happened to the other 998 - we got vote fixin goin on here???
__________________
Enjoy the build,njut av byggandet, godere il costruire, nyd bygningen, geniesse den Bau, apolafse tin kataskevi, disfrute la construcción, curta a construção, Pidä hauskaa rakentamisen parissa, bouw lekker,uživaj grade?inaslajdaites postroikoi, geniet die bou
dust

maker of wood, fiberglass, foam dust, metal bits and one day a Cozy will pop out and swiftly whisk me from meeting old friends and family to adventures throughout the world
  #94  
Old 01-25-2006, 03:21 PM
BelfryExpress BelfryExpress is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 15
Default

If my crew and I were going pure NA, we woulda most likely used a Soob engine. The nice thing is, I own a 2.5 RS and its getting upgraded to an STi and we coulda pulled the powerplant and ECU and done a full rebuild and already had a powerplant for the motor.

However, we are going for a normalized turbo setup therefore we are going with the rotary. Its inherent dedundancy combined with its resistance to seizing makes it a great powerplant.

I refuse to stuff a lycosaurous or a crapinental under the cowl of my aircraft. *gets on soapbox* the only reason these refugees from the 1930s are still around is they were FAA certified and its extremely expensive and difficult getting something certified these days. This is one of thoes governmental barriers to competition that provide for a natural oligopoly. That and the barrier quells innovation. It is repugnant to me to spend over 20 grand on a new motor that puts out 2/3rds of the horses of a modern power plant and sucks down 2x the fuel--and extremely high octane fuel at that!!! Even if someone hits me with the whole air-cooled thing. I can hit back with a Porsche turbo flat 6. heck, Cayce's BMW 540i puts out a tad over 300 horses at the crank, is lighter and uses less fuel than an O-540 *stepps down*
__________________
Guard thy airspeed lest the ground arise to smite thee
  #95  
Old 01-25-2006, 03:22 PM
neverquit's Avatar
neverquit neverquit is offline
G.Norman
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lathrup Village, MI
Posts: 1,481
Default

For you rotary buffs. Do you think a Mazda rotary engine off a high volume units per day assembly line is actually safer than an aircraft engine? I know you hear about aircraft engine failure but all engines fail sometime. Mazda rotaries don't get the publishing when someone gets towed to the dealership. Aircraft engines have built-in redundancy such as 2 spark plugs for each cylinder, etc. So, what's the advantage for a rotary besides cost?
  #96  
Old 01-25-2006, 03:31 PM
BelfryExpress BelfryExpress is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 15
Default

Cost
--Full Replacement
--Parts
--Maintenance
--Wear Items
--cheap unleaded gas (compared to 100LL)
--Mods

Efficiency

8-10 GPH at cruise opposed to 20-25 GPH for the same speed

Reliability

Hate to break it to you, but the 13B has dual sparkplugs

(just because moses didnt bring the 13B down from the mountain with the 10 commandments, doenst mean its not reliable. Its just not as established which seems to be really important to alot of the codgers in the experimental realm)

Pure rotational motion
--smooth as slik

Resistance to seizing

Weight

Ease of Turbocharging
__________________
Guard thy airspeed lest the ground arise to smite thee
  #97  
Old 01-25-2006, 04:20 PM
Marc Zeitlin Marc Zeitlin is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tehachapi, CA 93561
Posts: 1,083
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BelfryExpress
Cost
--Full Replacement
--Parts
--Maintenance
--Wear Items
--cheap unleaded gas (compared to 100LL)
--Mods
As long as the aircraft engine has low compression pistons (which most do), they can run on mogas. Most things that break/need repair on engines are not pistons, cylinders, and connecting rods - it's other stuff. The cost of aircraft ownership is a complex question, and depends strongly on the cost of money, the rate of depreciation/appreciation, and perceived value. Yes, you can purchase a rotary engine (and PSRU) for less than an aircraft engine, but it will be worth less. Aircraft engines have been appreciating substantially over the past 5-15 years - it's very possible to get more out of an engine than you purchased it for, even after using it for 10 years.

Advantage: completely unclear from a life-cycle cost standpoint

Quote:
Originally Posted by BelfryExpress
Efficiency

8-10 GPH at cruise opposed to 20-25 GPH for the same speed
Ummm, you might want to check those figures - what you've written there is just not so. The BSFC of aircraft engines, when properly leaned, is equivalent to, if not better than, rotary engines. Subaru's are about the same, maybe marginally better than aircraft engines. In actual use, in equivalent situations with equivalent propellers, all these engines burn about the same amount of fuel. If you want real efficiency increases, you'll need a diesel, not a rotary.

My carbureted O-360 burns 10 gal/hr. putting out 135 HP, for a BSFC of .44 lb/hp/hr. An gami-injected version, run well lean of peak with electronic ignition, will run between 0.4 and 0.42. Are you making the claim that the rotaries have magically been able to obtain BSFC's of 0.2 - 0.22? IIRC, discussions here and on the rotary list indicate BSFC's in the mid 0.4's, at best in the 0.4 region.

Advantage: draw - maybe infinitesimal advantage to aircraft engines

Quote:
Originally Posted by BelfryExpress
Reliability

Hate to break it to you, but the 13B has dual sparkplugs
As I've asked on the canardzone forum to someone making the same "reliability" claims, please provide some evidence (other than handwaving about the # of moving parts) to show that rotary engines, in full running getup, have lower failure rates and lower repair costs than other engines, either aircraft or automobile. Mazda should have been claiming that in their sales literature if there were any validity to the claim, no? I'm not claiming that aircraft engines are better than rotaries - just that there's been NO evidence presented to indicate that they're worse. Until there is some evidence one way or the other, the drumbeat for the rotary "reliability" advantage is religion, not science.

Advantage: Draw

Quote:
Originally Posted by BelfryExpress
Pure rotational motion
--smooth as slik
Not pure, but close. Very smooth.

Advantage: Rotary

Quote:
Originally Posted by BelfryExpress
Resistance to seizing
How often do aircraft engines seize? Is this a large percentage of aircraft engine failures? No.

Advantage: Infinitesimal advantage to Rotary

Quote:
Originally Posted by BelfryExpress
Weight
All Rotary engine installations in canard aircraft have weighed MORE than the equivalent aircraft engine installation would have weighed.

Advantage: Aircraft Engine

Quote:
Originally Posted by BelfryExpress
Ease of Turbocharging
Both Lycoming and Continental (as well as Subaru) have turbocharged versions of their engines that are commonly available.

Advantage: Draw

So what have we got here? A bunch of things that are draws, a couple of things that are close to draws, and a couple of things that are advantages each way.

It's hardly the slam-dunk that some folks would like to make it out to be. I'd LOVE to see auto conversions succeed - rotary, subaru, whatever - relying on 60 year old technology seems silly (and I say that as an engineer), but in fact, SO FAR, nothing has PROVEN itself to be better. The new certified diesels that are coming out (from Theilert and others) hold a great deal of promise, from a BSFC standpoint. The auto conversions hold great promise from a cost standpoint, but all these things wait to be proven.
__________________
  #98  
Old 01-25-2006, 05:20 PM
Jerry Schneider Jerry Schneider is offline
Cozy #768
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tampa
Posts: 223
Default

Nice to see the facts presented in such a non-prejudicial, factual manner.

Since this is the "Which Engine?' thread, I thought I'd add my 2c as well.

For the first 3-4 years of my project, I was sold on the Rotary. But as I got further into it, I saw a number of questions which needed to be resolved to get a viable, reliable rotary power plant. For me, the object was to "get into the air", and I saw the rotary as a more " experimental-experimental" journey than I wanted to experience.

I guess what I'm trying to get at, (poorly), is we all decided what our mission statement was when we decided what to build, be that Cozy, Long EZ, Vari-EZ, Velocity, SQ, or even Defiant (et. al.).
What's left, is how we want to get there, (during the Build). Some want the greatest performance, some want the "newest thing", some are into development.
My view: There is no "best".

My main desire, as related to any and all forums/mail lists, is that people would not present opinion as fact, without data to back it up. That would make everyone's decision process MUCH easier.

Disclaimer: I'm probably stating the obvious, but, I have the day off today. And I just got back from dropping my MT Electric Constant Speed Prop off at the factory to be overhauled, and have nothing else to do but pontificate. (Not enough time for a layup before SWBO comes home with plans for me. )
__________________
"I run with scissors."
Cozy Plans #768
http://home.earthlink.net/~jerskip
  #99  
Old 01-25-2006, 05:44 PM
neverquit's Avatar
neverquit neverquit is offline
G.Norman
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lathrup Village, MI
Posts: 1,481
Default

Quote:
I saw the rotary as a more " experimental-experimental" journey than I wanted to experience.
Yep, I agree Jerry. I saw your nose gear door on your website.

Quote:
Until there is some evidence one way or the other, the drumbeat for the rotary "reliability" advantage is religion, not science.
So I've heard. Thanks Mark, this cauterizes my question on the safety issue.

Since we're putting in our 2c here, I have to note being in the auto industry my entire working life I've seen what potential problems are installed in an engine day one. I would say if you're fixed on non-conventional aircraft powerplants, take it to someone with a highly respected name (not your favorite mechanic) to tear it down and rebuild it to racing specs. Be sure EVERYTHING is inspected and assembled without a doubt to spec. Like building your plane, "good enough" or cost should not be an option.
  #100  
Old 01-25-2006, 06:30 PM
rnbraud rnbraud is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 231
Default Talk about perfect timing.

I have just finished reading Nat's Newsletter #72 where he talks about a Cozy MkIV with a O-320 and a constant speed propellor. He stated he was wondering if an O-320 with a constant speed prop would perform in the same manner as an O-360 with a fixed two-blade prop.

Then I checkout Jerry Schneider's website, and lo and behold he is installing a O-320 with a constant speed prop. (They may have been IO-320's).

From what I gather from Nat's comments, he specualted the 320 withan adjustable prop spinning at a lil higher rpm would equal the speed of an O-360.

This is welcome news to me. Anyone else considering this type of setup in addition to Jerry? Is this a viable alternative?

Thanks.
  #101  
Old 01-25-2006, 07:08 PM
MarbleTurtle's Avatar
MarbleTurtle MarbleTurtle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dalton, GA.
Posts: 1,344
Default

You might want to try and track down Kevin Funk (?). I think that's the name... he has a 320 but I don't remember if he is running a CS prop.

I agree with most of what Marc says except for the example given about increasing value. I dealt with something similar while working in financial services... these things seriously rub me raw.

It goes like this... the last 30 years people have bought houses and watched as the value goes way up. I'm not going to save or invest, I'm going to buy the biggest house I can qualify for and that's going to be my retirement nest egg.

I actually read someone say something similar about the Lycoming engine on the fly-rotary list... Rusty are you here yet?!?!?! I'll put a lycoming in my RV6 and sell it for more money in 10 years than I paid for it! Better performance than my 401k!

This grates on me to no end. Here's why. There are umpteen million baby boomers that are squeezed in between the ages of 40 and 60. There are much fewer people in the demographic groups older and younger than the BB group. Historically, items that the BB group demand goway over "normal" value, and everything they collectively decide to dispose of goes down in value. Fortunately for the moment, they like stuff, the more the better, and they don't dispose of much.

Sure... home prices have gone up 10 fold while the BB group started squeezing out rug rats and needed a 3 bed 2.5 bath with the white picket fence out front. But what happens when this group starts trying to cash in on their suburban nest egg and move to FL like their parents did? Whose buying these houses? Other retirees? No. Young people starting families. There are fewer people in the younger Generation X and Z groups than the BB group. (I actually had someone touting real-estate investments argue with me on the radio and declare that illegal aliens would take up the slack.) So what happens when supply is high, demand is low? Have you heard that Greenspan is worried about an over-built real estate market? Heard about the Federal Reserve long term concerns over deflation instead of inflation? That's why.

The value of aircraft have gone up in the last 30 years as well. The lifespan on an aircraft is long, not disposable, and companies continue to add to the supply. Have you noticed the dominant age group of pilots at the airport lately? What happens when all of these ol' farts like Dust start loosing their medical? How much demand is there in the younger generations?

Just a thought... I'll get off my soapbox. Well... after I say "DON'T COUNT ON A LYCOMING INCREASING IN VALUE."

Wish I still had all my figures with me... interesting stuff if you like macro economics. Don't get me started on the international or gold standard quacks.
__________________
Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
  #102  
Old 01-25-2006, 07:43 PM
Nathan Gifford Nathan Gifford is offline
Nathan Gifford
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tickfaw, LA
Posts: 897
Default

I would add that what your Lycoming is worth will depend largely on how many hours away from overhaul it is when you sell it. (What about high time Defiants...double the overhaul costs?)

One of the thoughts we penned last year was a shared Lycoming (or other certified aircraft engine) used for initial flight testing. After that put in yo auto-conversion and fly that off.

Taking that to next step, you could fly on your cert until there is a really good firewall aft auto-conversion (which may not be much longer). Then sell the Lycoming and install Rotary/Subie...it might either put change in your pocket or not cost much for the install.
__________________
Nathan Gifford
Tickfaw, LA USA
Cozy Mk IV Plans Set 1330
Better Still --> Chapter 9
  #103  
Old 01-25-2006, 08:15 PM
rutanfan rutanfan is offline
Ray V.
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Logan, Utah
Posts: 229
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by levansic
Yeah, the Jabiru 5100 looks cool, but is only available with carburetors. Can't quite comprehend why a purpose built, brand new, airplane engine would have carburetors only in this day and age, but that's what they have, with no provision for injection.

-- Len
Me too. Regardless, I am leaning toward the 5100 in my Long-ez. There was a Varieze 3300 conversion in last year’s CSA with promising results (just in the testing phase however.)

If you asked me a year ago I would have claimed that a Mazda Renesis is the only option, but Paul Lamar’s death kind of sucked the pioneering life out of me. (No. I'm not saying that auto conversions are dangerous. It's just not in my scope at this time.)

I personally view the carburetors as a benefit. These engines plumb exactly like a Lycoming, and the factory will make the mount and exhaust for you. And it’s not like you’re using mags. I’ve made the assumption that they went with the transistorized self generating electronic ignition as a fail safe mode. Remember, this is a JAR-22H certified engine. (Yeah, I know. So is the Rotax.)

Also, if electronic ignition is a preferred, Creative Air is pioneering a fuel injection system. They claim that they are getting performance numbers with the electronic ignition (for what it’s worth.)

I’ll most likely be ordering a mount in the near future.
__________________
I think; therefore I am. - Rene Descartes
  #104  
Old 01-25-2006, 08:29 PM
Marc Zeitlin Marc Zeitlin is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tehachapi, CA 93561
Posts: 1,083
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rutanfan
..... but Paul Lamar’s death kind of sucked the pioneering life out of me.
Paul Conner, not Paul Lamar.
__________________
  #105  
Old 01-25-2006, 10:18 PM
Jerry Schneider Jerry Schneider is offline
Cozy #768
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tampa
Posts: 223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rnbraud
Then I checkout Jerry Schneider's website, and lo and behold he is installing a O-320 with a constant speed prop. (They may have been IO-320's)
Yes, I am using a IO-320 w/electric CS prop. It wasn't my FIRST choice, (IO-360 -200hp), but I got such a deal on the package, I just couldn't pass it up. The CozyGirrrls are fabricating my engine mount as we speak.
My hope is to get equivalent performance to an O-360. Time will tell...

I STILL like the rotary thing though, and plan on working up a rotary engine package while flying my Cozy. Who knows, maybe my Lycosaurus could become a "legacy" engine, passed from builder-to-builder like the steel templates?
__________________
"I run with scissors."
Cozy Plans #768
http://home.earthlink.net/~jerskip
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.