---------------------------------------------------------- Engines-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 05/22/09: 8 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 03:53 AM - Re: reliability (Jay Parker) 2. 04:08 AM - Re: reliability (Jay Parker) 3. 04:39 AM - Re: reliability (Charles Davis) 4. 06:45 AM - Re: reliability (Jim McBurney) 5. 06:55 AM - Re: reliability (Jim McBurney) 6. 06:58 AM - Re: reliability (Jay Parker) 7. 06:36 PM - Re: reliability (Dan Rogers) 8. 08:43 PM - Re: reliability (neilsenrm@comcast.net) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 03:53:00 AM PST US From: Jay Parker Subject: Re: Engines-List: reliability That's the story I heard.=C2- Some fellow on one of these boards=C2-fro m Australia laid down a deposit or pre-paid with the understanding the engi ne will follow in a couple months, but as far as I know he still hasn't rec eived his.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: "n801bh@n etzero.com" =0ATo: engines-list@matronics.com=0ASent: T hursday, May 21, 2009 9:28:44 PM=0ASubject: RE: Engines-List: reliability =0A=0A=0AAs far as I know there is ONE Velocity with a Deltahawk in it. Tha t is the test bed. Ya give them a deposit and you "might get a motor... In 50 years.!!!=0A=C2-=0Ado not archive=0A=0A=0ABen Haas=0AN801BH=0Awww.haas powerair.com=0A=0A---------- Original Message ----------=0AFrom: Bruce Camp bell =0ATo: "engines-list@matronics.com" =0ASubject: RE: Engines-List: reliability=0ADate: T hu, 21 May 2009 10:21:01 -0700=0A=0A=0AI think the delta hawk is being used on a number of velocities.=C3=82=C2- There is a bunch of info for veloci ty builders, which gets updated pretty regularly. =0A=C2-=0AFrom:owner-en gines-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics .com] On Behalf Of Jay Parker=0ASent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 10:04 AM=0ATo: engines-list@matronics.com=0ASubject: Re: Engines-List: reliability=0A=C2 -=0ASince we're on this topic of engines, when are they going to develop a diesel engine that can use Jet A?=C2- I plan to start building a CH-801 within a year or so, but I'm not in any hurry until there are a few light weight diesels on the market to choose from.=C2- I know Deltahawk seems t o be the closest to be marketable, but the last I heard was that they'll ta ke your money for a pre-order but nothing=C2-gets delivered yet. Thought is should have been certified by now. I'm still waiting for the engine that sounds too good to be true, the Zoche aero diesel, the wonder engine which is compact in size, lighter in weight that most gas engines, and will prob ably get you around 8 gal/hr when it's been geared down to 200HP from it's natural 300HP http://www.zoche.de/zoche_brochure.pdf=C2-,which the compan y says they can do easily.=C2- Their 150 HP would do nicely in the 750 an d maybe even the 701 if geared down getting 5.57 gal/hr, unaltered. Truly a miracle engine, which has been almost certified for the past 15 years according to the own er/developer.=C2- What the heck is going on there?=C2- The guy's sittin g on a gold mine and doing nothing.=C2- I'll believe it when I see it.=C2 - But why can't the other manufacturers develop a=C2-radial diesel like the Zoche?=C2-Fewer parts and things to go wrong, should be a snap for t he other manufacturers of gas engines. Jet A appears to be cheaper than 100 LL at the moment and more plentiful if you're flying in Europe.=0A=C2-=0A Jay=0A=C2-=0A=0A________________________________=0A=0AFrom:Bruce Campbell =0ATo: "engines-list@matronics.com" =0ASent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 11:48:36 AM=0ASubject: RE: Engines-List: reliability=0AI suspect there is a bit more to the engine reliability thing than the actual in-flight failure rates.=C2-=C2- The availability of parts in the field is another consideration should you hav e an issue, as is the cost of maintenance and overhaul.=C2- All of these favour the Rotax, I suspect.=C2- =C2-Most of the Rotax parts that might be required have automotive-type substitutes.=C2- =0A=C2-=0AAlso, over haul for a rotax is dirt cheap compared to a continental (something like $5 k vs $20k, give or take), if somewhat more frequent.=C2- Costly overhauls certainly make one consider long and hard before overhauling an engine whi ch has developed some marginal characteristics.=0A=C2-=0ARotaxes (Rotaces ?) also get something back from the liquid cooling: they don=C3=A2=82=AC =84=A2t blow cylinder heads or crack cylinders, or at least not nearly a s often.=0A=C2-=0AI suspect you could get access to considerable first ha nd experience by finding a flight school that operates Katanas.=C2- They have been fitted with both engines, and a school plane would have seen a lo t of hours and a lot of abuse.=0A=C2-=0A=C2-=C2-=C2-=C2-=C2-=C2 -=C2-=C2-=C2-=C2-=C2- Bruce =0A=C2-=0A=C2-=0AFrom:owner-eng ines-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics. com] On Behalf Of Richard & Martha Neilsen=0ASent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 7 :54 AM=0ATo: engines-list@matronics.com=0ASubject: Re: Engines-List: reliab ility=0A=C2-=0AKen=0A=C2-=0AThe Continental 0-200 is=C2-most likely y our best choice for reliability. It is going to be a bit heaver than your o ther choices so performance would be less.=0A=C2-=0AThe Rotax 912 series of engines are proving to be reliable,=C2-very close to Continentals. The engines are very light and with right prop will have the most thrust for w eight of=C2-all your choices.=0A=C2-=0AThe Rotax 914 is turbo charged. There just aren't enough flying to really establish a real reliability reco rd. If you look at turbo Continental engines their reliability suffers with the turbo so if=C2-reliability is your major concern you may want to sta y away from them.=0A=C2-=0AThe UL engines are new and could have teething problems. If reliability is your number one concern you should stay away f rom new engines. The 260iS is a higher RPM engine like the Jabiru so you wo uld have to use a shorter prop than a Continental or Rotax so prop efficien cy would be less. The CH 750 would be happier with a big slow turning prop producing lots of thrust.=0A=C2-=0AThe UL web site doesn't even list the 360 so I would think this would be a real new engine.=0A=C2-=0AAs always the info is worth what you paid for it.=0A=C2-=0ARick Neilsen=0ARedrive V W powered Kolb MKIIIC=0A----- Original Message ----- =0AFrom:Ken Ryan =0ATo :engines-list@matronics.com =0ASent:Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:16 PM=0ASubj ect:Engines-List: reliability=0A=C2-=0AI'm building a Zenith CH 750 and n eed to choose an engine. I'm in Alaska, so most of my flying is over remote , often very rugged terrain. An engine failure can be a very bad thing. I a m considering the following engines, and would like opinions as to which wo uld be the "most reliable:"=0A=0AContinental 0-200=0ARotax 912ULS=0ARotax 9 14=0AUL Power 260iS=0AUL Power 360=0A=0AKen Ryan=0A=C3=82=C2-=C2-=0A =C2-=0Ahref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List">http://ww w.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List=0Ahref="http://forums.matronics.co m">http://forums.matronics.com=0Ahref="http://www.matronics.com/contribut ion">http://www.matronics.com/c=0A=C3=82=C2-=C2-=0A =C2-=0Ahttp://www .matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com=0Ahttp: //www.matronics.com/contribution=0A =C2-=0Ahttp://www.matronics.com/Navig ics.com/" target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com=C3=82 =C2- _ttp://www.matronics.com/contribution" target=_blank=0A=== ====C3=82=C2-=C3=82=C2-=C3=82=C2- =0A =C2-=0A =C2-=0A http: //www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com=0A http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A =C2-=C2=C2=B7=BA~ =B0=C3=AD=C2=B2,=C3=9E=C3=99=C3=8A%=C2=A2=C2=BD4=C3=93M4}=C2=A7r=B9 =C2=AB=B0=C3=AA=C3=A7{(=C2=BA=C2=B8=C5=BE=C2=AD8^x"=EF=BD=C3=AB =C5-=C3=8BD=84=A2=C2=A8=C2=A5=C5-=C3=AE=84=A2K=C2=B6=C5=92j=C3=9A =C3=A8=C5=BE',.+-=C3=C2=AD=C2=BA=C2=B7=C2=AC5=C2=AB=C3=A2=EF=BD=C2=AB h=C2=AE=C3=9A=C2=AE=C5=92,z=C3=98^=84=A2=C2=A9=C3=B2.+-=C2=BA=C3=98=C2 =A5=C5-=C3=98=C5=BE=C2=B2=C3=8B=C5=93=C2=AB =C5-=C3=8BT=C5=B8 =C3=B4=C2=AEn=C3=87+=C5-=BAb=C2=A2p+r=C2=AFy'=C5=A1=C2=AD=C3=88C=C2 =A3 =C3=A5=C2=A1=C2=A7{=C2=AC=EF=BD=C2=AE=C5=92,x(Z=C2=B4P>-=C2=A2=C3=88 Z=C2=AD=C3=C2=A7vk=C5=93-k=C5=93-j+y=C2=A8ky=C3=B8m=C2 =B6=C5=B8=C3=C3=83 &j=C3=9A=C3=A8=C5=BE',r=B0=C25=C2=AB=C3=A2 =EF=BD=C2=ABh=C2=ACI=C3-=C5-w=C2=AC.+--=C3=9Bi=C3=C3=BC0 =C3=82f=C2=AD=C2=AE=B0=C3=A2r=C3=87(=BA=C3=B3Z=C2=BE(=C2=B6=C5 -=C3=84=C5=BE=C2=A7z=C3=82=C3=A2=C2=B2=C3=9F=C3=9A0=C3=918=C3=92Ia=C3=A4T 1$=C5=A1=84=A2=C3=A8+y=C2=AB\=C2=A2{^=C5=BE=C3'=C2=A5=C2=B2- =C2=AFj)ZnW=C2=AF=B0=C2=ABayg=BA=C5-=C3=AE=C5=A1=C3=86=C2=A1 =C2=AD=C3=A7=C3=A1=C2=B6=C3=9A=C3=BD=C3=BA+=C2=BAk&j=C3=9A=C3=A8=C5=BE',r =B0=C2=A1=C2=B6=C3=9A=C3=BD=C3=BA+=C2=BAk&j=C3=9A=C3=A8=C5=BE',r =B0=C2h=C2=B8=C2=AC=C2=B4*'=C2=B6=C2=B8=BA=C2=BA=C3=98=C2=A8=EF =BDg=BAJ+^N=C2=A7=9C*.~=C5-=C3=B2=C2=A2=C3=AA=C3-zw=C2 =AB=C2=A2=C3=AB,=C2=BA=C5=A1h=C2=AE=C3=93=C2=B6=C3=90=C3=ABjY^.+-=C3=99=C2 =A2=EF=BD=C2=A8ky=C3=B8m=C2=B6=C5=B8=C3=C3=83 &j=C3=9A=C3=A8=C5=BE',r =B0=C2r=B0=C3=AD=C2=AE&=C3=AE=C2=B6*'-=C3=9Bi=C3 =C3=BC0=C3=82f=C2=AD=C2=AE=B0=C3=A2r=C3=87(=BA=C3=B7(=C5=BE=C3 =9A=C3=A2n=C3=ABb=C2=A2=C3=9A=C3=BD=C2=C3=9F=C2=A2{=C2=C2=B7=C2n =A1r=C3=BEf=A2=9D=EF=BD =0A=0A________________________ ____________________________________ =0AYou have a right to seek justice! C ======================== _ ===== ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:08:51 AM PST US From: Jay Parker Subject: Re: Engines-List: reliability Well, if you can believe what Mr. Zoche says, his 300 HP engine only weighs 271 lbs which lighter than any gas engine at the same HP and probably any -at 200HP.- His design is an old fashion radial with air cooling fins. 11.13 gal/hr is-pretty damn precise numbers if he doesn't have a working engine.- I am frustrated that he's been sitting on this (for over 15 year s)if it truly has the stats he claims. http://www.zoche.de/specs.html.- T he size is a compact, 25.5" W x 25.5" H x 32.9" L.- Comp. ratio 17 to 1. - He's either a fantastic liar or crazy for not having it certified somew here.=0A=0A=0A-=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Gille s Thesee =0ATo: engines-list@matronics.com=0A Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 1:23:54 PM=0ASubject: Re: Engines-List: reliab @ac-grenoble.fr>=0A=0AJay and all,=0A=0A=0A>- until there are a few light weight diesels on the market to choose from.=0A=0AThe problem is, a light weight diesel is by no means lighter than a light weight gas engine. A dies el is heavier by design : more pressure in the combustion chambers, more to rque variations, etc.=0A=0A> Truly a miracle engine, which has been almost certified for the past 15 years according to the owner/developer.=0A=0A"Alm ost certified" engines are almost suitable for your airplane. Your airplane will almost fly ;-)=0A=0ABest regards,=0A-- Gilles=0Ahttp://contrails.free =================== ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:39:17 AM PST US From: "Charles Davis" Subject: RE: Engines-List: reliability You don't think, maybe, he is being paid to keep a lid on it by one of the 'established' aircraft powerplant manufacturers ? ... or am I just too sceptical ? Charles -----Original Message----- From: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jay Parker Sent: 22 May 2009 01:06 PM To: engines-list@matronics.com Subject: Re: Engines-List: reliability Well, if you can believe what Mr. Zoche says, his 300 HP engine only weighs 271 lbs which lighter than any gas engine at the same HP and probably any at 200HP. His design is an old fashion radial with air cooling fins. 11.13 gal/hr is pretty damn precise numbers if he doesn't have a working engine. I am frustrated that he's been sitting on this (for over 15 years)if it truly has the stats he claims. http://www.zoche.de/specs.html. The size is a compact, 25.5" W x 25.5" H x 32.9" L. Comp. ratio 17 to 1. He's either a fantastic liar or crazy for not having it certified somewhere. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- From: Gilles Thesee To: engines-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 1:23:54 PM Subject: Re: Engines-List: reliability Jay and all, > until there are a few light weight diesels on the market to choose from. The problem is, a light weight diesel is by no means lighter than a light weight gas engine. A diesel is heavier by design : more pressure in the combustion chambers, more torque variations, etc. > Truly a miracle engine, which has been almost certified for the past 15 years according to the owner/developer. "Almost certified" engines are almost suitable for your airplane. Your airplane will almost fly ;-) Bnbsp; ====================== -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content and is believed to be clean. (c) Internet Uncapped ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:45:06 AM PST US From: "Jim McBurney" Subject: Re: Engines-List: reliability Rick, You might be thinking of the Wilksch engine ( www.wilksch.com/). Do not archive Blue skies and tailwinds Jim CH-801 DeltaHawk diesel Augusta GA 90% done, 90% left ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:55:18 AM PST US From: "Jim McBurney" Subject: Re: Engines-List: reliability Rick, Or it may be this: www.dair.co.uk/. Do not archive Jim ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 06:58:00 AM PST US From: Jay Parker Subject: Re: Engines-List: reliability Got to be something like that, someone is paying him to keep it off the mar ket.- I would think he'd make much more money though if he'd just release the thing to the general public as it would be in huge demand.- He's eve n got-the prototype in a video that is-so quiet it was amazing.-Most of the noise came from the propeller blades.- Patent the silly thing and get it on the market, because there's nothing remotely close to that diesel now. It makes the-Thielert Centurian- and DeltaHawks engines looks lik e heavy beasts, the likes of-something-the Flintstones would use if the y could fly.=0A=0AJay=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom : Charles Davis =0ATo: engines-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Friday, May 22, 2009 7:28:56 AM=0ASubject: RE: Engines-List: relia bility=0A=0A=0AYou don't think, maybe, he is being paid to keep a lid on it by one of the 'established' aircraft powerplant manufacturers ? ... or am I just too sceptical ?=0A-=0ACharles=0A-=0A-=0A-----Original Message- ----=0AFrom: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-engines- list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jay Parker=0ASent: 22 May 2009 01:06 PM=0ATo: engines-list@matronics.com=0ASubject: Re: Engines-List: reliabili ty=0A=0A=0AWell, if you can believe what Mr. Zoche says, his 300 HP engine only weighs 271 lbs which lighter than any gas engine at the same HP and pr obably any-at 200HP.- His design is an old fashion radial with air cool ing fins. 11.13 gal/hr is-pretty damn precise numbers if he doesn't have a working engine.- I am frustrated that he's been sitting on this (for ov er 15 years)if it truly has the stats he claims. http://www.zoche.de/specs. html.- The size is a compact, 25.5" W x 25.5" H x 32.9" L.- Comp. ratio 17 to 1.- He's either a fantastic liar or crazy for not having it certif ied somewhere.=0A=0A=0A-=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFr om: Gilles Thesee =0ATo: engines-list@matroni cs.com=0ASent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 1:23:54 PM=0ASubject: Re: Engines-Lis es.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>=0A=0AJay and all,=0A=0A=0A>- until there are a few light weight diesels on the market to choose from.=0A=0AThe problem is, a light weight diesel is by no means lighter than a light weight gas engin e. A diesel is heavier by design : more pressure in the combustion chambers , more torque variations, etc.=0A=0A> Truly a miracle engine, which has bee n almost certified for the past 15 years according to the owner/developer. =0A=0A"Almost certified" engines are almost suitable for your airplane. You r airplane will almost fly ;-)=0A=0ABnbsp; - - - - - - - - - -====================== ==0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0Ahttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List=0Ai cs.com=0A.matronics.com/contribution=0A=0A=0A-- =0AThis message has been sc anned for viruses and dangerous content=0Aand is believed to be clean. =A9 =========================0A ======================== ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 06:36:59 PM PST US From: Dan Rogers Subject: Re: Engines-List: reliability I've been watching this thing for 15 years. If something sounds too good to be true it probably is!! I did hear that he is getting some kind of government financing while in development. So why finish development? Also, maybe the thing really can't do what he is promising so he just keeps on promising and living off his government. Much of the above is hearsay, but I certainly would say, 'Don't hold your breath for this engine!' Dan Rogers Charles Davis wrote: > You don't think, maybe, he is being paid to keep a lid on it by one of > the 'established' aircraft powerplant manufacturers ? ... or am I just > too sceptical ? > > Charles > > > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com]*On Behalf Of *Jay > Parker > *Sent:* 22 May 2009 01:06 PM > *To:* engines-list@matronics.com > *Subject:* Re: Engines-List: reliability > > Well, if you can believe what Mr. Zoche says, his 300 HP engine only > weighs 271 lbs which lighter than any gas engine at the same HP and > probably any at 200HP. His design is an old fashion radial with air > cooling fins. 11.13 gal/hr is pretty damn precise numbers if he > doesn't have a working engine. I am frustrated that he's been > sitting on this (for over 15 years)if it truly has the stats he > claims. http://www.zoche.de/specs.html. The size is a compact, > 25.5" W x 25.5" H x 32.9" L. Comp. ratio 17 to 1. He's either a > fantastic liar or crazy for not having it certified somewhere. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Gilles Thesee > *To:* engines-list@matronics.com > *Sent:* Thursday, May 21, 2009 1:23:54 PM > *Subject:* Re: Engines-List: reliability > > > > > Jay and all, > > > > until there are a few light weight diesels on the market to > choose from. > > The problem is, a light weight diesel is by no means lighter than a > light weight gas engine. A diesel is heavier by design : more > pressure in the combustion chambers, more torque variations, etc. > > > Truly a miracle engine, which has been almost certified for the > past 15 years according to the owner/developer. > > "Almost certified" engines are almost suitable for your airplane. > Your airplane will almost fly ;-) > > Bnbsp; ====================== > > > > * > > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Engines-List > ics.com > .matronics.com/contribution > > * > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content > and is believed to be clean. Internet Uncapped > > * > > > * ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:43:22 PM PST US From: neilsenrm@comcast.net Subject: Re: Engines-List: reliability Jim Actually I was thinking of the Gemini 100. The following is a web site that talks about the engine http://www.jetwhine.com/2008/08/gemini-diesel-engine-attracts-industrys-eye / Rick Neilsen Redrive VW Powered Kolb MKIIIC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim McBurney" Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 10:30:18 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: Engines-List: reliability Rick, You might be thinking of the Wilksch engine ( www.wilksch.com/). =C2- Do not archive Blue skies and tailwinds Jim CH-801 DeltaHawk diesel Augusta GA 90% done, 90% left =========== =========== MS - =========== e - =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt Dralle, List Admin. =========== ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message engines-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Engines-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/engines-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/engines-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.