---------------------------------------------------------- CorvairEngines-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 01/11/11: 7 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:37 AM - Re: Re: CorvairEngines-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 01/08/11 (roy szarafinski) 2. 04:48 AM - Re: Re: CorvairEngines-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 01/08/11 (Scott Black) 3. 04:51 AM - Re: Re: CorvairEngines-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 01/08/11 (Scott Black) 4. 09:37 AM - Re: Re: CorvairEngines-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 01/08/11 (MRus597999@aol.com) 5. 01:59 PM - Re: Corvair - where to get one? (Steve Dixon) 6. 04:09 PM - Re: Corvair - where to get one? (Scott Black) 7. 04:43 PM - Re: Corvair - where to get one? (jaybannist@cs.com) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:37:42 AM PST US From: roy szarafinski Subject: Re: CorvairEngines-List: Re: CorvairEngines-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 01/08/11 Mike, Don't get me wrong, I like MM, his enthusiasm is almost contagious, but realize that only when the engine was pushed beyond it's limits or because of inferior post production workmanship, did bad things happen. You, and whomever told you, seem to lack understanding, which is readily apparent by your last three statements. To think that a new crank will somehow cure the bending forces imposed by a propellor or imply that properly reconditioned parts are not suitable, defies the evidence, reason and logic. Saving weight is always a good idea but balance the notion with cost per pound saved then get yourself a Jab. Believe what you will, it's your truth, spend what you want, it's your money but please don't subject the rest of us with your parroted B.S. Put the time into your project, it's more productive than being a paper tiger. BTW I've seen and evaluated the cranks, gears, rods, pistons. All except the pistons, whiz bang stuff from the conscientious and well paid craftsman in land of Mao. Not that it cannot be any good, but how much better is it really? The rest? I reserve judgement. So, perhaps it's you who doesn't get the point. Man, I'm almost ashamed to post this publicly, debating with zealots is usually fruitless. Roy .. On Jan 10, 2011, at 10:25 PM, MRus597999@aol.com wrote: > You don't get the point. WW uses used parts to build these engines, > even nitrided cranks break. WW builds their Corvair engines with > 100,000 mile used cranks. And he doesn't guarantee any of them. If > WW doesn't stand behind its product then don't build them. WW > engines, some with nitrided cranks, broke.... Period! However, MM > says use new parts, including rods and NEW cranks. And that is what > he is doing. I have seen MM's new engines, you obviously haven't. > The guts of these engines involve brand new parts, not reconditioned > ones. New is better than used. I've studied WW extensively, talked > to him, bought his stuff. As far as he goes it's not bad..In fact I > plan on buying some more of his stuff. But MM is raising the bar. > If you want to use 100,000 mile cranks, even nitrided ones, go > ahead. I will use a new crank that is 2 1/2 times stronger than an > original GM crank much less one with milllions of cycles on the > crank.. I'll then be able to build an engine without an even > heavier 5th bearing. These engines are too heavy as it is. > > Mike Russell ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:48:45 AM PST US From: Scott Black Subject: RE: CorvairEngines-List: Re: CorvairEngines-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 01/08/11 You don't build a WW engine. You build a corvair engine useing his conversi on method and accessories. You are in charge and you take responsibility fo r what you do. It is not up to him to guarantee your work. And for what its worth=2C the rest of the engine in a WW conversion uses new internal compo nents i.e. rods and pistons. MM has 1 crank. Has it flown? Will 2 1/2 times stronger result in significant increase in fatigue resistance? Will there be harmonic issues? Quality control issues? Is it from China? We don't know . If you advise people to go this way based on no real experience you are a dvising them to become a test pilot (assuming they can actually get a crank - the website still says they can't). Will you guarantee it? Will MM guara ntee it based on no test experience? You are giving advice based on seeing an engine that has not flown based on a crank that is not available and eve n if it was has not been tested. The real issue with the corvair design for aircraft (and the VW) is that th e end bearing is not designed for prop loads - it isn't big enough. WW has figured this out as have others. Making the crank stronger does not necessa rily address this. A bigger bearing does. It took many years and higher pow er installations for the crank issue to present itself. It is only with man y hundreds of hrs of testing that this new crank will prove itself if it be comes commercially available=2C which it is NOT right now. So telling peopl e that it is way better is simply guesswork from somebody with no experienc e (other than having seen one) representing a company with no experience. A nd selling a component that has not been tested is irresponsible. ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:51:54 AM PST US From: Scott Black Subject: RE: CorvairEngines-List: Re: CorvairEngines-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 01/08/11 "whiz bang stuff from the conscientious and well paid craftsman in land o f Mao." That's classic! I almost want to put that up on my wall! Scott ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 09:37:26 AM PST US From: MRus597999@aol.com Subject: Re: CorvairEngines-List: Re: CorvairEngines-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 01/08/11 Well you obviously haven't been watching WW website, MM engines have flown and are fying. Read WW website and discover the issue he has had with his broken cranks, including nitrided ones. I have personally talked to some of WW engine users who had broken cranks.Not jsut the ones mentioned by WW on his website or in his book, a book that I have on my shelf next to this computer. This builder regretted not getting another type engine in the first place. If you want to continue to believe WW's own personal promotion and publicity go ahead, It's all anecdotal and all comes from WW himself. Has any independent agency really looked at his work? No! it all comes from him and those that haven't crashed yet. By your logic all new parts are suspect and 100,000 mile cranks are not; In this instance I have personally seen both operations at work. They are both respectable and I don't criticize either. Nor will I slavishly "adore" one as opposed to the other. WW is knowledgeable and I subscribe to his ideas wholeheartedly, but it turns me off when the first thing out his mouth is to bad mouth others in the field. He has personally expressed to me in personal conversations regarding Aeromax, and the well respected and long time builder of corvair engines from Long Beach, as well as others. It is unnecessary. I'm a little turned off by WW arrogance and disdain for anything not of WW. But to rebut your argument that WW does not make the parts or sell then realize that WW does sell nitrided cranks, look at his website; look at his books that show pictures of them. The crank IS the crux of this engine. You can't do anything with your corvair engine with a broken crank in flight. He has and does sell engines. Ask some of those who have had broken cranks in flight, including Langford, who has broken a couple including used nitrided ones. What do you say then about WW's excpertise. Other parts are new that are to be installed. Are all my parts in my corvair to be new EXCEPT the crank? By the way. Interestingly enough, the only cranks to break are those in engines that were "souped" up or overstressed. The standard engine without a 5th bearing did fine and none broke around the 4th bearing. MDR PS, this is my last post and I will respond to no more postings. Do what you wish, you are obviously married to WW and are not seeking even a trial separation to look at others who have some interesting things to do and say in this rather interesting field involving flying contraptions. In a message dated 1/11/2011 4:48:54 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, scott-black@sympatico.ca writes: You don't build a WW engine. You build a corvair engine useing his conversion method and accessories. You are in charge and you take responsibility for what you do. It is not up to him to guarantee your work. And for what its worth, the rest of the engine in a WW conversion uses new internal components i.e. rods and pistons. MM has 1 crank. Has it flown? Will 2 1/2 times stronger result in significant increase in fatigue resistance? Will there be harmonic issues? Quality control issues? Is it from China? We don't know. If you advise people to go this way based on no real experience you are advising them to become a test pilot (assuming they can actually get a crank - the website still says they can't). Will you guarantee it? Will MM guarantee it based on no test experience? You are giving advice based on seeing an engine that has not flown based on a crank that is not available and even if it was has not been tested. The real issue with the corvair design for aircraft (and the VW) is that the end bearing is not designed for prop loads - it isn't big enough. WW has figured this out as have others. Making the crank stronger does not necessarily address this. A bigger bearing does. It took many years and higher power installations for the crank issue to present itself. It is only with many hundreds of hrs of testing that this new crank will prove itself if it becomes commercially available, which it is NOT right now. So telling people that it is way better is simply guesswork from somebody with no experience (other than having seen one) representing a company with no experience. And selling a component that has not been tested is irresponsible. (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?CorvairEngines-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 01:59:49 PM PST US From: "Steve Dixon" Subject: Re: CorvairEngines-List: Corvair - where to get one? I don't think anyone is "married" to WW. For my part, I was only trying to give credit where I thought credit was due, and point out in response to the post below that there were alternatives to MM. How one chooses to build an engine is up to them, but IMHO they should proceed using the best information and parts (tested?) available. As I see it, the folks at MM are machinists with an interest in aviation, WW is an A&P with an interest in converting Corvair engines for aircraft use. MM became a LLC in 2007, WW has been doing his thing for several decades. WW has an excellent manual/book, and many years of Corvair College that are available online. I don't know of anyone else that can provide this much information. Also, I don't know of anyone who has the $ or time to test a Corvair crankshaft as well as GM. It was pointed out that there have been crankshaft failures in Corvairs when used on aircraft and this is primarily because they were not designed to withstand the gyroscopic and other forces exerted on them in flight. All one has to do is look at the differences in the crankshaft support of an engine designed for flight and one designed for automotive use and the reason for this is readily apparent. Aircraft engines have a huge main bearing nearest the prop to handle these forces. Adding the "fifth bearing" was a large step in the right direction to address this deficiency in the Corvair. One last thought. I always had the idea that homebuilding and engine conversions were done, at least in part, to reduce the cost of flying. This seems to be sometimes forgotten, or perhaps not a factor. While I believe the Corvair is an excellent automotive engine and a good aircraft engine, it is difficult to beat the reliability of an engine designed for aircraft use when money is not a factor. Steve Dixon ----- Original Message ----- From: MRus597999@aol.com To: corvairengines-list@matronics.com Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 10:37 PM Subject: Re: CorvairEngines-List: Corvair - where to get one? A better source for good parts, like new cranks, light weight cylinders, etc is at magnificentmachine.com. I talked to him last weekend and first met him in Livermore at a Corvair College. Wynne is good but this guy has got even better stuff. You want fuel injection, new not used cranks, etc. See this guy, he can build you a bullet proof engine far stronger than any thing Wynne can build. Mike Russell In a message dated 1/6/2011 3:10:38 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, raymondj@frontiernet.net writes: Greetings Clemens, No need to apologize for your english, it's better than my "Austrian" :) I can't offer any direct answers to your question. Try the CorvAircraft list. There are many more people and experts. http://www.krnet.org/corvaircraft_inst.html I'll see you there. Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN On 01/06/2011 04:00 AM, Clemens wrote: > --> CorvairEngines-List message posted by: "Clemens" > > Hello Listers, > I am from austria and building a 601XLB from plans. > > Now I have started looking around which engine to use and I think I like the corvair at most. > My problem now is how to get one. As I mentioned I live in Austria - the home of the Rotax, VW and BMW engines. I think there is no way to get a corvair core here in my country. I found that aeromax sells engine kit packages with the fifth bearing for 7500$. What do you think of it? - I can not find much about aeromax customers in internet. > I recognized that obviously William Wayne is the "Corvair Guru" but I dont know if he also sell engine kit packages like aeromax. > It would be nice to hear some inputs from you and sorry for my bad english. > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=325771#325771 > > > > > > > > > > ======================= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ======================= - List Contribution Web Site sp; ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 04:09:48 PM PST US From: Scott Black Subject: RE: CorvairEngines-List: Corvair - where to get one? Regarding used crankshafts=2C it is not the fact that they are used that ha s caused the failures. They could have 300=2C000 miles on them but I would bet a lot of money that none of them had cracks in front of the #6 bearing when removed from the car and none have failed in cars at that location. An d if these cranks had been brand new GM stock and subjected to those loads they likely would fail as well eventually. We know this now because of the work that WW has done and made public for the benefit of the community. http://flycorvair.com/crankissues.html There is also no guarantee that a new billet crank will be any better in th is regard. It might last a bit longer if it is stronger=2C but if the beari ngs are not designed to support it it will be flexed and worked and will fa tigue eventually. Anyone who claims it will be bulletproof guessing. It wil l be some time before this is known. There is a much higher probability fro m first principles that the 5th bearing will be much more resilient. I think what is happening here is that WW's in your face style has somebody 's nose out of joint. That is the only explanation for the bizarre claims b eing made (i.e. WW's cranks break etc). Anyway=2C this dead horse has been well flogged and I hope it has not been too tedious. I will let it go now. Scott From: dix39@charter.net Subject: Re: CorvairEngines-List: Corvair - where to get one? I don't think anyone is "married" to WW. For my part=2C I was only trying to give credit where I thought credit was due=2C and point out in response to the post below that there were alternatives to MM. How one chooses to b uild an engine is up to them=2C but IMHO they should proceed using the best information and parts (tested?) available. As I see it=2C the folks at MM are machinists with an interest in aviation =2C WW is an A&P with an interest in converting Corvair engines for aircraf t use. MM became a LLC in 2007=2C WW has been doing his thing for several decades. WW has an excellent manual/book=2C and many years of Corvair Coll ege that are available online. I don't know of anyone else that can provid e this much information. Also=2C I don't know of anyone who has the $ or t ime to test a Corvair crankshaft as well as GM. It was pointed out that there have been crankshaft failures in Corvairs whe n used on aircraft and this is primarily because they were not designed to withstand the gyroscopic and other forces exerted on them in flight. All o ne has to do is look at the differences in the crankshaft support of an eng ine designed for flight and one designed for automotive use and the reason for this is readily apparent. Aircraft engines have a huge main bearing ne arest the prop to handle these forces. Adding the "fifth bearing" was a la rge step in the right direction to address this deficiency in the Corvair. One last thought. I always had the idea that homebuilding and engine conve rsions were done=2C at least in part=2C to reduce the cost of flying. This seems to be sometimes forgotten=2C or perhaps not a factor. While I belie ve the Corvair is an excellent automotive engine and a good aircraft engine =2C it is difficult to beat the reliability of an engine designed for aircr aft use when money is not a factor. Steve Dixon ----- Original Message ----- From: MRus597999@aol.com Sent: Friday=2C January 07=2C 2011 10:37 PM Subject: Re: CorvairEngines-List: Corvair - where to get one? A better source for good parts=2C like new cranks=2C light weight cylinders =2C etc is at magnificentmachine.com. I talked to him last weekend and firs t met him in Livermore at a Corvair College. Wynne is good but this guy has got even better stuff. You want fuel injection=2C new not used cranks=2C e tc. See this guy=2C he can build you a bullet proof engine far stronger tha n any thing Wynne can build. Mike Russell In a message dated 1/6/2011 3:10:38 A.M. Pacific Standard Time=2C raymondj@ frontiernet.net writes: Greetings Clemens=2C No need to apologize for your english=2C it's better than my "Austrian" :) I can't offer any direct answers to your question. Try the CorvAircraft list. There are many more people and experts. http://www.krnet.org/corvaircraft_inst.html I'll see you there. Raymond Julian Kettle River=2C MN On 01/06/2011 04:00 AM=2C Clemens wrote: > --> CorvairEngines-List message posted by: "Clemens" > > Hello Listers=2C > I am from austria and building a 601XLB from plans. > > Now I have started looking around which engine to use and I think I like the corvair at most. > My problem now is how to get one. As I mentioned I live in Austria - the home of the Rotax=2C VW and BMW engines. I think there is no way to get a c orvair core here in my country. I found that aeromax sells engine kit packa ges with the fifth bearing for 7500$. What do you think of it? - I can not find much about aeromax customers in internet. > I recognized that obviously William Wayne is the "Corvair Guru" but I don t know if he also sell engine kit packages like aeromax. > It would be nice to hear some inputs from you and sorry for my bad englis h. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=325771#325771 > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?CorvairEngines-List">http://www. matronics.com/Navigator?CorvairEngines-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 04:43:53 PM PST US Subject: Re: CorvairEngines-List: Corvair - where to get one? From: jaybannist@cs.com Scott, When applied to steel, the term "strong" is somewhat nebulous. The strengt h of steel is expressed in terms of its ability to withstand stress at its most extreme fibers -- "f" in pounds per square inch. The kicker is that the higher the "f" is, the more brittle the steel is. Conversely, the low er the "f", the more ductile it is. A steel rod with a relatively low "f" will bend easily and bend a lot before breaking. A rod with a real high "f" is more likely to break than to bend. Which is "stronger"? There have be en some spectacular structural failures where the bolts that were used were too "strong", thus too brittle and they failed. So just because a steel p art has a higher "f" ("stronger") doesn't necessarily mean that it is more suited to the task intended for it. GM had a pretty long and successful e xperience with specifying the most advantageous steel strength for their cr ankshafts. The point is that making a crankshaft for a Corvair engine "str onger" is not necessarily a good thing. Jay Bannister ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message corvairengines-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/CorvairEngines-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/corvairengines-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/corvairengines-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.