Canard Community Forum  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:55 AM
Dust's Avatar
Dust Dust is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Troy, Michigan
Posts: 7,963
Default Dirty little engine " secret "

OK, for all of you newby's reading about all of this engine experimentation and saying to themselves, i can't put up with this BULL, you do not have to.

put in the plans lycoming, some have flown off the 40 hours in less than a week.

the lycomings are good strong engines and MOST have long term great operation.

This comment is not directed at just the rotary, but at ALL non standard installs, including my boring conti engine mount fab, etc. etc.
__________________
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

Last edited by Dust : 06-27-2005 at 10:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-24-2005, 11:52 AM
Waiter's Avatar
Waiter Waiter is offline
LongEZ-RG
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northwestern Ohio
Posts: 1,096
Default

Quote:
put in the plans lycoming, some have flown off the 40 hours in less than a week.
I DID IT!.

One of the advantages of "sticking to the plans". There were hundreds of LongEZs flying before me, so I just copied what they did, Standard engine, standard prop, baffling, cowling, etc. There was really no "Experimental" about my plane. I had High oil temperature on the first flight. I installed a trip plate in front of the cooler as was recommended by some, and that took care of the problem.

The first 10 hours was spent near the bottom of the envelop, Slow speed, Takeoffs, landings,. and learning how to fly the plane.

The remainder of the 40 hours was spent on envelope expansion, and climb/speed/weight measurements. I was very careful about recording data. The last 5 hours was spent on acrobatic maneuvers.

The only exciting times I had were during the Flutter testing, (I would take climb/speed/weight data on the way up to altitude (12-14 thousand), then perform dive sequences at progressively higher speeds to do the flutter test.

A Top speed of 260KIAS was achieved during a very "STRAIGHT DOWN" (at least it seemed like it) dive. This final speed dive was used to establish my Vne of 220 kts.

Most of my cruise fuel burn data came after the 40 hours

Waiter
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-24-2005, 05:23 PM
Nathan Gifford Nathan Gifford is offline
Nathan Gifford
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tickfaw, LA
Posts: 897
Default

And Dust there are a number of non-standard installations with a lot of trouble free hours of operation, burning cheaper fuel, and costing less to operate.

That said, I agree that there are some extremely good reasons to go with a cert engine installation. Number 1 - predictability.

A Lycoming installation on Cozy is a pretty well understood application of the technology. There just aren't going to be that many big surprises hanging that hunk of aluminum on the back of your airplane. Its mostly 40-50 year old technology, but what's wrong with that? Kind of makes you wonder why anyone would install a Continental with a single ignition system in a Cozy?

Why do people want to install a non-cert engine in a Cozy?

Cost: - Non-standard engines cost a fraction of what a certified engine does. Add to that that you can overhaul a non-cert for years and still pay less for maintenance than one overhaul of a cert would cost.

Operations: - I think to use of the word "all" applies here. All non-standard engines run on cheaper or readily available fuels. If you are paying a $1/gal less than avgas that's a lot of savings each fillup. Granted, you should remember not fly at higher altitudes mogas.

The observations by several people in this forum and elsewhere are worth repeating. For one, automotive engine reliability has improved tremendously in the last decade. Power output and power to weight ratios have also improved. The technology that makes this possible is also finding its way into certified installations, which help validate non-standard powerplants.

On the certified end, there have been problems crankcase breather systems plugging and causing engine failures. This particular problem is at least known, and has some resolutions. Still the issue of shock cooling and engines reaching TBO without expensive repairs looks largely unsolved. These things make all builders (as opposed to flyers) seriously consider non-standard powerplants.

On the non-standard end, I am not aware of any standard firewall-aft installations. There are some nice firewall-forward installations both for rotaries and Subaroooooos. A few people have built both pusher rotary and Subaru configurations but these, I think, are still somewhat unique. The Subie would probably be the easiest to duplicate, but I think the rotary is quickly catching up.

I don't think any non-standard engine has dual ignition systems. If it wasn't for the demonstrated reliability of these ignition and fuel injection systems I think we would all think it absolutely nuts to risk your keister and your a/c to them.

However, cert engines, even those with electronic ignitions, may have a mag as backup.

If all things stay the same, I would install a cert engine...all things staying the same...However, I am keeping a very close eye on rotary development and maybe when I get to those chapters (currently I'm reading Chapter 4), the rotary may be an option.
__________________
Nathan Gifford
Tickfaw, LA USA
Cozy Mk IV Plans Set 1330
Better Still --> Chapter 9
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-24-2005, 05:29 PM
MarbleTurtle's Avatar
MarbleTurtle MarbleTurtle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dalton, GA.
Posts: 1,344
Default

That said... Dust is working on a non-factory twin turbo system for his Continental with non-factory electronic ignition and fuel injection.
__________________
Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-24-2005, 06:10 PM
Mark Molava Mark Molava is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 53
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dust

put in the plans lycoming, some have flown off the 40 hours in less than a week.

the lycomings are good strong engines and MOST have long term great operation.
I had every intention of going with the rotary at first but my wife vetoed that idea when she heard all the teething problems associated with it. Also the resale value take a huge hit (even though THAT would never happen).

I intend to fly off my time in a few weeks when it comes, and use the plane.

Anyone have any thoughts to the advantages of a fuel injected lycoming other than no carb ice problems? Is a fuel injected engine worth the increased cost?

Thanks,

Mark
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-24-2005, 08:18 PM
David Staten's Avatar
David Staten David Staten is offline
Rotary Powered Velocity
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: KEFD, Houston Area, Texas
Posts: 441
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dust
put in the plans lycoming, some have flown off the 40 hours in less than a week.
How about mate that certified lycoming engine with a certified prop, and only have to go 25 hours. If that particular engine and prop are approved in some certified airplane somewhere, they qualify for the shortened phase one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dust
the lycomings are good strong engines and MOST have long term great operation.
No argument here.. the lower powered ones have much better reliability than the higher powered ones.

No slight taken against the rotary. I am knowingly deciding to use an alternative engine, that is actually slightly less fuel efficient. In my situation, the benefit is percieved to outweigh the cost. For someone else, the best "conversion" is taking cash and converting it to "lycoming".

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-24-2005, 08:42 PM
Nathan Gifford Nathan Gifford is offline
Nathan Gifford
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tickfaw, LA
Posts: 897
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Molava
...I had every intention of going with the rotary at first but my wife vetoed that idea when she heard all the teething problems associated with it. Also the resale value take a huge hit (even though THAT would never happen)...
If you are not that close to committing on engine, you do not have to make that decision right now. As far as I am concerned the jury has not even gone out to make a decision. However, if I had to make decision right now, I'd plea bargain...

As far as the wife flying, I think its going to me and the two dogs. Well, maybe one dog. Lady is more a terra firma dog, because she's terra about most things except her ball.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Molava
...Anyone have any thoughts to the advantages of a fuel injected lycoming other than no carb ice problems? Is a fuel injected engine worth the increased cost?...
I can't remember who it was at Sun-N-Fun, but one pilot was recounting his icing problem with his fuel injected engine. It forced him to land on road in Michigan. After a short period of time the ice melted and flew on.

As long as we are talking about non-standard aka alternative engines, also remember that alternative engines are abandoned all the time by manufacturers. In other words, it may be wise to stock parts for that alternative engine you have lest you might need to go through the development cycle all over again. Case and point is the Mazda 13B rotary. You can still get parts, though they are getting harder, or at least longer, to get.

I do think once some firewall aft solutions are really developed, building new configurations for newer versions of the powerplant will happen much more quickly.
__________________
Nathan Gifford
Tickfaw, LA USA
Cozy Mk IV Plans Set 1330
Better Still --> Chapter 9
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:18 PM
Dust's Avatar
Dust Dust is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Troy, Michigan
Posts: 7,963
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan Gifford
And Dust there are a number of non-standard installations with a lot of trouble free hours of operation, burning cheaper fuel, and costing less to operate.

Cost: - Non-standard engines cost a fraction of what a certified engine does. Add to that that you can overhaul a non-cert for years and still pay less for maintenance than one overhaul of a cert would cost.

Operations: - I think to use of the word "all" applies here. All non-standard engines run on cheaper or readily available fuels. If you are paying a $1/gal less than avgas that's a lot of savings each fillup. Granted, you should remember not fly at higher altitudes mogas.
mmmmmmmmm - initial cost is a toss up - used engines can be found with allot of life in them and all accessories for a comparable cost to a non standard engine.

the cost savings are definitely at the rebuild time, cost savings on fuel, to me are iffy as mogas is not readily available across the country where you may want to fly.

that said - the reason for my post is to remind the new to aviation that we have here - the engine is not hard and there are little or no teething on standard airplane installations.

you may or may not choose to go experimental on the engine.
__________________
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
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-24-2005, 11:01 PM
CBarber's Avatar
CBarber CBarber is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 802
Default

Ya know, I keep hearing about rotary parts getting harder to find, but I have not found this to be a problem. We got THREE turbo blocks off of ebay for 750 bucks with little effort. At any given time you can find parts on ebay. Yeah, you gotta know what you are looking for, but that is always the case. Heck, from what I understand cert parts can be hard to get too (not a great example, but have y'all heard about the issues with MT props....geesh). I would like a couple more parts available off the shelf, like an intake for our turbo install, but I think the concerns for parts is not all that valid. You can still get many/most from a number of sources. I am not saying parts will never be hard to find, but I think it is well over stated. Plus, the new Reneses should be supported into the foreseeable future...it will not just go away I don't think.

Also, as to a lower resale value.....this to me is a joke. IF a project takes 20, 30, 40 k less to build, it should be worth less, not because it is a lesser plane, but because it cost less originally. Yeah, if it still cost you 100k to build and you could only sell it for 50, that would suck, but if'n you build for 50 and sell for 50, I think you are ahead since you got to fly/use it too.

To me both are red hearings to justify not using an alternative engine. I feel no justification is needed either way. Do what you do.

For me....FLY ROTARY.....I hope

All the best,

Chris
__________________
Chris Barber
www.LoneStarVelocity.com
Houston, Texas
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-25-2005, 12:23 AM
Nathan Gifford Nathan Gifford is offline
Nathan Gifford
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tickfaw, LA
Posts: 897
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dust
...that said - the reason for my post is to remind the new to aviation that we have here - the engine is not hard and there are little or no teething on standard airplane installations...
No problem Dust. I am glad you have brought this up again. The important thing to for everyone to walk away with from this discussion is that this issue (or is it these issues?) are in a state of flux. You don't need to follow this every day, but you should drop in every few months and see where we are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBarber
...We got THREE turbo blocks off of ebay for 750 bucks with little effort. At any given time you can find parts on ebay. Yeah, you gotta know what you are looking for, but that is always the case...I am not saying parts will never be hard to find, but I think it is well over stated. Plus, the new Renesis should be supported into the foreseeable future...
I think that is the cost of one jug on Lycoming without the piston.

Certainly the Renesis will probably have a 5-10 production year run, maybe even longer. But at some point, only used parts will be available. Still, how many GA a/c engines are there in the US? Probably all of them combined won't add up to the number of Renesis engines that Mazda will produce in the next couple of years. Heaven only knows how many Subaru engines are available and adaptable to aviation use.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBarber
...Also, as to a lower resale value.....this to me is a joke. IF a project takes 20, 30, 40 k less to build, it should be worth less, not because it is a lesser plane, but because it cost less originally. Yeah, if it still cost you 100k to build and you could only sell it for 50, that would suck, but if'n you build for 50 and sell for 50, I think you are ahead since you got to fly/use it too...
Super points. I don't know if anyone has shown that you will net more money for your plane with a cert engine in it. Especially, if that engine needs to be rebuilt once or topped. Those items can easily exceed the cost of more than two rebuilds on a rotary or Subaru powerplant.

If you really think you will net more money for your plane with a cert engine then you could, before the sale, remove and sell your alternative engine, and then install that mid-time cert engine. After your 25 hours of flight testing, sell the a/c for the increased value the cert installation may enjoy. Remember, not everyone thinks an alternative engine is a problem.

Dust does have some very valid points about alternative engines. How much cheaper are they to install? John Slade has spent a considerable amount of time and money developing his rotary configuration and he has still not flown off his 40 hours. Remember, John is doing engine development so these additional hours only reflect on the process of getting the engine working properly.

If there were a firewall aft configuration for builders to work from for either rotary or Subie installations the time and money required to get reliable powerplants in operation would be greatly reduced. This would also embolden builders to readily install these powerplants.

If you are planning to install an alternative engine in the next 6 months, be prepared for a fair amount of development work and expense. If you won't be ready for that engine decision for a year or more, I think that some firewall aft solutions will be ready. Besides, if RVs are getting Subies and rotaries how far behind can pushers be?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBarber
...To me both are red hearings
Was this just one of those lawyer moments?
__________________
Nathan Gifford
Tickfaw, LA USA
Cozy Mk IV Plans Set 1330
Better Still --> Chapter 9
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-25-2005, 09:42 PM
1286's Avatar
1286 1286 is offline
Chapter 19 and 23
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Albany, Ga
Posts: 198
Default Reworking an engine

I have a friend who's Mooney I'm flying in my avatar, that was turning off a runway at about 2/3s the way down. He exited short into some sand with his right tire. Got stuck. Shut down and noticed his prop looked funny! PROP STRIKE! A $23,000.+ ouch. Now he in negotiations with the insurance company.

Bob
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-25-2005, 11:05 PM
CBarber's Avatar
CBarber CBarber is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 802
Default

OUCH. I am having sympathy pains


All the best,

Chris
__________________
Chris Barber
www.LoneStarVelocity.com
Houston, Texas
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-25-2005, 11:31 PM
John Slade's Avatar
John Slade John Slade is offline
Flying TurboRotaryCozyIV
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: KWST
Posts: 3,836
Default

Quote:
I am having sympathy pains
Chris, you must be a unique and special kind of lawyer
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-25-2005, 11:48 PM
David Staten's Avatar
David Staten David Staten is offline
Rotary Powered Velocity
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: KEFD, Houston Area, Texas
Posts: 441
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Slade
Chris, you must be a unique and special kind of lawyer
Not to rub it in but...

New prop... $3000
Rebuild kit for a Mazda 13B $1000
A new Eshaft if we really need one... $free in the garage pile..

Not having to tear down a Lycoming for an oops.. PRICELESS..

Thats where Chris is feeling his sympathy pains... knowing that if we went certified, we would be spending the equivalent of HALF our present outlay in fixing it.

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-26-2005, 09:43 AM
John Slade's Avatar
John Slade John Slade is offline
Flying TurboRotaryCozyIV
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: KWST
Posts: 3,836
Default

Ah. That puts it in perspective. Thanks. He had me worried there.

I find Ed Anderson's recent story interesting. He was visiting family in Loiusianna when his 13B developed "internal issues". He removed it, stripped and rebuilt it in his nephew's garage, then reinstalled it and flew home. Total cost - approx $220. The story begs a question, however. What caused the problem? - seems that he made an assembly mistake during the previous rebuild.

By comparison, my '64 Cherokee 160 developed "internal issues" a year after I sold it for around $12,000. The engine rebuild quote was $14,000. He walked away from it and gave the plane to the engine shop as payment for work already done.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 07:13 AM.


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