Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:38 AM - Re: Rotax Engine Alternatives - Aeromomentum (graemeh)
2. 09:11 AM - Re: Re: Rotax Engine Alternatives - Aeromomentum (GTH)
3. 05:42 PM - =?utf-8?Q?100_Octane_Racing_Fuel=3F? ()
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Engine Alternatives - Aeromomentum |
Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this discussion via this forum or
directly to me via email.
I particularly appreciate hearing from those who have tried an alternative installation.
If money were no object I'd just buy the Rotax. I realise that installing an alternative
engine will be more work and take more time. My challenge is to assess
the extra build time vs how long it would take me to save for the Rotax and
also add in a risk factor to allow for the extra risk in going for an alternative
engine.
There are a number of positives with the Aeromomentum engine:
* The designers are engineers
* In one of his videos the subject of torsional vibration is addressed
* When I asked Aeromomentum about using the engine on a Europa Mark checked the
Europa build manual for the engine install before replying - the man does his
research
* Aeromomentum have been around for a number of years, starting with jetboats then
moving to airboats and finally aircraft. One of their airboat engines lasted
to 4,000 hours before lack of maintenance finally broke it
Also as I'm in NZ I have ready access to Airmaster so I am confident that an appropriate
Prop will not be an issue.
Fortunately I'm in the position where I won't at the point of having to decide
on an engine for a little while so I can continue to watch engine developments
before I make my decision.
Thanks again for all who have contributed and I'd appreciate hearing further from
anyone with direct experience in using alternative engines (on a Europa or
other aircraft).
peterz(at)zutrasoft.com wrote:
> Indeed a new installation is alot of work....no question. Sadly the jabiru engines
have always been under performers with many technical issues. There are
however very well designed alternatives, such as the ULpower engines. If the
smaller UL was turbo-normalized to 130hp (design rating of the longer stroke derivative
- same heads), with inverted oil, it would be a strong alternative to
the rotax, with less complexity.
>
> The D-motor is also an intriguing design, with minimized parts count and light
weight....although they will likely end up on the trash heap of other designs
such as the gemini junker diesel after being squashed by rotax.
>
> The only point i am trying to make is that there are potential alternatives.
My perfect engine would be the 915iS......if one can ignore/tolerate rotax's
part price gouging policies.
>
> Cheers and blue skies,
> Pete
>
>
> > On Jul 16, 2017, at 7:17 PM, AirEupora wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I'd think long and hard about going to a different engine combination. Those
of us who have put a different engine on, had a lot of extra work. I put
a Jabiru on mine, It came with an engine mount and cowling. The first engine
mount was the wrong one, the cowling had to be modified to fit correctly, the
shape was wrong for the oil cooler and there no draw to put air out of the cowl.
The Jabiru plenum chambers didn't fit correctly and had to be modified a
lot. There was no customer support as the gentleman that I it bought from went
out of business and the factory was 12,000 miles away and about ten time zones.
The engine was cheaper, but weigh 54 lbs. more than the Rotax 912, The
Jabiru was $18.7K Rotax 912 was $24K. I use about 1.5 gallons more per hour
than the 912 going the same speed.
> >
> > I have had four years of headaches, Just now, I almost have a good flying
plane. That 54lbs, when I bough it. I didn't think to much about it, but now
having gained 40 lbs, My plane is a 1/1/2 person plane.
> >
> > Build it light and keep it light
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=471077#471077
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=471154#471154
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax Engine Alternatives - Aeromomentum |
Le 19/07/2017 12:37, graemeh a crit :
> I realise that installing an alternative engine will be more work and take more
time. My challenge is to assess the extra build time vs how long it would
take me to save for the Rotax and also add in a risk factor to allow for the extra
risk in going for an alternative engine.
>
> [...]
> Thanks again for all who have contributed and I'd appreciate hearing further
from anyone with direct experience in using alternative engines (on a Europa or
other aircraft).
Graeme and all,
As one who made an alternative engine *installation* albeit with a
proven engine, I hope you'll allow me to express my opinion ;-)
Devising a correct engine installation from scratch is not really the
problem. It takes time, research an lots of common sense, you'll find
lots of info on Contrails !
The problem is with those alternative engines. The best way would be to
interview several knowledgeable people with direct experience of a
working installation, and a few hundred (preferably thousand) happy
engine flight hours in their logbook.
But if those people did exist, then we would not be talking about an
*alternative* engine, but about a *proven* engine.
Bottom line, if you have time and money, and are eager to help develop
the engine, by all means go for it. You'll be a pioneer, have lots of
fun, learn lots of things, and discover there is no substitute for
thousands of engineer hours, test cell time, destroyed engines, and
thousands of flight hours before you achieve a reliable aero engine.
But don't trust the degree on the wall, the videos and the "we addressed
the torsional" blah blah. Ask for the blueprints, the actual number of
engines actually flying, the address of actual users atctually flying
the engine, study the Service Bulletins - if there are none, caveat
emptor, the engine has no flight experience.
On the other hand, if money, or time, or workshop equipment is key, then
go for a Rotax (even a second hand one), devise a correct cooling
installation, and you'll soon be a member of the happy flyer-builder family.
FWIW
--
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
http://lapierre.skunkworks.free.fr
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | =?utf-8?Q?100_Octane_Racing_Fuel=3F? |
SSB3YXMganVzdCBhdCBhbiBBcmNvIGdhcyBzdGF0aW9uIHRvIHJlZnVlbCBteSB0cnVjay4gV2hp
bGUgc3RhbmRpbmcgdGhlcmUsIEkgbm90aWNlZCBzZXZlcmFsIG9mIHRoZSBwdW1wcyBoYWQgMTAw
IE9jdGFuZSDigJxSYWNpbmcgRnVlbOKAnS4gSXMgdGhpcyB0aGUgc2FtZSBhcyBvdXIgMTAwIExM
IEF2Z2FzPyBIYXMgYW55b25lIHRyaWVkIGl0PyBJdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBuaWNlIHRvIG5vdCBoYXZl
IHRvIHBheSB0aGUgaGlnaGVyIHByaWNlcyBhdCB0aGUgYWlycG9ydC4NCg0KDQpNaWtlIER1YW5l
DQoNCkxhcyBWZWdhcywgTlYsIFVTQQ0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KU2VudCBmcm9tIFdpbmRvd3MgTWFp
bA=
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|